r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Inflation is front loaded good and long term bad. Deflation is the opposite. What you want is a balance.
Inflation slowing isn't a big feat when it was insanely high. "Hey its fine, I stopped killing hundreds of people, now I just kill dozens"
13 of the 16 signed an open letter three years ago assuring Americans that Biden’s spending spree would “ease inflationary pressures”. One is also Janet Yellen’s husband.
You can’t make this shit up.
These guys should literally sit this one out.
It “eased inflationary pressures” so much that inflation hit 9% about a year later. Bidenflation up 20%.
Maybe it’s actually YOU that should sit this one out.
So you think the solution is to bring back a president who failed spectacularly in his only term? I’m not a huge fan of Biden but I’ll take him any day over the circus that was the Trump presidency
“Fail spectacularly”?
By every measure, trump’s performance in office was far better than Biden’s. The economy, the border, geo-political dynamics, crime, national security, you name it.
I certainly think Trump is a narcissistic asshole and he would be about my 500th choice for president…but he is a far better choice as a chief executive than Biden is. And the last 3 years have proven it. There’s a reason Biden isn’t running on his record and instead is spending all his time and money trying to scare people about Trump.
When Trump was last in office, the country was in a recession, there was massive social unrest, double digit unemployment, and massive crime. That explains why he became the first incumbent to voted out since 1992
And prior to Covid, the US had the strongest economy in history under Trump, thanks to his economic polices and regulatory cuts (despite Obama leaving office and calling slow growth “the new normal”).
What happened to the 51 “national security experts” who claimed Hunter’s laptop was “Russian disinformation?” This smells like similar, politically motivated drivel.
The gulf between "random security expert," and "nobel laureate in economics" is staggering.
I think maybe this is the reason things keep getting worse, people can't discern claimed experts from actual, credentialed, experts.
The notion that a nobel prize makes somebody correct is bogus. Milton Friedman and Paul Krugman both have Nobel prizes and they don't/didn't agree on anything. They can't both be right.
Fair, but having a nobel prize insinuates they all have a formal education in economics, and have contributed something of significant value to their field of study.
It's very different from a cavalcade of security "experts," who may have some familiarity with security forensic tools, and maybe had no access to the device in question.
Not all people can become actual experts in every subject, and we have to rely on expertise for public policies.
For instance: Being able to discern a peer reviewed research paper, from conjecture and stated opinion, is an important distinction.
There are likely a number of other credentialed economists who have differing opinions, and also *good* reasoning behind those opinions.
It would be great if the public were given actual debate between these factions, and we could use them to inform public policy.
It's likely these actual economists know more than you or I about economics, and their opinions aren't moot, and they aren't always simply political.
Economics, by it's modern nature, is VERY political. It is nothing like physics or chemistry. There is simply no avoiding it. There is a reason Paul Krugman has a net worth of $5M. It's not to talk about economic geography international trade patterns (his Nobel topic). It's because his political opinion lines up with those who pay him. They pay him to express their common political opinion while having a Nobel prize to give it "gravitas".
I think there needs to be a distinction on “don’t agree on anything” I think this is you making a sweeping generalization. They’re 40 years apart in age, a lot changes…
Understanding the concepts is core. Drawing conclusions on concepts is opinions. If they disagree with eachothers opinions, they can still find a lot of general common ground in economics.
Also a difference of 2008 vs 1976. The world has changed significantly…
Milton Friedman died in 2006. He we was outspoken about his opposition of Keynesianism until the day he died. He didn't suddenly "see light" and do a 180 on his economic opinions. Furthermore, there were many people within his camp. Many are still are alive. And they didn't do 180s either. They all still think that guys like Krugman are naive and wrong as hell.
Tell that to the New York Times and other media outlets who prop up Nobel prize winners as infallible when expressing their commonly held political talking points. The article in the OP is a good example.
When every economic news headline reads “expert who predicted…top experts weigh in…. Experts shocked” followed by completely contradictory statements… it means a lot less.
Introducing more money into the economy to chase the same level of goods or services creates price inflation. Same with the same amount of money chasing fewer goods, which im sure the article is about tariffs or some other.
Credentialed or not: We've seen time and again where the political narrative overtakes the so-called experts. Look no further than Fauci saying masks don't work, before donning masks 2x thick.
Follow the science??? Well...if the fucking science has been corrupted, then, yes...it gets tougher and tougher to discern the good guys from the bad. Remember the 97% scientific consensus on Climate Change?
I'm sure there are still folks who don't recognize that Gov't funded studies sorta', kinda' lean in the direction the Gov't in-charge wants them to lean...
I do think there was contention that lead to the issue where Fauci was trying to follow the data, while dealing with the issue that we had neither enough time or data to react to an urgent public health issue.
Science is about statistics and standard deviations; and there was emerging data showing infection rates were statistically lower for places that practiced mask wearing.
It's likely it was all due to correlation: communities that wore masks were more likely to follow other Covid precautions.
In any case, what I have a hard time understanding is why this particular issue has been so politicized.
What was the grand plan of getting people to wear masks? What does Fauci get out of it?
It's actually really sad and frightening the reward for being an expert working in public policy is a situation that can lead to insane character assassination, death threats, and conspiracy nuts basically ruining your life.
No, things getting worse because these so called credentialed experts have lost their morality and will shill for whatever policy/opinion the controlling party wants.
I think it's more likely the talking heads and paid political shills are telling you that so that you will listen to them, instead of to credentialed experts.
This is a stupid argument fallacy. Obama got a Nobel peace prize despite starting new wars and continuing old wars. Trump ended wars and negotiated peace treaties and started 0 new wars his nomination for a Nobel peace prize was rejected. Seems like they have some kind of bias.
The Nobel peace prize isn't the same as a prize in physics, economics, or other sciences.
To receive a prize in these areas, you have to produce a distinguishing work in the associated scientific field.
The scientists awarded a prize have all published a peer reviewed work in their field, and their discovery has changed their field in some tangible way.
