Political Roundtable Part XV

[cammac]

Roger stone, Sebastian Gorka and Sean Hannity are losing their minds on Twitter amazing how triggered and incoherent these Trump supporters can get when faced with facts.

It's hilarious.

I mean it's "obviously" #fakenews and doesn't affect them so just sit back, laugh and watch the dems make fools of themselves.

I mean that's how I'd respond to #fakenews

It really gives an insight into their mindset. They literally believe that Trump can do no wrong and any accusations against him are false or some grand conspiracy despite the mountains of evidence in their face. There's only one echo chamber and it belongs to the right wing.

All I can say is Bananas, Bananas, Bananas

[dckingsfan]

So, recently there was news of the 3+% expansion of the economy in the third quarter. But, I would argue that this is not news and we are in fact still expanding at near to 2%.

This may be outcome bias - but I agree with the analysis synopsis that follows. Expansion of inventory isn't expansion of sales.

I don't think the framework has changed at all:
1) We still have a demographic problem and our immigration policy still leans familial vs. skill/age which is what we need.
2) The tax code hasn't changed and the proposed R revamp does little to fix what is wrong.

http://www.epi.org/publication/strong-headline-gdp-growth-number-overstates-economys-strength-actual-trend-unchanged-and-price-inflation-remains-extraordinarily-weak/

[dckingsfan]

Interesting collaboration between traditional and charter schools in Houston, it is called United for College Success. The Charter Schools had been measuring which colleges actually graduated their students within 6 years. KIPP, one of the Charters in Houston has their college graduation rate up at 50% for minorities vs. 9% nationally. Why? They have figured out how to match students with colleges.

That is a pretty phenomenal success rate. So what did they do? They made it available to the public school districts. Maybe this will be a step forward and the NTA will stop their revenge campaigns against charter schools and start collaborating.

It would be wise for the DNC to jump on board - okay, I won't hold my breath.

[dckingsfan]

This is a much more up to date cost structure than 2007.
While the oil sands is more difficult to refine and extract it obviously isn't Canada only oil resources.
Yes Saudi Arabia has low costs of extraction but also pose a huge risk in stability as well as every Middle Eastern country as well as Venezuela.
http://graphics.wsj.com/oil-barrel-breakdown/
While fracking has helped the USA in energy it is debatable that the downside is more costly than the upside.
"Beginning in 2009, the frequency of earthquakes in the U.S. State of Oklahoma rapidly increased from an average of fewer than two 3.0+ magnitude earthquakes per year since 1978[6] to hundreds per year in 2014, 2015, and 2016. "
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009%E2%80%9317_Oklahoma_earthquake_swarms

cammac - Canada should just stop with the oil sand. It is terrifically bad for the environment. Once coal goes - as it will - oil sands will be the next evil polluter.

[cammac]

So, recently there was news of the 3+% expansion of the economy in the third quarter. But, I would argue that this is not news and we are in fact still expanding at near to 2%.

This may be outcome bias - but I agree with the analysis synopsis that follows. Expansion of inventory isn't expansion of sales.

I don't think the framework has changed at all:
1) We still have a demographic problem and our immigration policy still leans familial vs. skill/age which is what we need.
2) The tax code hasn't changed and the proposed R revamp does little to fix what is wrong.

http://www.epi.org/publication/strong-headline-gdp-growth-number-overstates-economys-strength-actual-trend-unchanged-and-price-inflation-remains-extraordinarily-weak/

I tend to agree with you the reality is that a healthy advanced economy should have between 1.75% & 2.5% economic growth and really anything above isn't sustainable. Canada had a 1st quarter of 3.5% and then 4.5% 2nd quarter but the Government of Canada is still projected the yearly growth in the 2.2 to 3% range. The Trump 4% + is pure hyperbole and those are the figures they are utilizing in the new tax cuts. You only have to look at Kansas that had the lowest growth of any US State last year and adopted those policies. When I 1st went to China the economy was chugging along at a GDP of 12% and now it is in the 6.5% range which I think is a overestimation. This year in the USA might be the apple polished and looking at growth figures at between 1.75 to 2% in the next few years.

