Goldman Sachs: Democratic "blue wave" would "likely result in substantially easier US fiscal policy"

[Fuzzy Bear]

This is not an endorsement Democrats should want.

They had Kasich speak at the DNC, so they're fine with even Lehman Brother's executives endorsing them.

I heard John Bolton will come back to Bidens administration. He has the number one trait they're looking for which is Epically Owning Le Drumpf.

Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if this happened if Biden were elected.

The Democrats ARE the Wall Street party, as others have proclaimed in this thread.  I think it would behoove America to look into how that happened and what it's effect on America has been.

[Badger]

It's obvious by comparing the last two presidents of each party that Democratic presidents are better for the economy overall. Republicans haven't even "fiscal responsibility" going for them, since Bubba and Obama were the only presidents in 50 years who reduced the deficit. Dubya and Trump squandered it, as did Republican hero Ronald Reagan, who increased the deficit by 179%.

The defict went up under Reagan as the US had to rebuild our military which had been severely cut in the post Vietnam years , and counter the Soviets all across the world .

The tax cuts were also needed to help our economy get out of the stagflation of the 1970s and they did cause they helped increase aggregate supply which was needed as stagflation was caused by a supply shock .

His 1986 tax reform was revenue neutral so it had no impact on the defict , it was his 1981 tax cut that increased it and that was to help our economy recover .


Lastly beginning in 1983 the US began arguably its best 18 year economic stretch we ever have had

Attributing the economic growth of the 90s 2 a tax cut from a decade earlier, even after there had been in intervening recession, is a seriously cultish hot take

There was no so-called necessity to vastly increase military spending in the 80s. I am still waiting Dixie Chicken to hear from any conservative as to how are massively ramping up the military budget during the 80s and contributing to widespread debt anything to meaningfully accelerate the end of Communism by its own internal failures. I mean, unless you're subscribing to some imminent Red Dawn scenario throughout the 80s which is frankly laughable.

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

As with the US Chamber of Commerce endorsements for certain Congressional Democrats, this is a fairly transparent attempt to buy influence with the incoming blue wave.

Hopefully it is seen as such by the Congressional leadership.

[YE]

When Goldman Sachs praises Democrats, it’s usually a bad sign.

[doc gerritcole]

neoliberal shills gonna cave to wall st!

[OSR stands with Israel]

It's obvious by comparing the last two presidents of each party that Democratic presidents are better for the economy overall. Republicans haven't even "fiscal responsibility" going for them, since Bubba and Obama were the only presidents in 50 years who reduced the deficit. Dubya and Trump squandered it, as did Republican hero Ronald Reagan, who increased the deficit by 179%.

The defict went up under Reagan as the US had to rebuild our military which had been severely cut in the post Vietnam years , and counter the Soviets all across the world .

The tax cuts were also needed to help our economy get out of the stagflation of the 1970s and they did cause they helped increase aggregate supply which was needed as stagflation was caused by a supply shock .

His 1986 tax reform was revenue neutral so it had no impact on the defict , it was his 1981 tax cut that increased it and that was to help our economy recover .


Lastly beginning in 1983 the US began arguably its best 18 year economic stretch we ever have had

Attributing the economic growth of the 90s 2 a tax cut from a decade earlier, even after there had been in intervening recession, is a seriously cultish hot take

There was no so-called necessity to vastly increase military spending in the 80s. I am still waiting Dixie Chicken to hear from any conservative as to how are massively ramping up the military budget during the 80s and contributing to widespread debt anything to meaningfully accelerate the end of Communism by its own internal failures. I mean, unless you're subscribing to some imminent Red Dawn scenario throughout the 80s which is frankly laughable.

Nope people credit FDR for the 1947-1963 boom cause most of his policies remained in affect , just like most of Reagan’s remained in effect throughout the 90s.

[RINO Tom]

As with the US Chamber of Commerce endorsements for certain Congressional Democrats, this is a fairly transparent attempt to buy influence with the incoming blue wave.

Hopefully it is seen as such by the Congressional leadership.