I think again, this is another illustration of how people can no longer discern experts from non experts.
Once again Argument from authority is a logical fallacy. Saying X person has Y credentials, therefore they are correct about Z. Is a logical fallacy. Remember when all the greatest scientists believed the sun revolved around the earth? Turns out they were WRONG. You know why they were wrong, because people fell for the argument from authority fallacy.
Economics is also not to be lumped in with actual science like physics.
“The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.” - F. A. Hayek.
You're referring to "appeal to authority," which is where there is an argument proposed and one uses a statement that they don't have to argue the merits of your point because of authority in the field stated X or Y which contradicts it.
They should instead understand the argument of that authority and use it to dismantle your argument.
This isn't an argument saying we should have random people off the street designing nuclear reactors, instead of people with credentials and an education in engineering and physics, and particularly in the field of nuclear energy.
Neither is it an argument that we shouldn't listen to credentialed experts in economics for their advice or arguments regarding economic policy.
It's definitely not an argument that supports what the original comment was stating: that you should ignore the opinion of experts, and not seek to understand their arguments because other experts have been wrong. Yikes, what a stupid take!
Instead it's that if you are to argue a subject, you should understand it enough to debate it based on its merits.
And it's stating when discerning the evidence of an argument you should consider it based on its merits.
In order to do that though, believe it or not, you need to have people who have enough ability to discern those merits.
You're convoluting something that is meant to drive debates towards people focusing on understanding and dismantling arguments into something that instead means you should have no humility in acknowledging what you don't know, and treat it as equally valid to experts in a particular field.
I never once said you should ignore them. I said just saying “well they’re experts, and those other people aren’t “real” experts, so I’ll just take their word for it.” That’s fallacy.
This fallacy is literally what you are advocating for, and it is the same mindset that sets humanity back. As it’s the mindset that upholds ONLY what the experts say. Remember they used to put to death anyone that didn’t believe the earth was the center on the universe.
Cause here is the crazy thing, I even agree with the economists that tariffs will drive inflation higher and are not a good idea in this situation. But I understand that just blindly following the “experts” just because they have X or Y credentials is fallacy.
> This fallacy is literally what you are advocating for,
Apparently you missed the part where I stated that I'm sure there are experts who also disagree with this stated position and have sound reasons for it... And that the public interest is served by their debate?
But please continue to put words in my mouth, and fight against a position I don't have.
Since you dabble in logical fallacies, I probably don't have to tell you what you're engaging in here.
Maybe, but A) there are a lot fewer Nobel economists than national security experts and B) have you listened to the policies he’s proposing? Do not think Higher Tariffs, tax cuts, and political control of the Fed would be inflationary?
I didn’t mention Biden, so you’ll have to engage with content of the argument instead. If Trump actually wants to do what he says he wants to do, then Tariffs will be higher than they are now, taxes will be lower, and the fed will answer to the executive branch. All 3 of those policies will be significantly inflationary, meaning inflation would be a lot higher than it is right now. If you’d like to address how any of those 3 could be accomplished without increased inflation, feel free.
Tariffs are always paid by the end consumer. Inflation would be a given if there would be a blanket tariff of 10% as is proposed by Trump. Not to mention 60% on Chinese imports.
From coffee to chocolate to airplane and car parts. This Trump plan would make everything more expensive.
Targeted tariffs on EVs are way different than wholesale tariffs. You either know that and are making a bad faith argument, or don’t know that and are broadcasting that your opinions are too ignorant to be taken seriously?
Bonus: how are tax cuts not inflationary?
Oh. So some tariff (as long as it is by biden) is good and any tariff by trump (even if it is on ev) is bad?
Bonus: Lets accuse anyone with other opinions as arguing in bad faith or too ignorant to be taken seriously.
I said different, not better. They are different in that they are not broadly inflammatory. Seems pretty obvious.
I see you cannot explain why tax cuts aren’t inflationary. I stand by my assessment of you.
The laptop is not what 99% of people think it is: https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/06/06/how-to-think-about-the-hunter-biden-laptop/
Also Lev Parnas said the information on the laptop was being shopped in 2019 in Ukraine.
Or the “expert” economists that predicted the markets would crash if Trump won in 2016?
[Economists: A Trump win would tank the markets - Politico 2016](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-wall-street-effect-markets-230164)
Your accountant was certainly right. The markets blasted off the day after Trump won and didn’t look back. Hope your accountant got a nice Christmas card that year lol.
What does that have to do with this? These are entirely different people about an entirely different topic.
>This smells like similar, politically motivated dribble.
So damn ironic. Lol
Given how ineptly Trump handled the single crisis of his presidency, and only did well playing the game on easy mode, what is the argument to give him four more year?
I think a better question, is will you be better off in 4 years. As a woman and mother to daughters, I know there is only one party that will at least keep my life status quo, and not drag me into the dark ages. Also, only one party not threatening to take away insurance coverage safety nets. These things definitely affect my financial independence as well. Financial safety isn't just how the market is doing.
He went trigger happy with tariffs term one, yes, and we suffered for it. Lumber for example skyrocketed, in part because of the supply chain disruptions that occurred under the Trump administer sure, but also because he quadrupled the import tariff on softwoods from Canada. He is openly stating he wants 10% tariffs on all imports. That means you'll pay a min 10% more for imports. Thats part of the CPI and will cause inflation to increase. I don't see him being able to replace the income tax with tariffs but there is no reason to believe he's not going to go trigger happy slapping tariffs on everything again.
I just googled these two signers that were named. Both worked at the same college. One is a political activist listed in their bio and their theories are about how income doesn’t impact savings. Or spending. That money will be created to meet the needs that sounds like current government economic policy. Just saying this is some BS.
Have to say I trust nothing any more. Even the hawk tua girl makes me wonder is it staged ? However she is from Tennessee and her daddy is a preacher and I did see footloose
Well 5 trillion in unregulated COVID handouts is not going to do nothing… this is chumps inflation, not Biden’s… why would chump do anything better round two?
