About that "deregulation"...

[Chris0nllyn]

President Donald J. Trump himself routinely cites his deregulatory accomplishments as a cause for the strong economy in his first two years in office.

But these claims of both extensive deregulation and a major impact on the economy weaken considerably upon closer scrutiny.

In last year’s highly touted event, President Trump claimed to have eliminated 22 regulations for every new regulation his Administration issued. That claim has been fairly thoroughly debunked, as many of the deregulatory actions were not completed or were very trivial.

How do the claims in this year’s report stack up? The Trump Administration said it had eliminated 57 regulations from October 2017 through September 2018. I examined these 57 deregulatory actions and found that less than half of them resulted in measurable cost savings. Eleven of the 57 actions were delays in the effective date of regulations issued late in the Obama Administration. It is unclear whether these regulations will eventually be repealed, and the Trump Administration has largely failed in court when its regulatory delays have been challenged.

An additional five items in the list are withdrawals of proposed rules. These actions did not eliminate regulatory requirements that were actually in effect.

But it is extremely unlikely that 21 actions, plus those deregulatory actions from President Trump’s first year in office that were largely due to the use of the Congressional Review Act, have had any appreciable effect on the economy. In this past year, the deregulatory actions total an annual cost savings of $1.6 billion in an economy where the GDP is more than $20 trillion. And the cost savings are concentrated in one sector of the economy: health care.

https://www.theregreview.org/2018/11/12/shapiro-deregulatory-realities-illusions/

 

[Sapidus]

https://www.theregreview.org/2018/11/12/shapiro-deregulatory-realities-illusions/

It doesnt matter to his cultists. He has convinced them that every source except his Twitter or himself is either biased or out right lying. They don't want to and couldn't handle knowing the truth at this point as they are so deeply entrenched.

He cut taxes for the rich and they claim he is putting money in their pockets. He sleeps and watches Tv and golfs most of the day and they swear no president has ever worked harder or more selflessly.


He shows a despicable lack of respect for the troops and they claim he is out there singlehandedly nursing the wounded.


They don't deserve the time or energy to try to educate them at this point

 

[CPUSA]

It doesnt matter to his cultists. He has convinced them that every source except his Twitter or himself is either biased or out right lying. They don't want to and couldn't handle knowing the truth at this point as they are so deeply entrenched.

He cut taxes for the rich and they claim he is putting money in their pockets. He sleeps and watches Tv and golfs most of the day and they swear no president has ever worked harder or more selflessly.


He shows a despicable lack of respect for the troops and they claim he is out there singlehandedly nursing the wounded.


They don't deserve the time or energy to try to educate them at this point

Like you can't handle the truth about that failure of a Mulatto Muslim and his Tranny wife...
STFU you pathetic little Beta...

 

[transporter]

Like you can't handle the truth about that failure of a Mulatto Muslim and his Tranny wife...
STFU you pathetic little Beta...

Thanks for proving the point so often made.

 

[GURPS]

It doesn't matter to his cultists.

Ah yes, Dismissive Derision for anyone NOT hoping YOUR World View

yet the people most 'acting' like cultists are Progressives

He has convinced them that every source except his Twitter or himself is either biased or out right lying. They don't want to and couldn't handle knowing the truth at this point as they are so deeply entrenched.

ah no, those of us with critical thinking skills can read and understand what Trump sends out via twitter, without CNN misrepresenting what was said to 'make a story'

He cut taxes for the rich and they claim he is putting money in their pockets.

Yep, I got Money back .... more than I ever did from Obama

He sleeps and watches Tv and golfs most of the day and they swear no president has ever worked harder or more selflessly.

ya got something besides YOUR Fantasy, Supposition, Innuendo and Unfounded OPINION, to back up that claim ?

He shows a despicable lack of respect for the troops and they claim he is out there singlehandedly nursing the wounded.

ya got something besides YOUR Fantasy, Supposition, Innuendo and Unfounded OPINION, to back up that claim ?