One interesting thing is that if NAFTA is eliminated there is a snap back clause in the agreement for the USA & Canada.
The “snap back” provisions are put in place, reverting Canada back to earlier trade deals like the Canada-U.S. free trade agreement (FTA), signed in 1989, or terms under the World Trade Organization (WTO), established in 1995.

[dckingsfan]

I tend to agree with you the reality is that a healthy advanced economy should have between 1.75% & 2.5% economic growth and really anything above isn't sustainable.

Just curious - why? I think a healthy economy needs to be between 3-4%. Less than that and you get a high unemployment/underemployment with youth coming into the market place.

[stilldropin20]

trump wont hesitate too too much to pardon if absolutely necessary. and that message was sent crystal clear when he pardoned Sheriff Joe immediately. so tieing anything to trump will likely of end up a dead end because if they turn states they lose the trump pardon.

I dont know about Kushner but im quite certain trump Jr will fall on his sword if anything untoward happened in the manafort/kushner/trump Jr meeting. also trump jr and kushner can bare witness to each other and corroborate their stories where manafort can be left out to dry.

manafort received payments from the podesta group in 2009-2010 while assisting in the uranium one deal.

Its Interesting that Mueller would not want to hear from the undercover FBI informant that has been under gag order.

monday will be interesting.

[cammac]

I tend to agree with you the reality is that a healthy advanced economy should have between 1.75% & 2.5% economic growth and really anything above isn't sustainable.

Just curious - why? I think a healthy economy needs to be between 3-4%. Less than that and you get a high unemployment/underemployment with youth coming into the market place.

GDP growth rates should be tied to other factors for instance natural unemployment rates should be hovering about 4.7 to 5.8% and a target inflation rate should be in the 2% range. Currently the USA is about 4.2% which is full employment and a inflation rate @ 1.6%. The USA in the 1st 3quarters of 2017 are 1st. 1.2% 2nd. 3.1% 3rd. 3.0% which are healthy growth rates and will likely end up about the 2.5% range which is ideal. GDP obvious has its ups and down and I was on the low range at 1.75% it should be closer to 2.5% as a average. But one of the factors is the low inflation rate for the last number of years in Western Democracies which in itself will hold down GDP growth. So my figure of 1.75% reflects the inflation rates of the last number of years. In Canada our GDP has grown at the fastest rate in the G7 with 1st. 3.5% 2nd. 4.5% 3rd 3.0% part of this is that the Canadian economy had lagged somewhat and it is a period of catch up. It is much harder for advanced economies to have consistently high GDP since there isn't major shifts from a agrarian economy from a industrial economy. If you look at China only in 2012 did the shift take place with over 50% of the population being urban which is the crossing point into a industrialized society. The effect on the Chinese GDP has been reflective of that from 12% to the current 6.5% in GDP.

Plus GDP isn't a constant from country to country as a example in 2013 the USA added.

The government made a significant change in the gross investment number (I), which now includes R&D spending, art, music, film royalties, books, theatre. This change in GDP statistics has not been implemented elsewhere in the world. So the U.S. is the first to accomplish this rewriting of the GDP number.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/1368001-u-s-governments-new-way-of-calculating-gdp
In the EU things like prostitution and illicit drug sales are included.

GDP is controversial and some have higher estimates in ideal than I do but in a country such as the USA if you are beating inflation with unemployment at a acceptable level you are doing fine. Plus looking at one years results isn't a good thing because of economic upheavals such as the 2008 recession and the recovery after which was disjointed because of the upheaval.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/188105/annual-gdp-of-the-united-states-since-1990/

[cammac]

trump wont hesitate too too much to pardon if absolutely necessary. and that message was sent crystal clear when he pardoned Sheriff Joe immediately. so tieing anything to trump will likely of end up a dead end because if they turn states they lose the trump pardon.

I dont know about Kushner but im quite certain trump Jr will fall on his sword if anything untoward happened in the manafort/kushner/trump Jr meeting. also trump jr and kushner can bare witness to each other and corroborate their stories where manafort can be left out to dry.

manafort received payments from the podesta group in 2009-2010 while assisting in the uranium one deal.

