World is Falling Apart Thread (Locked forever)

[J T]

I dislike that it is considered normal! Back when Obama did it, he championed himself as being diplomatic in foreign relations, so it was a major error to send unqualified diplomats to other countries, even if they were less politically threatening countries like Norway. It runs counter to how he campaigned.

Nevertheless, Trump's adviser appointment seems especially deplorable. A guy who profited on the economy crashing is going to advice the president on the economy?! That's nuts!

Maybe there should be some kind of law that high contributing campaign donors cannot be appointed positions. Maybe with some sort of safeguard loophole for well qualified appointees who may still enter by a congressional vote or something along those lines.

[marurun]

The whole political appointee thing is not particularly American, either. It's pretty much one of those things that happens as a part of the political process worldwide. Not saying that to indicate it's good or anything, but it is one of those very useful tools to use to curry favor. You could argue that Ack's example of ambassadorships could still have positive outcomes if the individuals were committed to doing good work and learning to fill in their shortcomings. They would definitely have talented staff to assist them. We do have a strong state department in the area of diplomacy. Just not in the area of technology (our state department is notoriously unskilled and poorly equipped for technology).

[MrPopo]

Nevertheless, Trump's adviser appointment seems especially deplorable. A guy who profited on the economy crashing is going to advice the president on the economy?! That's nuts!

That actually sounds like the sanest thing Trump has done.

[J T]

Nevertheless, Trump's adviser appointment seems especially deplorable. A guy who profited on the economy crashing is going to advice the president on the economy?! That's nuts!

That actually sounds like the sanest thing Trump has done.

Maybe if Paulson was one of the people who was smart enough to actually predict it would happen, but he was just one of the people who profited off of tips from the people who figured it out. And maybe if he seemed to actually want to do something about it other than rake in piles of money, but to my knowledge, that is not what he did.

Also, Trump only has two actual economists out of his 15 economic advisers. Most of the others are people whom he has business ties with, largely from the real estate business.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Correct. Business acumen and an understanding of macroeconomics are tangentially related (at most). Accordingly, economic adviser positions should probably be filled with distinguished economists rather than wealthy businessmen.

(It is good to think of businessmen as drivers and economists as mechanics. Mechanics aren't necessarily good drivers, and the driver is probably not the best person to fix the car.)

[MrPopo]

And maybe if he seemed to actually want to do something about it other than rake in piles of money, but to my knowledge, that is not what he did.

It's the economic equivalent of teaching a kid the stove is hot. People have to get burned before they realize it.

[J T]

Moody's Analytics has released a paper about the macroeconomic consequences of Mr. Trump's economic policies.
https://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/docu ... licies.pdf

There is also a similar paper on the consequences of Secretary Clinton's economic policies:
https://www.economy.com/dismal/analysis/284122

[Ack]

Moody's Analytics has released a paper about the macroeconomic consequences of Mr. Trump's economic policies.
https://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/docu ... licies.pdf

There is also a similar paper on the consequences of Secretary Clinton's economic policies:
https://www.economy.com/dismal/analysis/284122

Just so you know, the Clinton one requires a subscription.

[prfsnl_gmr]

Moody's Analytics has released a paper about the macroeconomic consequences of Mr. Trump's economic policies.
https://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/docu ... licies.pdf

There is also a similar paper on the consequences of Secretary Clinton's economic policies:
https://www.economy.com/dismal/analysis/284122

Just so you know, the Clinton one requires a subscription.

You can read the "Cliff's Notes" version at:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgra ... 7ba5692348

http://fortune.com/2016/07/29/hillary-c ... proposals/

I am sure, however, that most of you will want to read the full reports and use your own models to verify all of the macroeconomic analysis contained with them independently.

[marurun]

That requires jumping to a LOT of conclusions, to try and build that particular conspiracy theory.