Official Off Topic Discussion Thread #1

[imabot]

By economic lag, I mean that there is a period of time between economic policies being enacted and the policies having a large/significant impact on the economy. Trump's economic policies are going to lead to our debt EQUALING our GDP by 2028 according to the Congressional Budget Office. Maybe Trump should start using the CBO.

 

[Warborg]

Trump is going to wreck our trade with other countries just to grandstand and stroke his ego.

So it's ok that other Countries have been unfairly raping us when it comes to trades? They have been taxing the crap out of our products and costing us tons of money. What was it...Canada taxes our dairy 265%? How is that fair?

Nafta(which I've personally opposed since day 1) Benefits Canada and Mexico but we get screwed.

 

[Kris P Bacon]

Many of your 1st paragraph "achievements" by Trump came within a year or even half of that. That is simply not enough time to account for the lag that comes from implementing economic policies or to even get them passed.

Obama increased the US debt because we were in a recession at that time and a bill was passed stimulating the economy(it worked even though it got watered down by the republicans). We were definitely not in a recession in early 2017. We can not compare the two without taking that into context. Sadly enough, Trump's tax bill will bring our national debt to 100 percent of our GDP by 2028 according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office,

Both of the next two points you mentioned happened within a MONTH of Trump being sworn in. What did Trump do? Correlation does not equal causation. Your third point is from April. Again, what policies did Trump enact?

Trump can claim credit for the next 2 imo.

Do you really want a guy who thinks that a Truck driver should have waited around in a unheated cab in 14 degrees below zero and risked death if he wanted to keep his job on the Supreme Court?

So getting rid of efforts to limit climate change is a good thing?

Getting rid of regulation blindly is a stupid thing to do. Where are we going to buy a new environment from? What is wrong with regulating pollution?

Trump is going to wreck our trade with other countries just to grandstand and stroke his ego.

Like I said, that was a fraction of the list, too long to post all of it.
We get it, you don't like Trump and wont give credit where it is due. Carry on.

 

[Drstrangelove]

By economic lag, I mean that there is a period of time between economic policies being enacted and the policies having a large/significant impact on the economy. Trump's economic policies are going to lead to our debt EQUALING our GDP by 2028 according to the Congressional Budget Office. Maybe Trump should start using the CBO.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/government-debt-to-gdp

Wow. This is this some sort of that "news" that people are talking about.

Obama accomplished this in 2012 at which point our debt exceeded our GDP. Maybe that's confusing. If our Debt equals our GDP by 2028, it means that we will be right where we were back in 2012 before Obama rang it up to 105%.

And oh... we were at 118% right after WW2, before the apocalypse.

 

[Kris P Bacon]

Many of your 1st paragraph "achievements" by Trump came within a year or even half of that. That is simply not enough time to account for the lag that comes from implementing economic policies or to even get them passed.

Obama increased the US debt because we were in a recession at that time and a bill was passed stimulating the economy(it worked even though it got watered down by the republicans). We were definitely not in a recession in early 2017. We can not compare the two without taking that into context. Sadly enough, Trump's tax bill will bring our national debt to 100 percent of our GDP by 2028 according to a report by the Congressional Budget Office,

Both of the next two points you mentioned happened within a MONTH of Trump being sworn in. What did Trump do? Correlation does not equal causation. Your third point is from April. Again, what policies did Trump enact?

Trump can claim credit for the next 2 imo.

Do you really want a guy who thinks that a Truck driver should have waited around in a unheated cab in 14 degrees below zero and risked death if he wanted to keep his job on the Supreme Court?

So getting rid of efforts to limit climate change is a good thing?

Getting rid of regulation blindly is a stupid thing to do. Where are we going to buy a new environment from? What is wrong with regulating pollution?

Trump is going to wreck our trade with other countries just to grandstand and stroke his ego.

 

[skjl47]

So getting rid of efforts to limit climate change is a good thing?

hello; here is the dilemma. I taught general science for 24 years, biology for 11 years and college freshman level geology and physical science for one year. I focused my graduate studies toward ecological science. I kept up with the ongoing climate evidence from around 1970 when I first received my undergraduate degree. Essentially the prime time past decades ago for any truly effective measures to be taken about curbing portions of climate change influenced by human activity. While I think there is a human layer to climate change, I also think many of the proposed plans of the world governments are going to be ineffective and much too expensive as they come basically too late.
I am assuming your are young now as I was back in the 1970's. I went round and round with people about the various environmental crisis points looming ahead. Those crisis points are no longer looming but are our present reality.
It pretty much all was related back then to the exponential human population growth. Many of us pushed a concept called ZPG (zero population growth). As can now be known the population has indeed continued to grow exponentially and is well beyond the numbers suspected to be a main "tipping point" for so many of the environmental disasters currently going on around us. Some day has for sure arrived to one degree or another.
Even if somehow all greenhouse emissions could be stopped right now we will have to live with the stuff already put into our environment for decades to come. Of course emissions will not stop. probably will not slow much. We also have to add the various natural greenhouse emissions, for example the volcano adding land mass to Hawaii.

My choice back in 1975-76 was to remain childless as that was to single best way I as an individual could contribute to a smaller environmental impact or footprint. I do some other things but that is by far the most effective. Unfortunately few others made a similar choice and many others have had more that the one child per person suggested by ZPG.