Its Interesting that Mueller would not want to hear from the undercover FBI informant that has been under gag order.

monday will be interesting.

Bananas, Bananas, Bananas

[cammac]

Sanders & Cdn. Doctors

Raza, 34, a graduate of both University of Toronto and Harvard, has seen the differences between the two country’s systems first-hand. If you break your leg in the U.S., he explains, you can’t go to the hospital nearest to you, because it might not be part of your insurance company’s network. 
“As a Canadian that was so shocking, because if I fall off my bike, if I break my leg, it doesn’t matter if I’m in downtown Toronto, if I’m in Scarborough,” he said. “I would go to the closest hospital and my OHIP card would get me treatment there.”

Dr. Melanie Bechard, a pediatric resident and CDM board member who also made a video for Sanders, is happy to share her experiences as a Canadian physician if it can help both countries have a meaningful discussion about best health-care practices.
A short while ago, a refugee family came to see Dr. Bechard at a pediatric outreach clinic. Back home, they had tried, repeatedly, to get their very sick child medical attention. Their child was “medically complex,” she says, and required a very long treatment.
For privacy reasons Bechard can’t share this family’s identity, or the nature of the child’s illness. What she can share is how the family broke down in tears when she conveyed they didn’t need to pay thousands of dollars for a treatment that required numerous specialists. They were living at a shelter.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/bernie-sanders-brings-canadian-doctors-into-us-health-care-debate/ar-AAu9avZ?ocid=spartandhp

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2017/10/28/bernie-sanders-awed-by-canadian-health-care.html

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

The drop for Trump has come from independents (who shifted from 41 percent approval in September to 34 percent now), whites (who went from 51 percent to 47 percent) and whites without a college degree (from 58 percent to 51 percent).

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/trump-s-approval-rating-drops-lowest-level-yet-new-nbc-n815321?cid=par-twitter-feed_20171029

[dckingsfan]

I tend to agree with you the reality is that a healthy advanced economy should have between 1.75% & 2.5% economic growth and really anything above isn't sustainable.

Just curious - why? I think a healthy economy needs to be between 3-4%. Less than that and you get a high unemployment/underemployment with youth coming into the market place.

GDP growth rates should be tied to other factors for instance natural unemployment rates should be hovering about 4.7 to 5.8% and a target inflation rate should be in the 2% range. Currently the USA is about 4.2% which is full employment and a inflation rate @ 1.6%. The USA in the 1st 3quarters of 2017 are 1st. 1.2% 2nd. 3.1% 3rd. 3.0% which are healthy growth rates and will likely end up about the 2.5% range which is ideal. GDP obvious has its ups and down and I was on the low range at 1.75% it should be closer to 2.5% as a average. But one of the factors is the low inflation rate for the last number of years in Western Democracies which in itself will hold down GDP growth. So my figure of 1.75% reflects the inflation rates of the last number of years. In Canada our GDP has grown at the fastest rate in the G7 with 1st. 3.5% 2nd. 4.5% 3rd 3.0% part of this is that the Canadian economy had lagged somewhat and it is a period of catch up. It is much harder for advanced economies to have consistently high GDP since there isn't major shifts from a agrarian economy from a industrial economy. If you look at China only in 2012 did the shift take place with over 50% of the population being urban which is the crossing point into a industrialized society. The effect on the Chinese GDP has been reflective of that from 12% to the current 6.5% in GDP.

Plus GDP isn't a constant from country to country as a example in 2013 the USA added.

The government made a significant change in the gross investment number (I), which now includes R&D spending, art, music, film royalties, books, theatre. This change in GDP statistics has not been implemented elsewhere in the world. So the U.S. is the first to accomplish this rewriting of the GDP number.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/1368001-u-s-governments-new-way-of-calculating-gdp
In the EU things like prostitution and illicit drug sales are included.

GDP is controversial and some have higher estimates in ideal than I do but in a country such as the USA if you are beating inflation with unemployment at a acceptable level you are doing fine. Plus looking at one years results isn't a good thing because of economic upheavals such as the 2008 recession and the recovery after which was disjointed because of the upheaval.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/188105/annual-gdp-of-the-united-states-since-1990/

First, I want to stop you at unemployment rates - you should look at labor participation rates not at unemployment rates in this case. Please take a look at those numbers before you declare that we have full labor participation - we don't.

