Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: 3% growth? really?!

  1. #1
    No registrado

    3% growth? really?!

    In Trump Plans to Slash Spending by $3.6 Trillion, Increase Military Spending, Balance the Budget in 10 Years I gave my three major factors 3% development will be very challenging to attain.

    Greg Ip, my favored Wall Steet Journal commentator, also gives a set of factors why Trump's 3% Growth Target Looks Out of Reach.

    Mr. Trump—moving in the reverse direction of President Barack Obama —promises reduce taxes and less regulation, which should boost business expense and hence employee productivity. Moreover, a less-generous social safety-net could prod some folks back to work. More employees who are effective are the elements of progress that is quicker.

    Yet there are reasons impartial economists believe the U.S. can not return to its historic development of 3%. The U.S. working age population grew 1.2% a year from 1950 through 2000. Using the baby-boomers retiring and households shrinking, it is going to grow less than 0.3% a year over the next decade. To produce a credible case for 3% growth, Mr. Trump has to determine some well-spring of employees or productiveness, that's output per-worker, that his predecessors have missed.

  2. #2
    No registrado
    In a post-truth globe, you'll be able to have whatever figures you like. How about 7% progress? Or 10%? Would not that be fantastic? I truly think we can have progress that is 1-2%. People say that is the the bestest progress actually observed. Remember: in the event YOU feel it is accurate it is not a lie. In case you genuinely and really dooly do. MAGA

  3. #3
    No registrado
    haHaha, you believe there are details that will be objectively quaint

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by The Fool
    haHaha, you feel there are details that will be objectively quaint !

    Note: As an aside.. I joined FF only a year or two before you... ( Extended time ago..Aaagh..)
    and after I joined and requested to nominate a forum title I nearly took your moniker. (The Fool)
    I was glad the title was subsequently picked by somebody whos cynicism matched my own... LoL

  5. #5
    I don't believe that's a lie. And I do believe it's achievable. However, like what all manipulators do is ... The essential key-word is left out by them. The keyword here is sustainable.

    You can have 3% or more progress in the short run that you exchange it for some other other items (e.g. China has a high-growth rate nevertheless they essentially sold their atmosphere asset aka pollution to trade due to their high development rate). In the longer run, is 3% sustainable? Is it sustainable and positive EUR will run-up for another couple of hundreds to one thousand pips, although analysts will inform you concerning the bull EUR tale?

    There is an unchallenged assumption in the rear of of people's thoughts these people are talking about sustainable progress rate which they did perhaps not commit to anyhow. Here is the sport these individuals perform and technically they truly are not deceptive or incorrect. It's the assumptions which we're being brain-washed to believe in a particular way that's the problem.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
This website uses cookies
We use cookies to store session information to facilitate remembering your login information, to allow you to save website preferences, to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners more information