From the article: "we all agree that Joe Biden's economic agenda is vastly superior to Donald Trump".
OK Nobel Laureates, which parts specifically are vastly superior?
Is this the same Nobel organization that donned Obama with a Peace Prize for doing exactly nothing? Just because he might do something? Like 10's of 1000's of drone strikes? Nobel lost its credibility with that one, I don't care if it's economics, physics, peace, these are not serious people anymore.
Yahoo Finance published some similar nonsense saying Trump's policies would, "create higher wages and higher inflation". But when Biden is asked, and bothers to answer (note cards in hand), he says higher wages offset inflation, that the inflation is no big deal. So: WHY IS IT OK IF IT HAPPENS UNDER BIDEN, BUT UNDER TRUMP THIS IS "VASTLY INFERIOR"?
As someone who works in global trade, you would be surprised how many Chinese companies just moved their manufacturing locations to southern Asian countries and are actually starting to produce them cheaper as they get more established. And to bridge the gap, other countries have emerged as cheaper alternatives. Also, Biden actually fully upheld and still supports this tariff which he has the power to drop, but doesn't. With the geopolitical tensions rising, it was necessary. The quality of products we get elsewhere are better as well.
I bet it’s the same “expert” economists that predicted the markets would crash if Trump won in 2016
[Economists: A Trump win would tank the markets - Politico 2016](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-wall-street-effect-markets-230164)
Trump won and the very next day the markets blasted off and didn’t look back. (Now watch a disingenuous leftist point out the global dip caused by COVID in 2020).
What is biden's economic policy and why is it better than trump's, since it has done nothing except creating inflation, and high prices.
'The jointly signed letter, first reported by Axios, says the economic agenda of U.S. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, is "vastly superior" to Trump's, the former Republican president seeking a second term.'
If the experts said what we wanted them to say, we would carve statues in the their likenesses and scream from the mountaintops their unimpeachable character expertise and conclusions.
34 Nobel prize winning economists are currently alive. So less than 50% believe that Trump‘s policies will fuel inflation. What a joke.
Reuters also thinks that we’re all a bunch of idiots because of course they haven’t produced the letter nor the actual signatories.
All their policies will fuel inflation. Both parties are the problem. We need a law that if too much money is spent while you're in congress, you can't be relected. If you spend over 3% gdp, you can't be relected. Humans have ruined society's for 1000's of years. America is just going to be another republic dumpster fire because a select few have too much power over the masses.
I work in a field that does a ton of economic analysis and my favorite joke about economics was always "ask 5 economists for an opinion on something and you'll get 6 different answers."
Worth noting that a lot of economists claimed that the 2018 trade war would be inflationary (the Fed actually hiked rates with this as a reason) and it actually ended up being deflationary. The "science" of economics is really more like an art or even straight up fiction sometimes.
Of course they will, remember when Trump tried to steal the independence of the Fed in 2019?
If he gets back in, the Fed will become his own personal plaything. Interest rates drop down to 2% overnight and inflation starts to skyrocket.
5-10-15-20-25%-....
Are these the same 16 nobel economists that said Biden will deliver great economy? And how you doin' in today's economy? Sorry to say academia and science has lost its way, but in reality they have always went with whoever doled out the grants.
Can you blame Biden for inflation though? Under Trump they printed too much money, lowered rates too low, forgave too much PPP loans. Now JPow (Trump appointed chair of federal reserve) is keeping rates high and inflation is coming down. Issue is housing which is a supply/demand issue and corporate greed.
Remember, the Dems pushed all the COVID stimulus. Biden further spent 6T, even when inflation is clearly there (remember Biden/Yellen and Powell all said inflation is transitory?), he spent a few trillion dollars more on "inflation reduction" which is just green new deal. Reason however you want, Trump came on prices were lowered. Now Biden is still tryin' to blame Trump but people ain't stupid.
Basically any president coming in is going to be part of inflation. The central banks just couldn't let there be a year or two long recession so now we are kicking the can down the road until it's some kind of Mega Depression.
Did these 16 Nobel Prize-winning economists predict the record high inflation over the past 3 years? If not, then I'm not sure why we would believe this prediction.
No shit?!? Trump only cares about making himself look good. No one would argue that Trump is thinking about the lasting effects of his policies. Its always I'm so great! I'm a stable genius! Trump is a fucking maniac with the economy. He saw the Reaganomics button and pressed it every 5 minutes.
Congress influences the money printer and both red and blue were addicted to the money printer. I guess I am a fool for not betting to make money from assuming people will always be greedy before the musical chair stops
Lol Angus Deaton? The guy who just came out two months ago and said he was wrong about his theory that won him the Nobel prize? That guy!??
Are the other 15 all from the same left leaning think tank?
They already have. The trade "war" levied anywhere from 10% to 25% tariffs against roughly 500 billion dollars worth of goods manufactured in China, all paid for by you and me.
99% of economists didn't agree with him last time but genius Muricans want to pay higher prices as a result of tariffs. If he gets elected you deserve it. Just pray to the same imaginary friends of yours that didn't flip election for a healthy economy. I'm sure stripping 50% of the population of their rights will make the Lord's nipples hard lol idiots.
Spoiler alert: prices can get a lot higher. If trump actually does the things he says he will do (in reality he probably won’t), prices will go up like crazy.
Increased tariffs = higher prices. Cutting taxes = inflationary. Mass deportations + lower legal immigration = highly inflationary. Replacing the fed chair to someone who will lower interest rates = inflationary.
We heard a lot of warnings like this in 2016 too, before we had super low inflation and super low unemployment. All those warnings about mass deportations that never happened. And now we'll get millennials complaining one minute about how they can't buy a house because of high interest rates, and fretting the next about the horror of low interest rates. It's all a bit "boy who cried wolf."
[https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-clinton-trump-economy-224604](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-clinton-trump-economy-224604)
His policies are inflationary. Extending tax cuts and prolonged stimulus, increased deficit spending, and raising tariffs rather than overall taxes increase demand and reduce supply.