And no - 2% isn't healthy - no matter how many times you say it.

Part of the problem we have is productivity (which is basically flat) - which in this country is basically flat (our education system is more than partially to blame on this). Part of that is our aging demographic (we need to have an immigration policy to fix that). And part of that has to do with our tax code which doesn't reward investement into productivity enhancments.

But please, just stop with the 2% is healthy... it isn't. Why? Take a look at the graph and you should understand in just a couple of seconds - since you are from Canada and your growth rate has been reasonable? What happened?

[cammac]

Just curious - why? I think a healthy economy needs to be between 3-4%. Less than that and you get a high unemployment/underemployment with youth coming into the market place.

GDP growth rates should be tied to other factors for instance natural unemployment rates should be hovering about 4.7 to 5.8% and a target inflation rate should be in the 2% range. Currently the USA is about 4.2% which is full employment and a inflation rate @ 1.6%. The USA in the 1st 3quarters of 2017 are 1st. 1.2% 2nd. 3.1% 3rd. 3.0% which are healthy growth rates and will likely end up about the 2.5% range which is ideal. GDP obvious has its ups and down and I was on the low range at 1.75% it should be closer to 2.5% as a average. But one of the factors is the low inflation rate for the last number of years in Western Democracies which in itself will hold down GDP growth. So my figure of 1.75% reflects the inflation rates of the last number of years. In Canada our GDP has grown at the fastest rate in the G7 with 1st. 3.5% 2nd. 4.5% 3rd 3.0% part of this is that the Canadian economy had lagged somewhat and it is a period of catch up. It is much harder for advanced economies to have consistently high GDP since there isn't major shifts from a agrarian economy from a industrial economy. If you look at China only in 2012 did the shift take place with over 50% of the population being urban which is the crossing point into a industrialized society. The effect on the Chinese GDP has been reflective of that from 12% to the current 6.5% in GDP.

Plus GDP isn't a constant from country to country as a example in 2013 the USA added.

The government made a significant change in the gross investment number (I), which now includes R&D spending, art, music, film royalties, books, theatre. This change in GDP statistics has not been implemented elsewhere in the world. So the U.S. is the first to accomplish this rewriting of the GDP number.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/1368001-u-s-governments-new-way-of-calculating-gdp
In the EU things like prostitution and illicit drug sales are included.

GDP is controversial and some have higher estimates in ideal than I do but in a country such as the USA if you are beating inflation with unemployment at a acceptable level you are doing fine. Plus looking at one years results isn't a good thing because of economic upheavals such as the 2008 recession and the recovery after which was disjointed because of the upheaval.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/188105/annual-gdp-of-the-united-states-since-1990/

First, I want to stop you at unemployment rates - you should look at labor participation rates not at unemployment rates in this case. Please take a look at those numbers before you declare that we have full labor participation - we don't.

And no - 2% isn't healthy - no matter how many times you say it.

Part of the problem we have is productivity (which is basically flat) - which in this country is basically flat (our education system is more than partially to blame on this). Part of that is our aging demographic (we need to have an immigration policy to fix that). And part of that has to do with our tax code which doesn't reward investement into productivity enhancments.

But please, just stop with the 2% is healthy... it isn't. Why? Take a look at the graph and you should understand in just a couple of seconds - since you are from Canada and your growth rate has been reasonable? What happened?

Your chart is very illustrative and correct Canada had a huge overspending problem especially in the 1st Trudeau Era and Canada was in deep financial trouble somewhat like the USA is into. Corrective action was taken after that period of time by both Progressive Conservative, Liberal and Conservative Governments. Since that time Canada has been the leader in the G7 in handling deficits. It also reflects that Canada spends more on services than the USA (healthcare) please put total healthcare GDP costs into the USA GDP. Also Canada is a higher taxed country and I must say we get value for taxes.

[dckingsfan]

cammac - what happened was your GDP increased AND you fixed your spending problem. We need to do both as well.

