#NotTiredofWinning

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
Didn't want to start a new thread so this is the best place I could find.

It is very apparent that Wall Street absolutely loathe's Trump's China trade policies. I was hoping that a lot of the fear was already baked into stock prices, but looks like we're headed for substantial correction territory as the worst case scenario for the trade deal continues to pan out. Couple that with some mid-quarter softness in retail and technology spending and now we see that the "R" word is being bandied about in the financial media.

All things being equal, the Trump campaign cannot afford a steep equity decline and economic slowdown at this point. He needs every bit of good household news he can muster to overcome the mainstream media slime apparatus and the unAmerican, anti-democracy, anti-republic dirty tricks and criminal activity being carried out by the Democrats.

It doesn't matter if China needs to be dealt with in a very tough way, or if he has forced Iran to back down like the real cowards they are. I don't have any real answers or advice for him -- it's just tough all the way around right now and I believe he is close to slipping into underdog territory if he is not already there.
your comments may be on point if it were June of 2020, but it seems a bit premature at this point.

First we need to wait an see if China can actually withstand the pressure, regardless of what our "stocks" do, China is suffering much worse. They've already tried dumping some of our debt, but it didn't have the effect that they hoped for, and frankly, there is no better investment than the US, so they don't have a lot of options.

I think I'll wait for the 4th QTR GDP (annual) results before I worry too much about the impact of the economy on the election.
 

John C

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
1,948
2,451
743
64
I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on the day to day movements of the stock market. DJ 30 is up over 170 points as I type this. NASDAQ is up 60.

I am more concerned that the Fed will engineer a recession between now and Nov. 2020.
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,947
2,204
743
Where else but Stillwater
Didn't want to start a new thread so this is the best place I could find.

It is very apparent that Wall Street absolutely loathe's Trump's China trade policies. I was hoping that a lot of the fear was already baked into stock prices, but looks like we're headed for substantial correction territory as the worst case scenario for the trade deal continues to pan out. Couple that with some mid-quarter softness in retail and technology spending and now we see that the "R" word is being bandied about in the financial media.

All things being equal, the Trump campaign cannot afford a steep equity decline and economic slowdown at this point. He needs every bit of good household news he can muster to overcome the mainstream media slime apparatus and the unAmerican, anti-democracy, anti-republic dirty tricks and criminal activity being carried out by the Democrats.

It doesn't matter if China needs to be dealt with in a very tough way, or if he has forced Iran to back down like the real cowards they are. I don't have any real answers or advice for him -- it's just tough all the way around right now and I believe he is close to slipping into underdog territory if he is not already there.
Don't worry. Trump said, “We’re changing laws as rapidly as we can get them through the courts".
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
17,273
24,238
1,743
Tulsa, OK
Don't worry. Trump said, “We’re changing laws as rapidly as we can get them through the courts".
Liberal Logic 101:
Obama: I have a pen and a phone = Good
Trump: we're changing laws through the courts = Bad.

The conservative view: Both are bad. Many of us have been arguing against this "mixing" of powers for decades, anybody who has a problem with how much power President Trump currently has...look in the freaking mirror because you're probably partly to blame.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
27,396
32,370
1,743
oklahoma city
I wouldn’t put too much emphasis on the day to day movements of the stock market. DJ 30 is up over 170 points as I type this. NASDAQ is up 60.

I am more concerned that the Fed will engineer a recession between now and Nov. 2020.
Why are you concerned about that?
Oct-Dec 2018, Fed Chairman Powell lays out a course of action including rate hikes over 2019 and maybe beyond with a stated goal of getting interest rates back up to a more typical long term level.
Trump was pissed about this and publically blasted the Fed because of the effect it had on the stock market. Powell rapidly backed off and made accommodative statements that completely backtracked from what he had said- now no rate hikes planned.
I'm not debating what is the correct way to go, but clearly, this Fed abruptly changed course due to political pressure from the President. I highly doubt the Fed does it again and if they do, I'm not sure why the chair would develop the backbone that was missing after his late 2018 statements.
I suppose the whole thing could have been engineered to make money change hands and the actions of the president were merely the expectations within the plan. But, other than that, I just don't see the Fed crossing him again.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
27,396
32,370
1,743
oklahoma city
Didn't want to start a new thread so this is the best place I could find.

It is very apparent that Wall Street absolutely loathe's Trump's China trade policies. I was hoping that a lot of the fear was already baked into stock prices, but looks like we're headed for substantial correction territory as the worst case scenario for the trade deal continues to pan out. Couple that with some mid-quarter softness in retail and technology spending and now we see that the "R" word is being bandied about in the financial media.

