Biden's Economy?

[K Graham]

Presidents have very little impact on the economy.

The evidence doesn't support that. The last five recessions over the past 40 years all started under Republican administrations. Is that just some crazy coincidence? Congress passes annual budgets based on the sitting President's agenda. That's no small thing.

And if Trump were still in office he'd be mishandling the pandemic like he did before and we'd have to shut down the economy, just like we did before.

[Kishkumen]

The evidence doesn't support that. The last five recessions over the past 40 years all started under Republican administrations. Is that just some crazy coincidence? Congress passes annual budgets based on the sitting President's agenda. That's no small thing.

And if Trump were still in office he'd be mishandling the pandemic like he did before and we'd have to shut down the economy, just like we did before.

Economic cycles, according to everything I have heard from experts, do not track with the party of the person in the Oval Office.

In any case, there are much more important considerations than the economy. For example, the existence of a republican form of government in which the rights of all are protected. Republicans have abandoned that, so who gives a crap about their economic policies. No one should.

[K Graham]

Well sure, there is no rule in economics that says Democrat Presidents are better. But how much correlation do we really need to deduce causation? Ann Owen, an economics professor at Hamilton College said that while Presidents typically don't have a lot of power to act unilaterally to affect the economy, the crisis we're in today presents a unique situation because it is a public health crisis, so anything the President does can have a significant effect on the economy. It was Biden's initiative that expanded nationwide access to vaccines by federalizing the process system, whereas Trump said to just let the states handle it on their own, which was a nightmare that led to millions of vials sitting in coolers. The economic recovery is happening in no small part because more than 62% of the country is now fully vaccinated.

As to your second point, I believe Biden will be able to sign a much needed voting rights act sometime in 2022.

[Gunnar]

As to your second point, I believe Biden will be able to sign a much needed voting rights act sometime in 2022.

Oh how I hope you're right about that! If things continue to stand as they are right now, there are several red states that have passed or are trying to pass laws that permit state legislatures to nullify what the majority of the state-wide electorate has voted for if whatever party currently holding a majority in the legislature doesn't like the results.

[dantana]

Presidents have very little impact on the economy.

So, you know what's crazy, we just threw 4 years of Trump and 2 years of covid at the economy and... My area of work anyway - house building - is strong as ever. It's almost like there is something akin to macrophysics v microphysics going on. Only not.

[Moksha]

Will China's housing market woes end with a global financial crisis?

[Kishkumen]

Will China's housing market woes end with a global financial crisis?

Now that is something that could have a huge impact on the economy.

[Res Ipsa]

Presidents have very little impact on the economy.

So, you know what's crazy, we just threw 4 years of Trump and 2 years of covid at the economy and... My area of work anyway - house building - is strong as ever. It's almost like there is something akin to macrophysics v microphysics going on. Only not.

When I was in school, an econ major started out with introductory microeconomics and then introductory macroeconomics. and the two were very different. Each used different tools and methods of analysis. Supply and demand in a single industry may not have a huge influence on the economy as a whole. From a macroeconomic perspective, probably the most important factors have been the enormous fiscal stimulus from the tax cuts during the Trump administration combined with the enormous fiscal stimulus from government spending during COVID combined with the fed's policy of keeping interest rates low. COVID has been economically devastating for some folks, but some industries appear almost unscathed. I suspect that, at the micro level, the situations of individual industries is going to fluctuate as supply chain problems in terms of manufacturing, goods, and labor, continue to occur with each successive wave. It's a crap shoot, to some extent.

[Res Ipsa]

As to your second point, I believe Biden will be able to sign a much needed voting rights act sometime in 2022.

Oh how I hope you're right about that! If things continue to stand as they are right now, there are several red states that have passed or are trying to pass laws that permit state legislatures to nullify what the majority of the state-wide electorate has voted for if whatever party currently holding a majority in the legislature doesn't like the results.

Gunnar, I don't think the federal government can do anything Constitutionally about that particular issue. I think the Constitution specifically gives state legislators the power to decide how a state's electors are appointed in a Presidential election. I think a state legislature could pass a law saying that the electors are chosen by the state legislature and skip voting by the citizens entirely. That's a situation that the citizens of those states will have to address with their state legislatures.

In fact, the bill that the Republicans want to pass will make sure that the federal government can do nothing by clarifying that the VP does not have the power to do what the coup plotters wanted him to do: reject the certified electors of a state. While I agree that the VP does not constitutionally have the power to refuse to accept the certified electors, I don't think the congressional republicans care much about the what the constitution requires -- they want this legislation in place so that Harris can't do what the coup plotters wanted to do if any state legislatures choose to override the choice of the people in their state. It's purely tactical. If we had a republican President and VP, they wouldn't vote for any reform.

What federal legislation could do is prohibit voter suppression. But the Rs don't want that, because their suppression legislation is aimed at the folks who tend to vote for Democrats. So, it's either break the filibuster or suppression is the order of the day in states controlled by Rs.

[Gunnar]

Oh how I hope you're right about that! If things continue to stand as they are right now, there are several red states that have passed or are trying to pass laws that permit state legislatures to nullify what the majority of the state-wide electorate has voted for if whatever party currently holding a majority in the legislature doesn't like the results.

Gunnar, I don't think the federal government can do anything Constitutionally about that particular issue. I think the Constitution specifically gives state legislators the power to decide how a state's electors are appointed in a Presidential election. I think a state legislature could pass a law saying that the electors are chosen by the state legislature and skip voting by the citizens entirely. That's a situation that the citizens of those states will have to address with their state legislatures.

Yes, I have read the constitution and the section pertaining to the election of the President, and it does indeed seem like there is nothing in the way of individual state legislatures deciding to strictly follow the letter of it to overturn the will of the people in Presidential elections if they want to. The possibility that it may be possible for them to go back to that has always discomfited me somewhat ever since I read that. It is scary to realize the possibility that the national legislature may not have the constitutional authority to prevent that from happening.

In fact, the bill that the Republicans want to pass will make sure that the federal government can do nothing by clarifying that the VP does not have the power to do what the coup plotters wanted him to do: reject the certified electors of a state. While I agree that the VP does not constitutionally have the power to refuse to accept the certified electors, I don't think the congressional republicans care much about the what the constitution requires -- they want this legislation in place so that Harris can't do what the coup plotters wanted to do if any state legislatures choose to override the choice of the people in their state. It's purely tactical. If we had a republican President and VP, they wouldn't vote for any reform.

How disgustingly hypocritical of them!

What federal legislation could do is prohibit voter suppression. But the Rs don't want that, because their suppression legislation is aimed at the folks who tend to vote for Democrats. So, it's either break the filibuster or suppression is the order of the day in states controlled by Rs.

How deplorably weak and/or hypocritical it is of the democrats who still oppose breaking or ending the filibuster - particularly Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema. It is hard to logically avoid the conclusion that they are primarily deeply beholden to wealthy, self-serving corporate donors and/or their own selfish interests rather than to the majority will of the constituents who voted for them.

We really need a constitutional amendment to correct these still lingering anti-democratic flaws in our constitution. Unfortunately, the likelihood of that happening seem to be vanishingly small, and continually shrinking. The Electoral College system should have been removed by constitutional amendment long ago or should never have been part of the Constitution in the first place.