Posted on 01/19/2017 2:39:41 AM PST by expat_panama
Donald Trump hasn’t moved into the White House yet, but the president-elect is already influencing the outlook for global economic growth. This week, the International Monetary Fund raised its US economic growth forecast by half a percent for 2017 and 2018, as a result of Trump’s planned tax cuts, infrastructure spending and regulatory reform. The IMF now expects the US economy to grow 2.3% this year and 2.5% next year.
But Paul Sheard, chief economist at S&P Global, says the outlook for economic growth is largely dependent on which Donald Trump we get in the White House.
Sheard believes there is the “relationist” Trump, someone who sets the bar high for growth and wants to “Make America Great Again,” and then there’s the “protectionist” Trump...
...“Americans are prone to looking at the sunny side of things,” Sheard says. “After a rather dismal eight or nine years, perhaps it’s time for those animal spirits to be unleashed.”
(Excerpt) Read more at finance.yahoo.com ...
I think America is truly ready for some protectionism.
We’re all growing very tired, of being the world’s chumps on trade.
Just saying.
“Trump’s planned tax cuts [yes], infrastructure spending [no] and regulatory reform [yes].”
Two sound good, but I’ll pass on another trillion dollar stimulus.
Infrastructure done the right way if fine. We do have needs. If it’s not crony, union jobs but rather focused on the most damaged federally controlled bridges, roads and airports, it’s a needed service and will drive jobs. Not in love with the concept but if done with a business man’s hat on, it could be helpful.
Done at the Central Government level, maintenance of roads, bridges, airports is inherently inefficient. That is true regardless of how skilled the chief executive is.
The Central Government is just flat out too big for efficient management.
Eliminate all Federal transportation and sin taxes (gasoline, tires, batteries, plane landings, alcohol, tobacco, etc). Tell the collectors of those taxes to send the money directly to the state in which collected for 5 years. The states have 5 years to replace the federal taxes with state taxes (or not).
The primary role of Federal infrastructure programs is to feed the Congressional mosquitos in the swamp. Obamacare passed due to the Louisiana Purchase and Nebraska Corn Husker, and other bribes less obvious. Obamacare did not get all those Democrat votes because they thought it was a good idea.
Trump could use infrastructure spending to bribe Congress to support his healthcare and tax policies, and court appointments. But then Trump becomes the swamp and we have won nothing.
With a slimmed down Central Government, the chief executive will be more able to address the real priorities of a Central Government.
Decentralization of infrastructure spending benefits everyone except the Central Government swamp dwellers.
” I’ll pass on another trillion dollar stimulus.”
Obama spent the stimulus on the unions. Remember....”the shovel ready jobs weren’t as shovel ready as we thought”.
Actually spending the money on infrastructure is a whole different ball game.
Also, the private sector is offering to pay for a large part of it.
Let Trump be Trump. THEN, we can criticize what actually happens, instead of worrying about what MIGHT happen.
“Obama spent the stimulus on the unions. Remember....”the shovel ready jobs weren’t as shovel ready as we thought”. Actually spending the money on infrastructure is a whole different ball game. Also, the private sector is offering to pay for a large part of it. Let Trump be Trump. THEN, we can criticize what actually happens, instead of worrying about what MIGHT happen.”
There are very few “infrastructure” repiars that the federal monster alone can do. States can repair the infrastructure in their borders and will do it more efficiently.
After having Soetoro taking an ax to our military during the last eight years, we much more need the money spent on defense.
Americans do not care about “growth”. Only the elites, bankers, and speculators care about that metric.
I’m not an economist, but I surmised long ago that a “growing” economy simply means the increase of debt. Bankers and elites benefit from increased debt, not the common man.
Yahoo thinks we should want what is best for the elites.
I say screw ‘em.
Hope all is well with you. Wish you were back.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.