Did I say it is basically too late for effective reduction of climate change effects by now?

By economic lag, I mean that there is a period of time between economic policies being enacted and the policies having a large/significant impact on the economy

Hello; For some economic trends there is indeed a lag between enactment and results. For others things can move very quickly. For those that move quickly sometimes it only takes someone in authority to make a decision and let the business world know.

 

[J. H.]

hello; here is the dilemma. I taught general science for 24 years, biology for 11 years and college freshman level geology and physical science for one year. I focused my graduate studies toward ecological science. I kept up with the ongoing climate evidence from around 1970 when I first received my undergraduate degree. Essentially the prime time past decades ago for any truly effective measures to be taken about curbing portions of climate change influenced by human activity. While I think there is a human layer to climate change, I also think many of the proposed plans of the world governments are going to be ineffective and much too expensive as they come basically too late.
I am assuming your are young now as I was back in the 1970's. I went round and round with people about the various environmental crisis points looming ahead. Those crisis points are no longer looming but are our present reality.
It pretty much all was related back then to the exponential human population growth. Many of us pushed a concept called ZPG (zero population growth). As can now be known the population has indeed continued to grow exponentially and is well beyond the numbers suspected to be a main "tipping point" for so many of the environmental disasters currently going on around us. Some day has for sure arrived to one degree or another.
Even if somehow all greenhouse emissions could be stopped right now we will have to live with the stuff already put into our environment for decades to come. Of course emissions will not stop. probably will not slow much. We also have to add the various natural greenhouse emissions, for example the volcano adding land mass to Hawaii.

My choice back in 1975-76 was to remain childless as that was to single best way I as an individual could contribute to a smaller environmental impact or footprint. I do some other things but that is by far the most effective. Unfortunately few others made a similar choice and many others have had more that the one child per person suggested by ZPG.

Did I say it is basically too late for effective reduction of climate change effects by now?



Hello; For some economic trends there is indeed a lag between enactment and results. For others things can move very quickly. For those that move quickly sometimes it only takes someone in authority to make a decision and let the business world know.

So you are saying we should all just lay down and die? Let the markets boom and let humanity have its last boom before the apocalypse? Maybe we can't turn the change around, but we can still adapt to cope with it!

 

[skjl47]

So you are saying we should all just lay down and die? Let the markets boom and let humanity have its last boom before the apocalypse? Maybe we can't turn the change around, but we can still adapt to cope with it!

Hello; "we should all just lay down and die?" No I am not saying we should all just lay down and die. I am saying things have progressed a bit too far to avoid some of the consequences no matter what steps may now be taken. I think some of the proposed ideas to deal with the issues at such a late date will be is some ways acts of desperation.
An analogy. If a massive asteroid is known to be heading toward earth and will cause massive destruction. If you can do something while it is far away it should only take a nudge to change it's path. If you wait until it is much closer it takes so much more to deflect the path. The analogy is that climate effects are so far along there is going to be some sort of impact regardless.

Another imperfect analogy might be someone who smokes tobacco. The earlier a person quits then the likely hood of a bad outcome is lessened. If you wait until you have symptoms then the measures that need to be taken become much more drastic. I quit smoking back in 1979 after smoking for over ten years. I might still have problems from my past smoking but the extent should be lessened.
Even today there are many folks who will strongly argue that a man induced portion of climate change is not happening. Same as it was over 40 years ago with other environmental concerns.

"Let the markets boom and let humanity have its last boom before the apocalypse?"
Hello; I have been considering this very thing myself. So far I am sticking largely to my small impact lifestyle. I have thought about buying a Mustang GT. I can afford it but it will mean I have given up entirely all hope. I wish I has some confidence that people will change in some fundamental way, but I do not.
You as an individual and I as an individual can only make decisions for ourselves about our lifestyles and the impact we will have.

"Maybe we can't turn the change around, but we can still adapt to cope with it![/QUOTE]"
Hello; Yes I agree. I coped by having a vasectomy when I was around 25 years old. I was still married to my first wife and she felt the same way. I also live as low impact lifestyle as I can stand. My water use is around 800-900 gallons a month. I keep vehicles for many years. My current car is a 2001 and my current truck is a 2004. The longer I keep them in good tune and on the road then the less impact comes from the manufacture of a replacement. This is likely not what you mean is my guess.

What do you mean by "cope" ?

Hello; By the way I also think climate change is a lesser of the evils we face.

 

[PYRU]

So you are saying we should all just lay down and die? Let the markets boom and let humanity have its last boom before the apocalypse? Maybe we can't turn the change around, but we can still adapt to cope with it!

....but those horrible French people

 

[skjl47]

Hello J J. H. Maybe it will help if you think of most current human societies as addicts. Addicted to abundant low cost energy. Addicted to technology. Addicted to personal vehicle and mass air transportation. Addicts do not much care what their addiction leads to in the long run as long as they get what they crave today.

Here is a question. I have central air for my three bedroom house but have run it but so far this season for a few hours on 3 very hot humid nights while I slept. I keep my electric use down that way. My last bill was $56 for 32 days. Are you willing to go without AC during the summer most of the time? Before you jump to the conclusion that it is because I cannot afford to use it, that is not the case.
That is a way to cope.