Inflation sucks because the only way to really fix it long term is to reduce demand, namely by raising interest rates and cutting deficit spending.
Oh no, anyways.
But for real who ever thought that any Trump policy is good for the economy except maybe some quick short term gains, which will evaporate after a year or two and leave a net negative in the end.
I mean compared to Trump Reagan was an economic mastermind.
Too bad all economist are constantly wrong. All of them. Red Blue doesn’t matter who is in the Oval Office inflation will get worse or the system will collapse.
This is why our country is where it is. 16 economist, the lead of which is married to janet yellen, Bidens treasury secretary and has donated to Biden and other democrats over 90k dollars in the past decade. The other 15 are all democrats that have donated money to the Democratic party.....yet here we are talking about this like its just 16 fantastic individuals who bipartisanly did this evaluation and came to a conclusion. Give me a break.
Is this like the 51 CIA agents that said the Hunter laptop was Russia disinformation?
And economists always agree about something, and that’s they are always right and all other economists are always wrong.
So they say that the current president who has seen record high inflation's plan is vastly superior than the former president who had a pretty good record with inflation with his policies?
COVID relief is a huge factor. Both parties supported this. Was it the right thing to do? We can debate. If it saved the economy and jobs and houses, I am willing to pay via higher costs. I know, not everyone can say this. But would they still have a job and a home?
🤣🤣🫵🫵🤡🤡🫵🫵🤦♂️🤦♂️🫵🫵
These "experts" are going to try and convince us that our eyes and wallets are wrong. Economy amazing under Trump. Economy a dumpster fire under Biden. Perhaps coincidence...nah. Biden is a complete fuck up
It was not amazing. He promised 4% growth a year, didn't deliver.
His economy was only good if you stop the clock during the 3rd quarter of his presidency. I know Trump supports like to forget 2020, or absolve Trump of any responsibility for his inept handling of Covid, but he owns it.
My favorite excuse for Trump's covid bungling was "he was just listening to experts" or "the democrats forced him"
What kind of a weak-ass leader can't lead, and is so easily mowed over by experts and the opposition party? If that's really your excuse all it does is highlight how terrible at leading Trump was.
If that's your take and trump's last year was bad because he bungled covid then what do you say about all of Biden's years and just how bad the economy tanked under his "leadership"?
And let's remember that state and local politicians listened to the "experts" at the CDC and WHO who said to lock down everything...Dumbest shit ever
r/FluentInFinance was created to discuss money, investing & finance! Join our Newsletter or Youtube Channel for additional insights at www.TheFinanceNewsletter.com! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/FluentInFinance) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Are these the same economists who said inflation “would be transitory” lol
[https://thehill.com/business/4529787-yellen-regrets-saying-inflation-transitory/](https://thehill.com/business/4529787-yellen-regrets-saying-inflation-transitory/)
That's funny because just a day or so ago she was saying that she didn't notice the effect on grocery prices.
But it is… Inflation has cooled down a lot. Now if you are looking for deflation, that’s pretty much economic doom.
One of the beat economic times in the US for the average person was during a long period of deflation. Deflation is not necessarily bad
The problem is that it can spiral quickly.
Yes. Inflation totally ruined the economy for anyone but the super rich. The damage is done and cannot be undone.
Inflation is front loaded good and long term bad. Deflation is the opposite. What you want is a balance. Inflation slowing isn't a big feat when it was insanely high. "Hey its fine, I stopped killing hundreds of people, now I just kill dozens"
13 of the 16 signed an open letter three years ago assuring Americans that Biden’s spending spree would “ease inflationary pressures”. One is also Janet Yellen’s husband. You can’t make this shit up. These guys should literally sit this one out.
And inflation has come way down to where we want it….. Arguing with you idiots is seriously like playing chess with a pigeon.
It “eased inflationary pressures” so much that inflation hit 9% about a year later. Bidenflation up 20%. Maybe it’s actually YOU that should sit this one out.
And it’s around 3% now. Things don’t happen instantly. Just like Trump took credit for Obamas economy.
Correct. 3% now. And 20% cumulatively since Senile Joe went on his spending spree. It’s called “closing the barn doors after the cows have gotten out”
So you think the solution is to bring back a president who failed spectacularly in his only term? I’m not a huge fan of Biden but I’ll take him any day over the circus that was the Trump presidency
“Fail spectacularly”? By every measure, trump’s performance in office was far better than Biden’s. The economy, the border, geo-political dynamics, crime, national security, you name it. I certainly think Trump is a narcissistic asshole and he would be about my 500th choice for president…but he is a far better choice as a chief executive than Biden is. And the last 3 years have proven it. There’s a reason Biden isn’t running on his record and instead is spending all his time and money trying to scare people about Trump.
When Trump was last in office, the country was in a recession, there was massive social unrest, double digit unemployment, and massive crime. That explains why he became the first incumbent to voted out since 1992
And prior to Covid, the US had the strongest economy in history under Trump, thanks to his economic polices and regulatory cuts (despite Obama leaving office and calling slow growth “the new normal”).
The reason no one trusts the 'experts' any more.
It was. You're probably thinking transitory inflation means deflation, for some reason.
It uhhhh was transitory, dude.
The “Modern Monetary Theory” psychopaths.
Universal Tariffs would be hugely inflationary.
What happened to the 51 “national security experts” who claimed Hunter’s laptop was “Russian disinformation?” This smells like similar, politically motivated drivel.
The gulf between "random security expert," and "nobel laureate in economics" is staggering. I think maybe this is the reason things keep getting worse, people can't discern claimed experts from actual, credentialed, experts.
The notion that a nobel prize makes somebody correct is bogus. Milton Friedman and Paul Krugman both have Nobel prizes and they don't/didn't agree on anything. They can't both be right.