Ding ding ding.  Total Wall Street donations for Congressional races (each year is a hyperlink):

2018: 63% to Democrats, 37% to Republicans

2016: 55% to Republicans, 45% to Democrats

2014: 63% to Republicans, 37% to Democrats

2012: 79% to Republicans, 21% to Democrats

2010: 56% to Republicans, 46% to Democrats

2008: 56% to Democrats, 44% to Republicans

Make no mistake - there is certainly an aspect of the financial industries being uncomfortable with Trump's demeanor and competency, and the trade war is also a factor.  However, it is pretty obvious that Wall Street has shown a tendency to bet on the winner, and to bet on Republicans a lot more heavily when the GOP is perceived as favored or having a good chance.

[Stranger in a strange land]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

Too late for that. Even if we do, it'll just divert Chinese trade to the rest of the world.

[OSR stands with Israel]

It's obvious by comparing the last two presidents of each party that Democratic presidents are better for the economy overall. Republicans haven't even "fiscal responsibility" going for them, since Bubba and Obama were the only presidents in 50 years who reduced the deficit. Dubya and Trump squandered it, as did Republican hero Ronald Reagan, who increased the deficit by 179%.

The defict went up under Reagan as the US had to rebuild our military which had been severely cut in the post Vietnam years , and counter the Soviets all across the world .

The tax cuts were also needed to help our economy get out of the stagflation of the 1970s and they did cause they helped increase aggregate supply which was needed as stagflation was caused by a supply shock .

His 1986 tax reform was revenue neutral so it had no impact on the defict , it was his 1981 tax cut that increased it and that was to help our economy recover .


Lastly beginning in 1983 the US began arguably its best 18 year economic stretch we ever have had

Attributing the economic growth of the 90s 2 a tax cut from a decade earlier, even after there had been in intervening recession, is a seriously cultish hot take

There was no so-called necessity to vastly increase military spending in the 80s. I am still waiting Dixie Chicken to hear from any conservative as to how are massively ramping up the military budget during the 80s and contributing to widespread debt anything to meaningfully accelerate the end of Communism by its own internal failures. I mean, unless you're subscribing to some imminent Red Dawn scenario throughout the 80s which is frankly laughable.

Yes it was , doing so let us counter the communists all across the world and undermine them as well forcing the Soviets to spend more and more money finally forced to play defense in their own territory thanks to the US playing offense for the first time since the 1950s and that pushed them over the edge . Reagan also did a secret economic war against the USSR

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/02/27/reagan-approved-plan-to-sabotage-soviets/a9184eff-47fd-402e-beb2-63970851e130/


https://portside.org/2017-11-02/demise-soviet-union-secret-war-helped-destroy-soviet-socialism-1981-1991

[TiltsAreUnderrated]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

Too late for that. Even if we do, it'll just divert Chinese trade to the rest of the world.

This is where, as uncomfortable as it is for many populists across the spectrum, something like Obama's TPP would help. The best way to shut China out of international trade is by building big clubs and inviting lots of other countries (but not them) in.

I accept that the following has little bearing on government policy, but it may be a moral imperative given the Uighur camps. Their state capitalism has ensured that political liberalism did not have to go hand in hand with the economic variant they have adopted more of since the end of their command economics.

[Robert California]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

We didn't trade with the Soviets because they had nothing to offer.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

"easier fiscal policy" is another way to say more willingness for deficit spending, right?

That's what the US economy needs right now. It's a recession/depression period.

Sure we need some of that right now, but they are talking it seems about longer-term policies.  And I don't know how they are factoring in the effect of new regulations, much higher minimum wage, etc.  Does anyone know where the actual report can be found?

Donald Trump and the Republican Senate still haven't passed a short-term stimulus, that's hardly strong economic management.

Remind me again why Pelosi shot down the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus proposal on this?

If Democrat leadership think getting stimulus out the door right as soon as possible is really important, they sure haven't been acting like it for the past few months.

[Robert California]

It's obvious by comparing the last two presidents of each party that Democratic presidents are better for the economy overall. Republicans haven't even "fiscal responsibility" going for them, since Bubba and Obama were the only presidents in 50 years who reduced the deficit. Dubya and Trump squandered it, as did Republican hero Ronald Reagan, who increased the deficit by 179%.

