
Recession Already Grips Corners of U.S., Menacing Trump’s 2020 Bid - edwardfrank
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2019-09-09/a-manufacturing-recession-could-cost-trump-a-second-term
======
gumby
"job" measurement isn't an adequate metric as some jobs are high earners and
some jobs pay so little that you need more than one just to keep your head
above water. So people may be happier or unhappier than suggested by this
metric.

In other words I don't think the article really addresses its own thesis.

~~~
Mikeb85
Yup. Also doesn't measure the fact that some people have multiple jobs, when
wages go up they often ditch one. Not to mention things like labour
participation rate, underemployment, etc...

------
c3534l
Economists have correctly predicted 5 out of the last 3 recessions.

------
joezydeco
My contacts in various parts of the manufacturing sector tell me they're
already pulling back but keeping it quiet. Nobody wants to be the first to
proclaim gloom and doom.

~~~
ahartmetz
Similar situation over here in Germany. New orders have dropped greatly in
some branches of the industry that I know about.

------
_bxg1
I want nothing more than for Trump to get unseated, but it amazes me how
people pin the entirety of the economy's ebbs and flows on whoever was most
recently president.

Edit: the sitting president of course has influence on the big picture, but
there are many other factors at play, some of which are inevitable

~~~
blitmap
Anecdote: I have seen my shares of stock dip by up to 5% because of his
tweets.

~~~
toomuchtodo
[https://www.vox.com/policy-and-
politics/2019/9/9/20857451/tr...](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-
politics/2019/9/9/20857451/trump-stock-market-tweet-volfefe-jpmorgan-twitter)

------
Mikeb85
The infographic shows 4 of Trump's swing states with job gains vs. 3 with job
losses. My US geography isn't perfect, but it looks like losses vs. gains
across states are pretty equal.

I read the whole article, they don't do a great job backing up their thesis,
instead using anecdotes.

> His advisers argue that the blame for any slowdown rests with a Federal
> Reserve that last year hiked interest rates too quickly and a strong dollar
> that makes U.S. exports less competitive.

They're not wrong. Interest rate hikes reduce the amount of debt companies (or
farmers) can take on to pay for equipment and rates that are too high are a
drag on the economy. Low rates encourage growth.

~~~
wahern
> They're not wrong.

They're not right, either. What's far more important for farmers and loan
officers is a market for selling the product.

Normally it's sort of silly to point a finger at the president for larger
market trends, but if ever culpability for market trends could be laid at a
president's feet, it'd be for something exactly like a poorly executed trade
war. On the other hand, the market has been on a nearly 10 year run. Some sort
of slowdown was inevitable.

The real story is that the tax cuts did squat to help the economy, and instead
resulted in extraordinary deficits, precisely as predicated by everybody whose
professional credibility was on the line.

~~~
credit_guy
> The real story is that the tax cuts did squat to help the economy, and
> instead resulted in extraordinary deficits, precisely as predicated by
> everybody whose professional credibility was on the line.

This is a very partisan opinion. Objectively assessing how much the tax cuts
helped or didn't help the economy is impossible, but seeing what professionals
predicted and then observed is not. For example the Congress has the Joint
Committee on Taxation [1], whose job is to estimate the impact of various tax
cuts (among other things). Their assessment was an impact on GDP of about 0.8%
on average for the first decade [2]. Despite this, they also predicted a one
trillion reduction in revenues overall (for the first decade). Separately, the
Congressional Budget Office (which in this case has overlapping duties with
the JCT), predicted a reduction in revenues of about 1.4 trillion for one
decade [3] and an average impact on real GDP of 0.7% over the same period [4].

>and instead resulted in extraordinary deficits

The tax cuts did increased the deficits, but the main reason for the deficit
increase is the military spending. To be more precise, the deficit increased
by $194 BN between 2016 and 2018 ([5],[6]), and the military spending has
increased by $123 BN over the same period, [7].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress_Joint_C...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Congress_Joint_Committee_on_Taxation)
[2]
[https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=5045](https://www.jct.gov/publications.html?func=startdown&id=5045)

[3]
[https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53312](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53312)

[4]
[https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53787](https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53787)

[5]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_bud...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget)

[6]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_bud...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_United_States_federal_budget)

[7] [https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-
ch...](https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges-
growth-3306320)

------
sjg007
Trump has basically nuked the farmers... so watch them all vote him out.

~~~
gootdude
The farmers actually have doubled down on Trump and believe conspiracies that
the USDA is just out to get him. [1]

Never thought I’d actually witness the emperor has no clothes.

[1] [https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/10/reuters-america-many-u-s-
far...](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/10/reuters-america-many-u-s-farmers-fume-
at-washington-not-trump-over-biofuel-trade-policies.html)

~~~
sjg007
He is down 10% in farm support and that number will continue to drop as the
new reality continues to set in over the next year.

