Regardless of personalities etc, and whats happened up to now....looking forwards, can Trump deliver?
America, like the rest of us, likes its cheap goods. And obviously part of that cheapness is provided by lower costs of labour, by overseas work.
If you bring that production back to the US, its going to add to the cost. Prices will rise. Can America stomach that?
....unless he plans on bringing about a massive reduction in internal US labour costs, of course.
you can see the reasons for the anger, but why do they think Trump is the answer to their problems ?
Are you sitting behind a desk all day? Well that’s not hard work. Hard work is someone like me — I’m a logger, I get up at 4:30 and break my back. For my entire life that’s what I’m doing. I’m wearing my body out in the process of earning a living." OKAY I AGREE WITH THAT. But the Republican party is the party that tried to privatize social security and is always looking for a way to reduce and defer SS benefits. So that plays right into the Thomas Frank theory of what's the matter with Kansas - or apparently with Wisconsin. Are "elites" only democrats or does elite mean money. Because the folks in Wisconsin just voted (perhaps) to reduce taxes on elites, reduce their own options for health care, reduce or delay their SS benefits, and eliminate the estate tax. Someone needs to really give me an explanation of how that makes their life any better. In essence, I AM SO MAD AT ELITES I AM GOING TO VOTE TO CUT THEIR TAXES. Tell me how that is getting their voices heard.
you can see the reasons for the anger, but why do they think Trump is the answer to their problems ?
I'm not sure they do: Most just thought he was a better option than Clinton.
"I'm not sure they do: Most just thought he was a better option than Clinton."
Really good point. We talk as though Clinton/Trump voters vote with enthusiasm. In fact we have no idea what their ideal candidate would have looked like.
In fact we have no idea what their ideal candidate would have looked like.
We do know Trump is the least popular republican candidate in recent history.
[img] 
[/img]
you can see the reasons for the anger, but why do they think Trump is the answer to their problems ?
They don't (and he's not). But he was the alternative on the voting card. He wasn't an established politician and he'd voiced 'policies' intended to bolster the US domestic economy. He presented an alternative to the status quo, even if that wasn't the one people actually wanted.
He presented an alternative to the status quo, even if that wasn't the one people actually wanted.
Yet fewer people voted for him than they have for republican candidates in the past. He failed badly. Luckily for him Clinton was an even bigger failure.
Though disgruntled "blue collar workers" (I dislike that term) played a part I don't think it's what won it for Trump (And the Senate & Congress for GOP)... It was probably down to the middle classes not liking Obamacare, they see it as people getting something for nothing while they have to pay through the nose and work hard for theirs. The politics of envy.
"He presented an alternative to the status quo, even if that wasn't the one people actually wanted."
5th Elephant's post leads me to suspect we're all over thinking this.
Looks to me like ~60m people vote Republican whether it's Ghandi or a Chimpanzee on the ticket.
Unfortunately the Democrats picked a candidate who was so unpopular in her own party she couldn't beat the Republican core vote.
America, like the rest of us, likes its cheap goods. And obviously part of that cheapness is provided by lower costs of labour, by overseas work.If you bring that production back to the US, its going to add to the cost. Prices will rise. Can America stomach that?
....unless he plans on bringing about a massive reduction in internal US labour costs, of course.
I think that the idea that low labour costs elsewhere, especially in China, means that it's generally simply not economically viable for US (and UK/EU) based manufacturing businesses to compete is too readily accepted, and that the costs vs benefits are a lot more finely balanced than the simple comparison of the hourly rate of a Chinese worker and his American counterpart:
- as I understand it, Chinese labour costs have been rising in the last decade
- China industrialised very rapidly and threw up a lot of factories - many with state money - in a very short period of time, because they knew that almost no matter what they might get wrong, the labour costs were so low that mistakes would not matter. I think many of those factories as a result and the skills/quality of their employees are not as good as their USA/EU equivalents (less efficient, poorer quality product etc.), and as a result they will struggle to maintain a competitive edge without an (artificially?) low currency exchange rate and state bank subsidies.
- China has a major problem with corruption, and that also damages their competiveness
- A lot of businesses have repatriated functions back from the Far East, in order to regain control of quality/product safety, simplify the supply chain, to guard intellctual property, and because it is simply cheaper to do so.