The defict went up under Reagan as the US had to rebuild our military which had been severely cut in the post Vietnam years , and counter the Soviets all across the world .

The tax cuts were also needed to help our economy get out of the stagflation of the 1970s and they did cause they helped increase aggregate supply which was needed as stagflation was caused by a supply shock .

His 1986 tax reform was revenue neutral so it had no impact on the defict , it was his 1981 tax cut that increased it and that was to help our economy recover .


Lastly beginning in 1983 the US began arguably its best 18 year economic stretch we ever have had

Attributing the economic growth of the 90s 2 a tax cut from a decade earlier, even after there had been in intervening recession, is a seriously cultish hot take

There was no so-called necessity to vastly increase military spending in the 80s. I am still waiting Dixie Chicken to hear from any conservative as to how are massively ramping up the military budget during the 80s and contributing to widespread debt anything to meaningfully accelerate the end of Communism by its own internal failures. I mean, unless you're subscribing to some imminent Red Dawn scenario throughout the 80s which is frankly laughable.

Nope people credit FDR for the 1947-1963 boom cause most of his policies remained in affect , just like most of Reagan’s remained in effect throughout the 90s.

Because it's not like much of the rest of the world's industrial capacity was *destroyed* by a massive, worldwide war or anything...

[Robert California]

This is not an endorsement Democrats should want.

They had Kasich speak at the DNC, so they're fine with even Lehman Brother's executives endorsing them.

I heard John Bolton will come back to Bidens administration. He has the number one trait they're looking for which is Epically Owning Le Drumpf.

Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if this happened if Biden were elected.

The bench of liberal foreign policy thinktankers is far too strong for this to be even a remote possibility.

[Nightcore Nationalist]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets

We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

I thought you were a big free-trader, what happened?  (I Generally agree though)

But that Cold War policy wasn't a successful or good one, Carter was wrong on that. The USSR collapsed not because we refused to trade with them but because of internal issues.

PNTR was a mistake, but the tariff war just isn't working.

China learned from the Soviet's mistakes and liberalized their markets just enough to grow into an economic juggernaut and the hemispherical superpower they are today.  They also duped naive western leaders (*cough* Bill Clinton) into believing that if they joined the global markets, they would become significantly less authoritarian.  So much for that, never trust a Communist.

Remind me again why Pelosi shot down the bipartisan Problem Solvers Caucus proposal on this?

If Democrat leadership think getting stimulus out the door right as soon as possible is really important, they sure haven't been acting like it for the past few months.

THIS.  Although I'm unsatisfied with Mitch's apathy on stimulus (despite the fact Trump consistently supported it), Pelosi blocked it like 4 ot 5 times now, because she won't pass anythinf that doesn't bail out blue-state pension debts.  

She;s reaching Harry Reid levels of a*shollery.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets

We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

I thought you were a big free-trader, what happened?  (I Generally agree though)

I am a massive free trader but the reason I oppose trade with China is not for economic reasons but because I beleive they are our enemies.


I beleive we should sign LAFTA , TPP , trade deals with India and other nations and much more but we should have a goal to reduce trade with China at the very least early 2000s levels if not lower

[Badger]

It's obvious by comparing the last two presidents of each party that Democratic presidents are better for the economy overall. Republicans haven't even "fiscal responsibility" going for them, since Bubba and Obama were the only presidents in 50 years who reduced the deficit. Dubya and Trump squandered it, as did Republican hero Ronald Reagan, who increased the deficit by 179%.

The defict went up under Reagan as the US had to rebuild our military which had been severely cut in the post Vietnam years , and counter the Soviets all across the world .

The tax cuts were also needed to help our economy get out of the stagflation of the 1970s and they did cause they helped increase aggregate supply which was needed as stagflation was caused by a supply shock .

His 1986 tax reform was revenue neutral so it had no impact on the defict , it was his 1981 tax cut that increased it and that was to help our economy recover .