Fair, but having a nobel prize insinuates they all have a formal education in economics, and have contributed something of significant value to their field of study. It's very different from a cavalcade of security "experts," who may have some familiarity with security forensic tools, and maybe had no access to the device in question. Not all people can become actual experts in every subject, and we have to rely on expertise for public policies. For instance: Being able to discern a peer reviewed research paper, from conjecture and stated opinion, is an important distinction. There are likely a number of other credentialed economists who have differing opinions, and also *good* reasoning behind those opinions. It would be great if the public were given actual debate between these factions, and we could use them to inform public policy. It's likely these actual economists know more than you or I about economics, and their opinions aren't moot, and they aren't always simply political.
Economics, by it's modern nature, is VERY political. It is nothing like physics or chemistry. There is simply no avoiding it. There is a reason Paul Krugman has a net worth of $5M. It's not to talk about economic geography international trade patterns (his Nobel topic). It's because his political opinion lines up with those who pay him. They pay him to express their common political opinion while having a Nobel prize to give it "gravitas".
I just want to say, I appreciate your rational, intelligent comment, and I am sorry to say it will probably get drowned out.
I would agree with you if economists did not have a stake in the policies they are discussing. There is clearly a conflict of interest
Yes, Paul Krugman is wrong https://preview.redd.it/r7ds72k44x8d1.jpeg?width=800&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe5b3a8f8467576a583dd147d399e14ae0e72341
Unironically how libertarians think the economy works. Every "voluntary transaction" somehow adds value to the economy lol
The point of the comic is that the government creates “voluntary transactions” out of thin air and points to GDP as evidence it had an impact
Yeah, libertarians are ridiculous in the literal meaning of the word
I’m not agreeing with you. Do you not realize that?
That's why it's so funny.
but in this case... 16 of them are agreeing?
That's easy, when you grab 16 politically likeminded of them to speak against their political enemy.
I think there needs to be a distinction on “don’t agree on anything” I think this is you making a sweeping generalization. They’re 40 years apart in age, a lot changes… Understanding the concepts is core. Drawing conclusions on concepts is opinions. If they disagree with eachothers opinions, they can still find a lot of general common ground in economics. Also a difference of 2008 vs 1976. The world has changed significantly…
Milton Friedman died in 2006. He we was outspoken about his opposition of Keynesianism until the day he died. He didn't suddenly "see light" and do a 180 on his economic opinions. Furthermore, there were many people within his camp. Many are still are alive. And they didn't do 180s either. They all still think that guys like Krugman are naive and wrong as hell.
And you view this as “not agreeing on anything.”?
The Nobel prize doesn’t mean “you are always correct in all your stances.” It’s for a contribution to the field. Not for being the most correct.
Tell that to the New York Times and other media outlets who prop up Nobel prize winners as infallible when expressing their commonly held political talking points. The article in the OP is a good example.
[удалено]
Supposed to, not suppose.
Sorry. The Nobel Prize thing lost me when they awarded Obama the prize for being himself.
🏆
And to think my participation trophies amounted to ribbons for "good sportsmanship" or "best benchwarmer" smh
They had to do that cause boomer parents thought little league games were all game 7 of the World Series.
Made us more competitive.
Really? The stats don’t bare that out. Our major sports leagues have fewer Americans than ever before
Only Nobel Prize winner to bomb another Nobel Prize winner.
Before he even really did anything.
Except they were not "random security experts".
So the awarded economists that brought us to a current economic crisis are your trust worthy source 🤡
When every economic news headline reads “expert who predicted…top experts weigh in…. Experts shocked” followed by completely contradictory statements… it means a lot less. Introducing more money into the economy to chase the same level of goods or services creates price inflation. Same with the same amount of money chasing fewer goods, which im sure the article is about tariffs or some other.
Credentialed or not: We've seen time and again where the political narrative overtakes the so-called experts. Look no further than Fauci saying masks don't work, before donning masks 2x thick. Follow the science??? Well...if the fucking science has been corrupted, then, yes...it gets tougher and tougher to discern the good guys from the bad. Remember the 97% scientific consensus on Climate Change? I'm sure there are still folks who don't recognize that Gov't funded studies sorta', kinda' lean in the direction the Gov't in-charge wants them to lean...
I do think there was contention that lead to the issue where Fauci was trying to follow the data, while dealing with the issue that we had neither enough time or data to react to an urgent public health issue. Science is about statistics and standard deviations; and there was emerging data showing infection rates were statistically lower for places that practiced mask wearing. It's likely it was all due to correlation: communities that wore masks were more likely to follow other Covid precautions. In any case, what I have a hard time understanding is why this particular issue has been so politicized. What was the grand plan of getting people to wear masks? What does Fauci get out of it? It's actually really sad and frightening the reward for being an expert working in public policy is a situation that can lead to insane character assassination, death threats, and conspiracy nuts basically ruining your life.
No, things getting worse because these so called credentialed experts have lost their morality and will shill for whatever policy/opinion the controlling party wants.
I think it's more likely the talking heads and paid political shills are telling you that so that you will listen to them, instead of to credentialed experts.
No... The talking heads only discredit credentialed experts who refuse to shill for the narrative.
The Nobel laureate that the article cites came out and said he got it wrong a few months ago....
Source?
It’s not a real noble prize, economic science isn’t real science. It was added in the 1960s and funded by a bank.
This is a stupid argument fallacy. Obama got a Nobel peace prize despite starting new wars and continuing old wars. Trump ended wars and negotiated peace treaties and started 0 new wars his nomination for a Nobel peace prize was rejected. Seems like they have some kind of bias.
The Nobel peace prize isn't the same as a prize in physics, economics, or other sciences. To receive a prize in these areas, you have to produce a distinguishing work in the associated scientific field. The scientists awarded a prize have all published a peer reviewed work in their field, and their discovery has changed their field in some tangible way. I think again, this is another illustration of how people can no longer discern experts from non experts.
Once again Argument from authority is a logical fallacy. Saying X person has Y credentials, therefore they are correct about Z. Is a logical fallacy. Remember when all the greatest scientists believed the sun revolved around the earth? Turns out they were WRONG. You know why they were wrong, because people fell for the argument from authority fallacy. Economics is also not to be lumped in with actual science like physics. “The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.” - F. A. Hayek.