All things being equal, the Trump campaign cannot afford a steep equity decline and economic slowdown at this point. He needs every bit of good household news he can muster to overcome the mainstream media slime apparatus and the unAmerican, anti-democracy, anti-republic dirty tricks and criminal activity being carried out by the Democrats.

It doesn't matter if China needs to be dealt with in a very tough way, or if he has forced Iran to back down like the real cowards they are. I don't have any real answers or advice for him -- it's just tough all the way around right now and I believe he is close to slipping into underdog territory if he is not already there.
Every once in a while mashed in with your partisan blah, blah, blah you talk investing and can make a hell of a lot of sense.
;)
 
Last edited:

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
Why are you concerned about that?
Oct-Dec 2018, Fed Chairman Powell lays out a course of action including rate hikes over 2019 and maybe beyond with a stated goal of getting interest rates back up to a more typical long term level.
Trump was pissed about this and publically blasted the Fed because of the effect it had on the stock market. Powell rapidly backed off and made accommodative statements that completely backtracked from what he had said- now no rate hikes planned.
I'm not debating what is the correct way to go, but clearly, this Fed abruptly changed course due to political pressure from the President. I highly doubt the Fed does it again and if they do, I'm not sure why the chair would develop the backbone that was missing after his late 2018 statements.
I suppose the whole thing could have been engineered to make money change hands and the actions of the president were merely the expectations within the plan. But, other than that, I just don't see the Fed crossing him again.
I believe that you badly misinterpreted what actually transpired, and the fears of the other poster are not unfounded.

While you got the chronology of event correct, the policy of the Fed has not changed, they simply quit being so obvious about it after Trump called them out publicly.

Their plan and their intent has not changed, they were trying to raise rates under Obama too, but couldn't because the economy was so bad and inflation was not occurring as they needed.

The Feds desperately need to raise the rates because they are in dire straights at 0% interest, with no room to affect the economy if another crash occurs.

They slowed down raising the rates, but they are not finished raising rates while they can and before the next crash does occur.

in fact... it's in the news again today...

Trump blames Fed once again for hurting economic growth
So far this year, the Fed has erred on the dovish side, signaling that there will be no changes to the interbank lending rate in either direction as it looks to strike a balance between relatively strong economic data in the U.S. and potential headwinds -- such as the U.S.-China trade war and muted inflation.

Most recently, minutes from the Federal Open Market Committee’s April 30-May 1 meeting published on Wednesday revealed that even in the face of increased global economic growth or more moderate growth, better financial conditions and moderating global uncertainties, rates will remain steady “for some time.”

Last year, the Fed hiked interest rates four times.
https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/trump-fed-jerome-powellus-economic-growth-markets
 
Last edited:

John C

Deputy
A/V Subscriber
Oct 13, 2011
1,948
2,451
743
64
Why are you concerned about that?
Oct-Dec 2018, Fed Chairman Powell lays out a course of action including rate hikes over 2019 and maybe beyond with a stated goal of getting interest rates back up to a more typical long term level.
Trump was pissed about this and publically blasted the Fed because of the effect it had on the stock market. Powell rapidly backed off and made accommodative statements that completely backtracked from what he had said- now no rate hikes planned.
I'm not debating what is the correct way to go, but clearly, this Fed abruptly changed course due to political pressure from the President. I highly doubt the Fed does it again and if they do, I'm not sure why the chair would develop the backbone that was missing after his late 2018 statements.
I suppose the whole thing could have been engineered to make money change hands and the actions of the president were merely the expectations within the plan. But, other than that, I just don't see the Fed crossing him again.
The Open Market Committee has 12 members, consisting of the 7 members of the Board of Governors, the President of the NYC District Bank, and 4 of the other 11 District Banks. Those last 4 positions are rotated on an annual basis. Who knows what will happen to the majority view with 4 different members. I don’t think it was any great coincidence that the Fed started raising interest rates almost immediately following the 2016 elections. The fact that the rates at which the Treasury borrows have increased almost 2 percentage points since those elections means that the annual deficit would increase by roughly $400 billion, ceteris paribus, for which the current administration gets blamed. The Fed can push up Treasury rates without any announcement they are doing so—they just start selling more of their holdings.