Your arguments thus far have been that 2% GDP is fine - and anyone who cuts or offers to cut spending is bad. How do you rectify that?

[cammac]

cammac - what happened was your GDP increased AND you fixed your spending problem. We need to do both as well.

Your arguments thus far have been that 2% GDP is fine - and anyone who cuts or offers to cut spending is bad. How do you rectify that?

I am saying averaging a GDP of 2% isn't bad for a fully industrialized country obviously 2.5% is better there will be spikes higher and lower. Also in the USA determining what full employment is with maybe 5 to 8% of the population not counted or included in the work force so unemployment figures are higher.

Canada reformed its corporate tax system significantly lowering taxes as I have discussed before.
In the Mulroney Era the GST. was introduced it started a 8% and was highly unpopular and lead to the destruction of the Progressive Conservative Party. The Liberal government was elected on repealing it but kept it and helped in creating a era of surpluses. Since then the Federal part of the GST. has been reduced to 6%. GST. is a consumption tax on my goods and services with give backs to low income individuals.

Canada also has had extremely strong individuals at the Bank of Canada that directs the major decisions on the economy which sets interest rates and monitors banks and financial institutions. After a rocky start the FTA. between Canada and the USA became beneficial to both countries. The economies of both have been more intertwined and both have gained from this arrangement. NAFTA bringing a 3rd world country into the arrangement created a new paradigm when Mexico entered the agreement. Manufacturing jobs were lost in both Canada and USA one of the reasons is the Walmart factor companies looking for the lowest possible price without scruples. International companies took advantage of lax labour laws in Mexico with faux unions which one thing Canada does agree with the USA. This has not been particularly helpful to all 3 countries. But you must keep in mind many of those jobs would have been shipped offshore to China in any case. The aim of NAFTA was to bring Mexico into a more productive country from a 3rd world one. The negatives and positives have been mixed but it has not been the disaster that Trump wants people to believe.

[stilldropin20]

Interesting collaboration between traditional and charter schools in Houston, it is called United for College Success. The Charter Schools had been measuring which colleges actually graduated their students within 6 years. KIPP, one of the Charters in Houston has their college graduation rate up at 50% for minorities vs. 9% nationally. Why? They have figured out how to match students with colleges.

That is a pretty phenomenal success rate. So what did they do? They made it available to the public school districts. Maybe this will be a step forward and the NTA will stop their revenge campaigns against charter schools and start collaborating.

It would be wise for the DNC to jump on board - okay, I won't hold my breath.

excellent point. and interesting concept.

[cammac]

Interesting collaboration between traditional and charter schools in Houston, it is called United for College Success. The Charter Schools had been measuring which colleges actually graduated their students within 6 years. KIPP, one of the Charters in Houston has their college graduation rate up at 50% for minorities vs. 9% nationally. Why? They have figured out how to match students with colleges.

That is a pretty phenomenal success rate. So what did they do? They made it available to the public school districts. Maybe this will be a step forward and the NTA will stop their revenge campaigns against charter schools and start collaborating.

It would be wise for the DNC to jump on board - okay, I won't hold my breath.

excellent point. and interesting concept.

Might be a better idea to properly fund public schools to eliminate the huge discrepancy between funding in the inner city and the burbs. I applaud any school that can achieve academic success either a charter school or a public school but for every great result from a charter school there are numerous bad results.

[dckingsfan]

cammac - what happened was your GDP increased AND you fixed your spending problem. We need to do both as well.

Your arguments thus far have been that 2% GDP is fine - and anyone who cuts or offers to cut spending is bad. How do you rectify that?

I am saying averaging a GDP of 2% isn't bad for a fully industrialized country obviously 2.5% is better there will be spikes higher and lower. Also in the USA determining what full employment is with maybe 5 to 8% of the population not counted or included in the work force so unemployment figures are higher.

No - you said it again. 2% isn't okay - it is bad, there is no way around that. And if you include the population that isn't counted it makes the full employment numbers worse - not better.

Another point that you make is that Canadian taxes are much higher - they aren't. 42 vs 43% of GDP isn't much of a difference.

