US trade deficit...
10 responses | 0 likes
Started by cliff-e - March 6, 2019, 4:12 p.m.

soars under 45.

http://www.abcactionnews.com/news/national/us-trade-deficit-grows-by-more-than-100-billion-under-trump

Also in the news today...the last Chevrolet Cruze rolls off the assembly line at Lordstown Ohio and the plant closes.

So much winning... :~(

Comments
By mcfarmer - March 6, 2019, 5:09 p.m.
Like Reply



“voters not being educated to the truth of what is coming their way”

By mcfarm - March 6, 2019, 6:46 p.m.
Like Reply

so you guys really think that if chevy cruize's were selling like hot cakes they would be shutting down the facility?

By cliff-e - March 6, 2019, 8:14 p.m.
Like Reply
By TimNew - March 7, 2019, 3:10 a.m.
Like Reply

Have you ever looked at a chart that compares GDP to trade deficits?


BTW,  we had a budget surplus for January. 

By mcfarmer - March 7, 2019, 8:48 a.m.
Like Reply

Tim :


“BTW,  we had a budget surplus for January. ”


Oh for crying out loud. You know better than that Shirley. I just gotta call blatant hypocrisy on that. Or deception, or ignorance, which is it ? You gotta get better material.

Jan. 2019 $9  billion surplus

Jan. 2018 $51 billion surplus

Jan. 2017  $52 billion surplus


Federal deficit up 77 percent so far this budget year


By TimNew - March 7, 2019, 9:29 a.m.
Like Reply

I said we had a surplus.  It's a fact.  January is often a surplus month, yes. But my main point was that we often see heightened trade deficits with a growing economy.

You think I was being deceptive?   Taking a snap shot of available data is deceptive, cherry picking,  etc, etc.  Looking at YTD data in an economy where a huge fiscal policy change is still taking form is at least deceptive.

I've said about a dozen times that we need to wait until at least April to start drawing any real conclusions.  And honestly, assuming as you claim you are actually interested in honesty, we are not quite done with the 5th qtr of a tax change that will take at least 6 qtrs. to fully mature.  Let's see how many "Trump Voters" are added to the tax roles with tomorrows employment report. Jobless claims came in today at a ridiculously low 223k with the 4wk moving average continuing a steady drop.  But then, with the lowest unemployment rate in decades and job openings at record levels, wages finally showing growth, if you prefer to focus on deficits as the "end of the world" in spite of the swelling tax roles,  you go right ahead.  but there are 200-300 thousands more voters every month that have jobs that didn't,and millions more who are finally seeing growth in earnings who may disagree with you.


And don't call me Shirley.


By mcfarmer - March 7, 2019, 9:43 a.m.
Like Reply

Good, so we agree it was intended to be deceptive.


I mean why crow about the lowest Jan surplus in years if not to deceive ?


No reason I can think of.


Again, the last word is yours. I’m sure I’ve heard it before.

By TimNew - March 7, 2019, 9:58 a.m.
Like Reply

"Good, so we agree it was intended to be deceptive."


No, it was not meant to be deceptive, and only in the convoluted lib world can the truth be called deceptive.


What I feel is deceptive is taking a micro sample of data in a macro subject, which of course, is SOP for the party of deception, of which you are a proud member.


We've come to expect deception from you and yours, so I won't be taking offense at your dishonest attempt, just pity.



By carlberky - March 7, 2019, 10:41 a.m.
Like Reply

"What I feel is deceptive is taking a micro sample of data in a macro subject"

Tim, I believe that was mcfarmer's point.

By TimNew - March 7, 2019, 11:33 a.m.
Like Reply

I suppose we'll call it poetic license, or perhaps some secret lib code, that calls this

"Oh for crying out loud. You know better than that Shirley. I just gotta call blatant hypocrisy on that. Or deception, or ignorance, which is it ? You gotta get better material.

Jan. 2019 $9  billion surplus

Jan. 2018 $51 billion surplus

Jan. 2017  $52 billion surplus"

calling out micro vs macro data.  Looks to me like McFarmer is saying that relative to other recent January's, this last one is mild. Or, adding micro to micro to micro on what should be a macro subject,


And as I already stated earlier,  my comment re: the budget deficit was an aside to an aside.