1F32431B-7840-4A2A-844C-48C483463229.jpeg


I just don’t trust the Fed not to play politics would have been my short answer.
 

steross

Bookface/Instagran legend
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
27,396
32,370
1,743
oklahoma city
The Open Market Committee has 12 members, consisting of the 7 members of the Board of Governors, the President of the NYC District Bank, and 4 of the other 11 District Banks. Those last 4 positions are rotated on an annual basis. Who knows what will happen to the majority view with 4 different members. I don’t think it was any great coincidence that the Fed started raising interest rates almost immediately following the 2016 elections. The fact that the rates at which the Treasury borrows have increased almost 2 percentage points since those elections means that the annual deficit would increase by roughly $400 billion, ceteris paribus, for which the current administration gets blamed. The Fed can push up Treasury rates without any announcement they are doing so—they just start selling more of their holdings.

View attachment 70470

I just don’t trust the Fed not to play politics would have been my short answer.
Looking at that graph, it is about recession time. Why would it be likely that they would do that? Is there a strong liberal influence in banking? Why did they not stick with it if that was the intention? If they can do it secretly, what was the purpose of the late 2018 public statements?

BTW, I'm not debating you on this, just trying to get other perspectives from people whose opinion I value.
 
Last edited:

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,947
2,204
743
Where else but Stillwater
To his credit he's going through the process, not like comrade barack who just bulldozed his socialistic will on the masses. Wake up while you still have a pot to piss in ;)
If you're a conservative opposed to activist courts, you don't want them changing federal laws. That is the job of Congress. On the other hand, if you love President Trump, you want him to go ahead and try to get the courts do what Congress won't.
 

llcoolw

Territorial Marshal
Feb 7, 2005
6,066
3,317
1,743
Sammamish, Washington.Dallas, Texas.Maui, Hawaii
Looking at that graph, it is about recession time. Why would it be likely that they would do that? Is there a strong liberal influence in banking? Why did they not stick with it if that was the intention? If they can do it secretly, what was the purpose of the late 2018 public statements?

BTW, I'm not debating you on this, just trying to get other perspectives from people whose opinion I value.
It's not just liberals trying to oust Donny. There's many folks who paid in advance to both parties to keep things running unchanged. Don has upset the gravy train and derailed it to his buddies and supporters.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
If you're a conservative opposed to activist courts, you don't want them changing federal laws. That is the job of Congress. On the other hand, if you love President Trump, you want him to go ahead and try to get the courts do what Congress won't.
ahhh.... excuse me... what do you think the purpose of the Supreme Beings might be, but to challenge the constitutionality of federal law? Are the Supreme Beings only there to suppress and repress the States?

The whole strategy of the Democratic party for the last 50 years has been to try to get the Courts do do what Congress won't. What freaking planet do you live on?
 

StillwaterTownie

Federal Marshal
Jun 18, 2010
16,947
2,204
743
Where else but Stillwater
ahhh.... excuse me... what do you think the purpose of the Supreme Beings might be, but to challenge the constitutionality of federal law? Are the Supreme Beings only there to suppress and repress the States?

The whole strategy of the Democratic party for the last 50 years has been to try to get the Courts do do what Congress won't. What freaking planet do you live on?
LOL, tell that to President Trump. He's been a Democrat for much of his life.

The Supreme Court can't judge the constitutionality of laws passed until asked to do so. Good luck in getting a case all the way there, if needed.
 

CaliforniaCowboy

Federal Marshal
Oct 15, 2003
16,364
2,585
1,743
So Cal
LOL, tell that to President Trump. He's been a Democrat for much of his life.

The Supreme Court can't judge the constitutionality of laws passed until asked to do so. Good luck in getting a case all the way there, if needed.
I know the process for getting the Supreme Beings to hear a case..... we've all watched the left perform that very feat for several decades now
 
Jul 25, 2018
2,235
587
243
48
Boulder, CO
LOL, tell that to President Trump. He's been a Democrat for much of his life.

The Supreme Court can't judge the constitutionality of laws passed until asked to do so. Good luck in getting a case all the way there, if needed.
Once again, you demonstrate the lack of capacity to understand that not everyone associated with a political party agrees with every single thing their party supports. Being a member of a party is not an all or nothing proposition for millions upon millions of people.
 

SLVRBK

Johnny 8ball's PR Manager
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Oct 16, 2003
14,329
5,238
1,743
Katy, TX
Once again, you demonstrate the lack of capacity to understand that not everyone associated with a political party agrees with every single thing their party supports. Being a member of a party is not an all or nothing proposition for millions upon millions of people.
In my best Stillwater Townie: But you as a conservative Republican would certainly agree that the Republican party stands for the core beliefs of all Republicans!