Lastly beginning in 1983 the US began arguably its best 18 year economic stretch we ever have had

Attributing the economic growth of the 90s 2 a tax cut from a decade earlier, even after there had been in intervening recession, is a seriously cultish hot take

There was no so-called necessity to vastly increase military spending in the 80s. I am still waiting Dixie Chicken to hear from any conservative as to how are massively ramping up the military budget during the 80s and contributing to widespread debt anything to meaningfully accelerate the end of Communism by its own internal failures. I mean, unless you're subscribing to some imminent Red Dawn scenario throughout the 80s which is frankly laughable.

Nope people credit FDR for the 1947-1963 boom cause most of his policies remained in affect , just like most of Reagan’s remained in effect throughout the 90s.

Citation needed for anyone who seriously credits FDR for the 50s economic boom. For the Social and Economic Security Programs he left in place to protect those still in need and who get hit by recessions, sure. Otherwise, you are literally talking out of your ass

[Badger]

It's obvious by comparing the last two presidents of each party that Democratic presidents are better for the economy overall. Republicans haven't even "fiscal responsibility" going for them, since Bubba and Obama were the only presidents in 50 years who reduced the deficit. Dubya and Trump squandered it, as did Republican hero Ronald Reagan, who increased the deficit by 179%.

The defict went up under Reagan as the US had to rebuild our military which had been severely cut in the post Vietnam years , and counter the Soviets all across the world .

The tax cuts were also needed to help our economy get out of the stagflation of the 1970s and they did cause they helped increase aggregate supply which was needed as stagflation was caused by a supply shock .

His 1986 tax reform was revenue neutral so it had no impact on the defict , it was his 1981 tax cut that increased it and that was to help our economy recover .


Lastly beginning in 1983 the US began arguably its best 18 year economic stretch we ever have had

Attributing the economic growth of the 90s 2 a tax cut from a decade earlier, even after there had been in intervening recession, is a seriously cultish hot take

There was no so-called necessity to vastly increase military spending in the 80s. I am still waiting Dixie Chicken to hear from any conservative as to how are massively ramping up the military budget during the 80s and contributing to widespread debt anything to meaningfully accelerate the end of Communism by its own internal failures. I mean, unless you're subscribing to some imminent Red Dawn scenario throughout the 80s which is frankly laughable.

Yes it was , doing so let us counter the communists all across the world and undermine them as well forcing the Soviets to spend more and more money finally forced to play defense in their own territory thanks to the US playing offense for the first time since the 1950s and that pushed them over the edge . Reagan also did a secret economic war against the USSR

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2004/02/27/reagan-approved-plan-to-sabotage-soviets/a9184eff-47fd-402e-beb2-63970851e130/


https://portside.org/2017-11-02/demise-soviet-union-secret-war-helped-destroy-soviet-socialism-1981-1991

Except they didn't, fantasy boy. We spent a ton of money and the Soviets didn't bite. Documents released after the fall of Communism showed that the rate of growth of defense spending remained about the same as it was Prior Reagan presidency. We spent ourselves into debt, but didn't forts the Russians to do so either.

What do you even think these articles seek to prove? The Washington Post article doesn't even begin to address this issue, other than Reagan made grand plans never carried out to possibly sabotage Soviet pipelines and the like, and the other is some underground newspaper article written by a some dude.

Let's also not forget that many of these measures, such as funding the mujahideen, we're started by Carter and fully supported by Congressional Democrats. They would have occurred under a Carter second term or a president Mondale, without driving us into debt so the Pentagon could allow it special defense contractors to charge $600 for hammers.

Still waiting for an ounce of actual evidence behind your assertion, but I'm not holding my breath.

[The Free North]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

There is a substantial amount of ignorance on this forum, but this post is likely the most egregious of the year.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

There is a substantial amount of ignorance on this forum, but this post is likely the most egregious of the year.

China is by far the biggest enemies we have and it is high time we start treating them as one.

We also need to revamp the CIA to help counter Chinese influence around the world

[KaiserDave]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

There is a substantial amount of ignorance on this forum, but this post is likely the most egregious of the year.

China is by far the biggest enemies we have and it is high time we start treating them as one.

We also need to revamp the CIA to help counter Chinese influence around the world

Blocking of trade with your enemies isn't a good idea though. The Cuban Embargo is a disaster. Yes, we can hit them with sanctions where it hurts (not all sanctions involve trade blockage).