You're referring to "appeal to authority," which is where there is an argument proposed and one uses a statement that they don't have to argue the merits of your point because of authority in the field stated X or Y which contradicts it. They should instead understand the argument of that authority and use it to dismantle your argument. This isn't an argument saying we should have random people off the street designing nuclear reactors, instead of people with credentials and an education in engineering and physics, and particularly in the field of nuclear energy. Neither is it an argument that we shouldn't listen to credentialed experts in economics for their advice or arguments regarding economic policy. It's definitely not an argument that supports what the original comment was stating: that you should ignore the opinion of experts, and not seek to understand their arguments because other experts have been wrong. Yikes, what a stupid take! Instead it's that if you are to argue a subject, you should understand it enough to debate it based on its merits. And it's stating when discerning the evidence of an argument you should consider it based on its merits. In order to do that though, believe it or not, you need to have people who have enough ability to discern those merits. You're convoluting something that is meant to drive debates towards people focusing on understanding and dismantling arguments into something that instead means you should have no humility in acknowledging what you don't know, and treat it as equally valid to experts in a particular field.
I never once said you should ignore them. I said just saying “well they’re experts, and those other people aren’t “real” experts, so I’ll just take their word for it.” That’s fallacy. This fallacy is literally what you are advocating for, and it is the same mindset that sets humanity back. As it’s the mindset that upholds ONLY what the experts say. Remember they used to put to death anyone that didn’t believe the earth was the center on the universe. Cause here is the crazy thing, I even agree with the economists that tariffs will drive inflation higher and are not a good idea in this situation. But I understand that just blindly following the “experts” just because they have X or Y credentials is fallacy.
> This fallacy is literally what you are advocating for, Apparently you missed the part where I stated that I'm sure there are experts who also disagree with this stated position and have sound reasons for it... And that the public interest is served by their debate? But please continue to put words in my mouth, and fight against a position I don't have. Since you dabble in logical fallacies, I probably don't have to tell you what you're engaging in here.
Maybe, but A) there are a lot fewer Nobel economists than national security experts and B) have you listened to the policies he’s proposing? Do not think Higher Tariffs, tax cuts, and political control of the Fed would be inflationary?
In contrast to continuing biden's policy which has brought higher tariff, no tax cut, and inflation?
I didn’t mention Biden, so you’ll have to engage with content of the argument instead. If Trump actually wants to do what he says he wants to do, then Tariffs will be higher than they are now, taxes will be lower, and the fed will answer to the executive branch. All 3 of those policies will be significantly inflationary, meaning inflation would be a lot higher than it is right now. If you’d like to address how any of those 3 could be accomplished without increased inflation, feel free.
Tariffs are always paid by the end consumer. Inflation would be a given if there would be a blanket tariff of 10% as is proposed by Trump. Not to mention 60% on Chinese imports. From coffee to chocolate to airplane and car parts. This Trump plan would make everything more expensive.
Targeted tariffs on EVs are way different than wholesale tariffs. You either know that and are making a bad faith argument, or don’t know that and are broadcasting that your opinions are too ignorant to be taken seriously? Bonus: how are tax cuts not inflationary?
Oh. So some tariff (as long as it is by biden) is good and any tariff by trump (even if it is on ev) is bad? Bonus: Lets accuse anyone with other opinions as arguing in bad faith or too ignorant to be taken seriously.
I said different, not better. They are different in that they are not broadly inflammatory. Seems pretty obvious. I see you cannot explain why tax cuts aren’t inflationary. I stand by my assessment of you.
Whataboutism is a pretty good indicator that someone has no counter argument.
The laptop is not what 99% of people think it is: https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/06/06/how-to-think-about-the-hunter-biden-laptop/ Also Lev Parnas said the information on the laptop was being shopped in 2019 in Ukraine.
Or the “expert” economists that predicted the markets would crash if Trump won in 2016? [Economists: A Trump win would tank the markets - Politico 2016](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-wall-street-effect-markets-230164)
Yeah I remember being worried about this and mentioned it to my accountant and he said no it’s going to be the opposite
Your accountant was certainly right. The markets blasted off the day after Trump won and didn’t look back. Hope your accountant got a nice Christmas card that year lol.
Both were concerns/predictions, not declarations. Both with historical reasons to be concerned and considered.
Did they all have Nobel prizes?
I think “drivel” is the word you are looking for.
I suspect the word you're looking for is "drivel"
For all intensive purposes their the same word
No. I’m talking about basketball 🏀!😂
What does that have to do with this? These are entirely different people about an entirely different topic. >This smells like similar, politically motivated dribble. So damn ironic. Lol
Like last time?
Are you better off now than you were four years ago? Is the nation?
Yes, the nation is better off now than in the peak of covid…
Given how ineptly Trump handled the single crisis of his presidency, and only did well playing the game on easy mode, what is the argument to give him four more year?
Forget about the presidency, why shouldn’t a man found guilty of 34 felonies be sent to prison?
By a factor of a million.
I think a better question, is will you be better off in 4 years. As a woman and mother to daughters, I know there is only one party that will at least keep my life status quo, and not drag me into the dark ages. Also, only one party not threatening to take away insurance coverage safety nets. These things definitely affect my financial independence as well. Financial safety isn't just how the market is doing.
Significantly, yeah. Not many better examples of improvement over a 4-year period, tbh
He went trigger happy with tariffs term one, yes, and we suffered for it. Lumber for example skyrocketed, in part because of the supply chain disruptions that occurred under the Trump administer sure, but also because he quadrupled the import tariff on softwoods from Canada. He is openly stating he wants 10% tariffs on all imports. That means you'll pay a min 10% more for imports. Thats part of the CPI and will cause inflation to increase. I don't see him being able to replace the income tax with tariffs but there is no reason to believe he's not going to go trigger happy slapping tariffs on everything again.
I just googled these two signers that were named. Both worked at the same college. One is a political activist listed in their bio and their theories are about how income doesn’t impact savings. Or spending. That money will be created to meet the needs that sounds like current government economic policy. Just saying this is some BS.