So I suspect that the main obstacles to an increase in USA manufacturing are not so much the operating costs (energy/wages etc.) and more the barriers to entry of the costs of starting up by building or de-mothballing plants, and even those now may not be as great as before. For example, my understanding is that high tech semi-conductor manufacturing facilities have a fairly short lifespan, and it's often easier/cheaper for the manufacturers to build a new factory for the next generation of chips, rather than try to upgrade their existing factories.
The USA has a lot of advantages for starting up new manufacturing: loads of space, lots of natural resources, a flexible/mobile workforce and a labour market/laws that favour the employer, and low energy costs. If corporations also know that the government (Trump or otherwise) is actively going to support them, that could strongly encourage them to invest more inside the USA.
If they have any shortages, it might be temporary gaps in some of the workforce skills, in which case they can do what America has always done, and encourage immigration to fill the gaps (Give me [s]your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free[/s] your ambitious go-getting degree qualified Mexican or Chinese production engineer).
you can see the reasons for the anger, but why do they think Trump is the answer to their problems ?
They don't. There are many reasons, but the best ones [url= http://michaelmoore.com/trumpwillwin/ ]are summarised by Michael Moore[/url].
leads me to suspect we're all over thinking this.
Pretty much.
leads me to suspect [b]we're all[/b] over thinking this.
Speak for yourself.
looks at percentage of votes for each candidate and pondersLuckily for him Clinton was an even bigger failure.
Alan Sorkin's letter to his daughters:
http://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2016/11/aaron-sorkin-donald-trump-president-letter-daughter
I like the way he veers from a direct lift from the West Wing, to calling Trump a douche nozzle.
Lol at the Newsnight clip on FB.
"What are you going to do on your first day in the White House?"
"Lots of things. So many things you wouldn't believe"
Ok, Donald. Things. Got it.
Also, [url= http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-seeks-to-delay-trial-until-after-inauguration/ar-AAk9Ntl ]could get juicy![/url]
Ronald Reagan was similarly demonised by the left, especially outside the USA, but I think was widely considered by most Americans to have been a very good President (and to have been much smarter than many gave him credit for being).
Sorry I'm a bit late but Reagan was all ready a politician having served as governor before making his Whitehouse bid. Trump has no experience and that's the worrying part for the thinking American / the best part for the rabble rousers. Hopefully the experiment will be cost neutral/beneficial.
Stoner, that academic is saying nothing new....Eric Hoffer said the exact same thing 60 years ago. Do people really have this short a lived collective memory?
Eric Hoffer said the exact same thing 60 years ago. Do people really have this short a lived collective memory?
Everyone needs to read Hoffer. +1
Alan (sic) Sorkin's letter to his daughters:
Sentimental clap trap that makes him so successful as a scriptwriter.
meaty - MemberSentimental clap trap that makes him so successful as a scriptwriter.
Perhaps, but who would you want to write a rallying cry to the Democratic Party other than Arron Sorkin? I can't think of anyone better.
In all honesty, and I wouldn't have voted for him, I'm optimistic about his presidency.
He's got everything going for him, so should be able to effect change and in short order.
I'm hoping that he won't repeal all of Obamacare, but we'll see; the first 100days will set the tone. If it's a total clusterf***, at least it's only 4years unlike Brexit.
I'm optimistic about his presidency
Based on what?
"Based on what?"
I'm optimistic. Given people are worried he'll nuke China and Russia in his first week he can only exceed expectations.
Perhaps, but who would you want to write a rallying cry to the Democratic Party other than Arron Sorkin? I can't think of anyone better.
He will appeal to the liberals on the West and East Coasts, but they have got those votes in the bag, maybe a bit less JayZee and Beyonce and a bit more Archie Bunker is what they need to win the rust belt states where they lost the election.
Based on what?
I have doubled up on the lottery tonight, the world cannot continue to be this unlucky, can it?
I have doubled up on the lottery tonight, the world cannot continue to be this unlucky, can it?
Haha, likewise.
People who know President Elect Trump, who have worked with him, have said that he's a pragmatist, that he geniuinely wants to make a difference...I still think he's a little unhinged, but then, so was Churchill and he's probably our most revered statesman of all time...
I prefer people with flaws and conviction over flawless people with nothing you can hold them to.
Eh? Trump is the living embodiment of Neo-liberalism.