And also...no revamping the CIA is a bad idea. The CIA did all kinds of vile things during the Cold War, let's not revisit that. Also...since when did they get de-vamped? Since 9/11? When? How?

[Benjamin Frank]

I'm in the midst of reading the essay/book "Why Lenin? Why Stalin? Why Gorbachev?"
https://www.amazon.com/Why-Lenin-Stalin-Gorbachev-Soviet/dp/0065011112

an update on the book/essay "Why Lenin? Why Stalin."

I'm not up to Gorbachev of the collapse of the Soviet Union yet, but from what I recall:

1.The Soviet Union collapsed primarily due to the collapse in low oil prices starting in 1981.

https://inflationdata.com/articles/inflation-adjusted-prices/historical-crude-oil-prices-table/

There was an especially big drop in oil prices in 1986.

Then as was the case with Putin, high oil prices propped up the Soviet Union and likely prevented it from collapsing sooner.

2.Gorbachev, at first, tried to open up the Soviet Union (see Glasnost and Perestroika) while keeping the Communist Party in power.  This became untenable and first led to a brief coup and shortly after to Boris Yeltsin taking power and the dissolution of the Soviet Union.

Gorvachev coming to power was no sure thing though.  There were other younger hardline members of the Politburo who were under consideration.  Reagan's brinksmanship might have backfired in a worldwide nuclear war had the Politburo chosen a different leader.  Everything worked out fine, and Reagan came out looking like a strategic genius, but things could have turned out very differently.  History never has to turn out the way that it does.

[OSR stands with Israel]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

There is a substantial amount of ignorance on this forum, but this post is likely the most egregious of the year.

China is by far the biggest enemies we have and it is high time we start treating them as one.

We also need to revamp the CIA to help counter Chinese influence around the world

Blocking of trade with your enemies isn't a good idea though. The Cuban Embargo is a disaster. Yes, we can hit them with sanctions where it hurts (not all sanctions involve trade blockage).

And also...no revamping the CIA is a bad idea. The CIA did all kinds of vile things during the Cold War, let's not revisit that. Also...since when did they get de-vamped? Since 9/11? When? How?

Maybe revamped was the wrong words, but the priorities of it changed . CIA did do bad things in the cold war and you can put some new rules to make sure that doesnt happen again

[KaiserDave]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

There is a substantial amount of ignorance on this forum, but this post is likely the most egregious of the year.

China is by far the biggest enemies we have and it is high time we start treating them as one.

We also need to revamp the CIA to help counter Chinese influence around the world

Blocking of trade with your enemies isn't a good idea though. The Cuban Embargo is a disaster. Yes, we can hit them with sanctions where it hurts (not all sanctions involve trade blockage).

And also...no revamping the CIA is a bad idea. The CIA did all kinds of vile things during the Cold War, let's not revisit that. Also...since when did they get de-vamped? Since 9/11? When? How?

Maybe revamped was the wrong words, but the priorities of it changed . CIA did do bad things in the cold war and you can put some new rules to make sure that doesnt happen again

I find this naive. What would you have them doing that isn't the same as during the Cold War?

[OSR stands with Israel]

The Trade War with China should be escalated significantly . The goal should be to reduce trade with them as much as we had with the soviets


We are in a New Cold War and we need to win it

There is a substantial amount of ignorance on this forum, but this post is likely the most egregious of the year.

China is by far the biggest enemies we have and it is high time we start treating them as one.

We also need to revamp the CIA to help counter Chinese influence around the world

Blocking of trade with your enemies isn't a good idea though. The Cuban Embargo is a disaster. Yes, we can hit them with sanctions where it hurts (not all sanctions involve trade blockage).

And also...no revamping the CIA is a bad idea. The CIA did all kinds of vile things during the Cold War, let's not revisit that. Also...since when did they get de-vamped? Since 9/11? When? How?

Maybe revamped was the wrong words, but the priorities of it changed . CIA did do bad things in the cold war and you can put some new rules to make sure that doesnt happen again

I find this naive. What would you have them doing that isn't the same as during the Cold War?

Not overthrow democratically elected nations.