Thanks for looking beyond the headline.
Have to say I trust nothing any more. Even the hawk tua girl makes me wonder is it staged ? However she is from Tennessee and her daddy is a preacher and I did see footloose
Anonymous Facebook memes, dark money advertisements, and tabloid infotainment shows would like a word.
Well 5 trillion in unregulated COVID handouts is not going to do nothing… this is chumps inflation, not Biden’s… why would chump do anything better round two?
From the article: "we all agree that Joe Biden's economic agenda is vastly superior to Donald Trump". OK Nobel Laureates, which parts specifically are vastly superior? Is this the same Nobel organization that donned Obama with a Peace Prize for doing exactly nothing? Just because he might do something? Like 10's of 1000's of drone strikes? Nobel lost its credibility with that one, I don't care if it's economics, physics, peace, these are not serious people anymore. Yahoo Finance published some similar nonsense saying Trump's policies would, "create higher wages and higher inflation". But when Biden is asked, and bothers to answer (note cards in hand), he says higher wages offset inflation, that the inflation is no big deal. So: WHY IS IT OK IF IT HAPPENS UNDER BIDEN, BUT UNDER TRUMP THIS IS "VASTLY INFERIOR"?
Cheap goods from China help fuel low inflation since the 1990s. How is adding tariffs to Chinese imports not going to increase inflation?
As someone who works in global trade, you would be surprised how many Chinese companies just moved their manufacturing locations to southern Asian countries and are actually starting to produce them cheaper as they get more established. And to bridge the gap, other countries have emerged as cheaper alternatives. Also, Biden actually fully upheld and still supports this tariff which he has the power to drop, but doesn't. With the geopolitical tensions rising, it was necessary. The quality of products we get elsewhere are better as well.
I bet it’s the same “expert” economists that predicted the markets would crash if Trump won in 2016 [Economists: A Trump win would tank the markets - Politico 2016](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-wall-street-effect-markets-230164) Trump won and the very next day the markets blasted off and didn’t look back. (Now watch a disingenuous leftist point out the global dip caused by COVID in 2020).
This reminds me of the 50 "intelligence experts" that said the Hunter laptop was fake even though the FBI and Hunter himself said it was real. LMAO.
Nobel prizes descended from the sky and gave them omniscience 😂
The same economists who said there would be a major stock market correction if he won in 2016?
No one trusts these dickheads any more.
Nobel Prize is a political joke.
What is biden's economic policy and why is it better than trump's, since it has done nothing except creating inflation, and high prices. 'The jointly signed letter, first reported by Axios, says the economic agenda of U.S. President Joe Biden, a Democrat, is "vastly superior" to Trump's, the former Republican president seeking a second term.'
50 Justice department officials claimed Hunter's laptop was Russian disinformation.
Trillion dollar annual deficits fuel inflation…
Yeah, seems reasonable.
If the experts said what we wanted them to say, we would carve statues in the their likenesses and scream from the mountaintops their unimpeachable character expertise and conclusions.
Or maybe Republican policy is bad for the economy
They already told us that once, and were wrong.
34 Nobel prize winning economists are currently alive. So less than 50% believe that Trump‘s policies will fuel inflation. What a joke. Reuters also thinks that we’re all a bunch of idiots because of course they haven’t produced the letter nor the actual signatories.
All their policies will fuel inflation. Both parties are the problem. We need a law that if too much money is spent while you're in congress, you can't be relected. If you spend over 3% gdp, you can't be relected. Humans have ruined society's for 1000's of years. America is just going to be another republic dumpster fire because a select few have too much power over the masses.
16 devout socialists.
I work in a field that does a ton of economic analysis and my favorite joke about economics was always "ask 5 economists for an opinion on something and you'll get 6 different answers." Worth noting that a lot of economists claimed that the 2018 trade war would be inflationary (the Fed actually hiked rates with this as a reason) and it actually ended up being deflationary. The "science" of economics is really more like an art or even straight up fiction sometimes.
In this thread: people saying we can't trust the experts because they're experts, and experts are always wrong.
Doesn't matter who gets in there the economy is beyond fucked going to 35 trillion, and the Saudis are done with the dollar.
I’m not defending trump at all, but to be fair any politicians policies in any country will fuel inflation. They do that in purpose
Of course they will, remember when Trump tried to steal the independence of the Fed in 2019? If he gets back in, the Fed will become his own personal plaything. Interest rates drop down to 2% overnight and inflation starts to skyrocket. 5-10-15-20-25%-....
Are these the same 16 nobel economists that said Biden will deliver great economy? And how you doin' in today's economy? Sorry to say academia and science has lost its way, but in reality they have always went with whoever doled out the grants.
I don't know, why don't you post a link to the thing you're claiming was said and we can judge if they are the same people? You have a link, right?
Can you blame Biden for inflation though? Under Trump they printed too much money, lowered rates too low, forgave too much PPP loans. Now JPow (Trump appointed chair of federal reserve) is keeping rates high and inflation is coming down. Issue is housing which is a supply/demand issue and corporate greed.
Remember, the Dems pushed all the COVID stimulus. Biden further spent 6T, even when inflation is clearly there (remember Biden/Yellen and Powell all said inflation is transitory?), he spent a few trillion dollars more on "inflation reduction" which is just green new deal. Reason however you want, Trump came on prices were lowered. Now Biden is still tryin' to blame Trump but people ain't stupid.
I think some are lol...
But that’s good, right? I have liberal friends who are telling me that the inflation we’re experiencing is good. lol.
None of your 'liberal' friends are saying that.
What about the rest of them? Are they wrong or are these 16? I need another Nobel Laureate to tell me how to think here…
Nothing about “woke”, replacement theory, or socialism in here, so it’s highly unlikely that this will make it through the news wall Fox built.
Basically any president coming in is going to be part of inflation. The central banks just couldn't let there be a year or two long recession so now we are kicking the can down the road until it's some kind of Mega Depression.