Trump identified the problem of communities which have been left out of the nation's economic success over the last two decades, and offered solutions. Between 1996 and 2013 annual per-capita US GDP has grown from around $30,000 to $53,000. But most households haven't shared equally in that. US real median household income has been on a downward trend since 1999 and (after a second temporary blip in 2007) is now back where it was in 1996.
His campaign was based on fixing the economy for those people and they voted for it; he also provided endless distractions with his comments and behaviour. The Democrats responded by attacking his personal suitability but didn't make the case for the economy. In the end, it was the economy stupid.
Trump's solution for those who've been left behind is to blame it on foreigners - immigration and trade - and build the walls to keep them out.
This is mercantilism - trade is a zero-sum game and America will be better off if he negotiates tougher terms to raise the price of imports, which will hurt the foreigners and benefit America.
Most likely he will pick on limited product areas, such as steel, to attempt to revive the US industries which have suffered, whilst allowing iphones to travel unimpeded.
His view of trade and globalisation seems commonplace, but the root cause of the losses of those rust-belt communities isn't trade, it's technological change. The productive businesses which generated wealth for those communities in the past have been overtaken by changes in technology, and those communities are struggling to find new roles. Whilst the pace of change has been increasing, there hasn't been an effective policy response either in the US or the UK.
The neo-liberal response of 'let them make their own way' hasn't worked.
There's also the increasingly unequal distribution of the spoils of economic success.
Trump's solution is a programme of public infrastructure building, and tax cuts which will keep the Republican Congress on side. So the spending taps will open. The infrastructure spending will stimulate the economy broadly, but leaves the underlying issues of technological change and income distribution unaddressed.
If he succeeds, expect inflation to rise, the Fed to raise interest rates to compensate and Trump to attempt to loosen the Fed's grip by appointing dovish board members and Chair.
Still, unless he provokes another global financial crisis by blocking trade, or causes a geopolitical upset, it should be enough to secure a second term.
[img] 
[/img]
Interesting AMA on Reddit:
"A mouthpiece of the Russian government has intervened in the American election to help sway the outcome towards their preferred candidate and the Republicans could not be happier about it.
So many words I never thought I'd say."
[url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-us-2016-37953528 ]The Doughnut decides that Obamacare might not be that bad afterall.[/url]
That won't offset putting creationist whacko Carson in as secretary of education.
Interesting comments from Trumps security advisor, he and republicans are looking at a big increase in military budget, which they feel Obama has neglected
[url= http://theconcourse.deadspin.com/donald-trump-doesnt-like-this-any-more-than-you-do-1788862854?utm_campaign=socialflow_jezebel_facebook&utm_source=jezebel_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow ]The poo has hit the turbine[/url]
Love that Grahamh and completely agree, interview with former employee reckoned he hated working more than 2 days in a row.... This is going to be painful for him
The downside is that America just elected Mike Pence to the presidency
This guy agrees with me but for different reasons
Meh. Personally I just think that's Trump's attempt to look serious and statesman like.
He may well be a little nervous too, but to be honest I'd be more worried if he wasn't!
interview with former employee reckoned he hated working more than 2 days in a row.... This is going to be painful for him
Well, if Obama has racked up over 300 rounds of golf then perhaps there's some room to delegate after all?
Be interesting to see how Trump handles his first law suit,
The judge has advised him to just pay it off, he wants to defer until after he's prez, hoping that by then he'll be untouchable?
Ooooooo 300 rounds of golf in 8 years. Wow! Thats a whole round of golf (4-5 hours? So not even a whole day off) every 9-10 days. The man must be impeached immediately.
Must be a little embarrassing for DT to be relying on Obama to call for calm as a result of anti-DT protests.
Over 50% of those who voted democrat or republican didn't want you Donnie boy. Best get used to it.
We've gone from "Trump will nuke China" to "Trump won't do enough" in 48 hours. At this rate of improvement he's going to be curing cancer by next week and he hasn't even started. #bestpresidentever
igm - Member
Must be a little embarrassing for DT to be relying on Obama to call for calm
Trump's 'its not fair' tweet was fairly hilarious, after all the birther conspiracy crap he pulled he just looked embarrassed sitting with Obama.
how about putting 3 of his children at key posts ?
is that democracy ?