We have 3 problems.
1) Aging of our workforce
2) Underemployment and an undereducated workforce that leads to lower labor participation rates
3) Poor tax policy that leads to a lack of investment to drive productivity

And that all leads to stunted GDP growth which leads to a host of other issues including not being able to fund our entitlement programs.

[dckingsfan]

Interesting collaboration between traditional and charter schools in Houston, it is called United for College Success. The Charter Schools had been measuring which colleges actually graduated their students within 6 years. KIPP, one of the Charters in Houston has their college graduation rate up at 50% for minorities vs. 9% nationally. Why? They have figured out how to match students with colleges.

That is a pretty phenomenal success rate. So what did they do? They made it available to the public school districts. Maybe this will be a step forward and the NTA will stop their revenge campaigns against charter schools and start collaborating.

It would be wise for the DNC to jump on board - okay, I won't hold my breath.

excellent point. and interesting concept.

Might be a better idea to properly fund public schools to eliminate the huge discrepancy between funding in the inner city and the burbs. I applaud any school that can achieve academic success either a charter school or a public school but for every great result from a charter school there are numerous bad results.

Where are you getting these facts? Other than the NTA manufacturing propaganda it isn't true. Where there has been competition in urban areas for students all schools have improved. NY, New Orleans, Houston, etc.

And funding of K12 education until the great recession (when GDP fell as did the associated tax revenue) was well past inflation and yet was not yielding similar results. And please note - in the vast majority of states there isn't a discrepancy in funding in school districts - urban or otherwise.

[cammac]

cammac - what happened was your GDP increased AND you fixed your spending problem. We need to do both as well.

Your arguments thus far have been that 2% GDP is fine - and anyone who cuts or offers to cut spending is bad. How do you rectify that?

I am saying averaging a GDP of 2% isn't bad for a fully industrialized country obviously 2.5% is better there will be spikes higher and lower. Also in the USA determining what full employment is with maybe 5 to 8% of the population not counted or included in the work force so unemployment figures are higher.

No - you said it again. 2% isn't okay - it is bad, there is no way around that. And if you include the population that isn't counted it makes the full employment numbers worse - not better.

Another point that you make is that Canadian taxes are much higher - they aren't. 42 vs 43% of GDP isn't much of a difference.

We have 3 problems.
1) Aging of our workforce
2) Underemployment and an undereducated workforce that leads to lower labor participation rates
3) Poor tax policy that leads to a lack of investment to drive productivity

And that all leads to stunted GDP growth which leads to a host of other issues including not being able to fund our entitlement programs.

I said that GDP fluctuates but 2% to 2.5% is OK and in reality the best you can hope for as a average in a fully developed Western Democracy. Every advanced Democrat society is faced with that and newly emerged societies like China are facing the same conundrum. As education is improved in countries the birthrate tends to go down while a birthrate of 2.1 children per family is replacement. Currently the USA is at a cusp with 2.1 while Canada and China ( even with 2 child policy) are in the 1.6 range. Immigration has become a imperative to Canada for our future growth and the immigrant population is having higher birthrates than the typical European immigrants of the past. China also faces a demographic problem in that the balance between men and women are out of kilter in that there are significantly more males than females as a result of the one child policy. What should worry the white alt right is that non whites have a higher birthrate than whites. Yes aging is a huge problem and Japan a homogeneous society is a perfect illustration but it is a problem in every developing country.

Canada has taken some steps in not issuing pensions till 67 and also we have had a aggressive immigration policy bring in the replacement factor that our birthrate can't achieve. Plus our national pension plan invests very successfully in the markets to help bolster the surplus to current expenditures. Yes education is important but with De Vos do you really believe even adequate educational results will be achievable?

Well the proposed tax reforms in the USA are just the weasel going down the rabbit hole only benefiting the 1%. Right now many major American multinationals are sitting on pots of money without investing that in new ventures. When they do it is mostly to take over staid companies and gut them to extract the maximum profit. This also entails the loss of jobs all countries should be involved the the brave new world of new technology, smart infrastructure, clean energy and quality education and health all will produce high paying jobs.