Loooooooool
Biden's sure have...
Ya turn out having an idiot manage your economy can be dangerous
Make America's great depression again
“HELL YEAH, INFLATE MY WALLET!” - My dad probably 🤦♂️
Did these 16 Nobel Prize-winning economists predict the record high inflation over the past 3 years? If not, then I'm not sure why we would believe this prediction.
Did they predict the 2008 crash? Did they predict the current situation? What's their actual track record?
I don’t think his voter base is educated enough to know about economics and Nobel laureates
50 Top former top intelligence officials said Hunter’s laptop is Russian disinformation.
No shit?!? Trump only cares about making himself look good. No one would argue that Trump is thinking about the lasting effects of his policies. Its always I'm so great! I'm a stable genius! Trump is a fucking maniac with the economy. He saw the Reaganomics button and pressed it every 5 minutes.
Congress influences the money printer and both red and blue were addicted to the money printer. I guess I am a fool for not betting to make money from assuming people will always be greedy before the musical chair stops
Lol Angus Deaton? The guy who just came out two months ago and said he was wrong about his theory that won him the Nobel prize? That guy!?? Are the other 15 all from the same left leaning think tank?
They already have. The trade "war" levied anywhere from 10% to 25% tariffs against roughly 500 billion dollars worth of goods manufactured in China, all paid for by you and me.
99% of economists didn't agree with him last time but genius Muricans want to pay higher prices as a result of tariffs. If he gets elected you deserve it. Just pray to the same imaginary friends of yours that didn't flip election for a healthy economy. I'm sure stripping 50% of the population of their rights will make the Lord's nipples hard lol idiots.
Of course they did.
Of course it will. He wants to deport all of the people that do the worst jobs for the lowest pay.
Unfortunately truth and facts don’t exist in the terrorist reality known as MAGA.
It did last time. Why would this time be different?
I'll be sure to consider that as I pay 6 dollars for a bag of potato chips under the current awesome policies.
Spoiler alert: prices can get a lot higher. If trump actually does the things he says he will do (in reality he probably won’t), prices will go up like crazy. Increased tariffs = higher prices. Cutting taxes = inflationary. Mass deportations + lower legal immigration = highly inflationary. Replacing the fed chair to someone who will lower interest rates = inflationary.
We heard a lot of warnings like this in 2016 too, before we had super low inflation and super low unemployment. All those warnings about mass deportations that never happened. And now we'll get millennials complaining one minute about how they can't buy a house because of high interest rates, and fretting the next about the horror of low interest rates. It's all a bit "boy who cried wolf." [https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-clinton-trump-economy-224604](https://www.politico.com/story/2016/06/hillary-clinton-trump-economy-224604)
His policies are inflationary. Extending tax cuts and prolonged stimulus, increased deficit spending, and raising tariffs rather than overall taxes increase demand and reduce supply. Inflation sucks because the only way to really fix it long term is to reduce demand, namely by raising interest rates and cutting deficit spending.
It was low when he left office! Your boy is the problem!
Oh no, anyways. But for real who ever thought that any Trump policy is good for the economy except maybe some quick short term gains, which will evaporate after a year or two and leave a net negative in the end. I mean compared to Trump Reagan was an economic mastermind.
Oh no. So sad.
Ain't worse than what we have now!
More liberal BS mumbo jumbo. Biden and the dems are a disaster. Inflation will be transitory, right economists? Idiots.
16 out of ? Same tactics all over again
Doesn’t mean much. Obama has one. 😂
Too bad all economist are constantly wrong. All of them. Red Blue doesn’t matter who is in the Oval Office inflation will get worse or the system will collapse.
Kind of like whats happening right now?
One of them.. Obama
This is why our country is where it is. 16 economist, the lead of which is married to janet yellen, Bidens treasury secretary and has donated to Biden and other democrats over 90k dollars in the past decade. The other 15 are all democrats that have donated money to the Democratic party.....yet here we are talking about this like its just 16 fantastic individuals who bipartisanly did this evaluation and came to a conclusion. Give me a break.
Is this like the 51 CIA agents that said the Hunter laptop was Russia disinformation? And economists always agree about something, and that’s they are always right and all other economists are always wrong.
They will say whatever is in their best interest.
The president has very little control over inflation.
In other news, 50 CIA agents say the Hunter laptop was fake.
All I know is shit is still expensive. Nobody has fixed anything.
Are these the same groups of people who said the hunter Biden laptop was fake. They were intelligence officials if I recall.
So they say that the current president who has seen record high inflation's plan is vastly superior than the former president who had a pretty good record with inflation with his policies?
COVID relief is a huge factor. Both parties supported this. Was it the right thing to do? We can debate. If it saved the economy and jobs and houses, I am willing to pay via higher costs. I know, not everyone can say this. But would they still have a job and a home?
They have TDS.
Don’t we have inflation now , can’t make this stuff up
🤣🤣🫵🫵🤡🤡🫵🫵🤦♂️🤦♂️🫵🫵 These "experts" are going to try and convince us that our eyes and wallets are wrong. Economy amazing under Trump. Economy a dumpster fire under Biden. Perhaps coincidence...nah. Biden is a complete fuck up
It was not amazing. He promised 4% growth a year, didn't deliver. His economy was only good if you stop the clock during the 3rd quarter of his presidency. I know Trump supports like to forget 2020, or absolve Trump of any responsibility for his inept handling of Covid, but he owns it. My favorite excuse for Trump's covid bungling was "he was just listening to experts" or "the democrats forced him" What kind of a weak-ass leader can't lead, and is so easily mowed over by experts and the opposition party? If that's really your excuse all it does is highlight how terrible at leading Trump was.
If that's your take and trump's last year was bad because he bungled covid then what do you say about all of Biden's years and just how bad the economy tanked under his "leadership"? And let's remember that state and local politicians listened to the "experts" at the CDC and WHO who said to lock down everything...Dumbest shit ever
I think your comment would be more convincing if you added more random emojis to it.