They don't deserve the time or energy to try to educate them at this point

by 'education' you mean the typical progressive talking points, with no basis in reality

Every post you make is against anyone or any group that doesn't conform to your propagandist viewpoints.

 

[This_person]

https://www.theregreview.org/2018/11/12/shapiro-deregulatory-realities-illusions/

It's interesting that the author states the deregulations, then dismisses them because of his bias that the cost savings to business isn't significant enough to justify saying they have an impact. But, then later in the article, he acknowledges the mere perception of deregulation has likely spurred on the economy. Then he summarily rejects his own acknowledgement of that concept.

The fact is that Trump cannot show any real reasons for the strong economy any more than for the historic drop in black unemployment or a plethora of other advantages his administration's time has seen. It seems likely that the hype is the main driver. American perception is far more powerful than reality and always has been.

This is why trying to pull the thread on the Trump administration, while failing to ever pull the threads of the Obama Administration or any other for that matter shows much more about the author than the various administrations.

 

[GURPS]

..... he acknowledges the mere perception of deregulation has likely spurred on the economy.

I have long said [after getting schooled by Larry] no the President does not 'control' the economy or gas prices or the Price of OIL

but what President can do, is FOSTER an environment for growth with his Tax policies and Gov Regulations .....


we have 8 yrs of Doubt and Uncertainly with Obama ....
Trump gets elected, gives Americans a Tax cut, seems to be reducing regulations ... Suddenly Business Owner's 'confidence' is up and people feel better about themselves

 

[This_person]

I have long said [after getting schooled by Larry] no the President does not 'control' the economy or gas prices or the Price of OIL

but what President can do, is FOSTER an environment for growth with his Tax policies and Gov Regulations .....


we have 8 yrs of Doubt and Uncertainly with Obama ....
Trump gets elected, gives Americans a Tax cut, seems to be reducing regulations ... Suddenly Business Owner's 'confidence' is up and people feel better about themselves

 

[Gilligan]

. It seems likely that the hype is the main driver. American perception is far more powerful than reality and always has been.
.

Likely indeed. I figure it had to be mostly perception driving things since things turned positive so quickly. Effects attributable to deregulation, tax changes, etc. would almost never be so immediate.

 

[This_person]

Likely indeed. I figure it had to be mostly perception driving things since things turned positive so quickly. Effects attributable to deregulation, tax changes, etc. would almost never be so immediate.

Tranny accurately points out that some of the key factors were already headed in this direction. :shrug: While that may be true, they seemed (perception again) to accelerate when a pro-business president was elected. Instead of destroying the economy with his incompetence, as the Trannies of the world predicted (and seemingly secretly wished for, to prove them right), the economy marched on strongly. Certainly black unemployment and all that were not even close to heading in the direction they took, but those are details to which Trannies and those like it will never admit.

 

[This_person]

Likely indeed. I figure it had to be mostly perception driving things since things turned positive so quickly. Effects attributable to deregulation, tax changes, etc. would almost never be so immediate.

Tranny accurately points out that some of the key factors were already headed in this direction. :shrug: While that may be true, they seemed (perception again) to accelerate when a pro-business president was elected. Instead of destroying the economy with his incompetence, as the Trannies of the world predicted (and seemingly secretly wished for, to prove them right), the economy marched on strongly. Certainly black unemployment and all that were not even close to heading in the direction they took, but those are details to which Trannies and those like it will never admit.

 

[Gilligan]

Instead of destroying the economy with his incompetence, as the Trannies of the world predicted (and seemingly secretly wished for, to prove them right),

Some on the left were quite open about their desire to see an economic collapse occur soon...Bill Maher comes quickly to mind.

And as far all that "already headed in this direction" nonsense goes, it's meaningless drivel because it blithely ignores the simple fact that the length and magnitude of the recovery, for the entire duration of the Obama administration, was the worst in modern history. You could make arguments supporting the hypothesis that the recovery that did eventually occur, did so in spite of things the Obama administration did, not because of.

You could even argue, based on results like those shown in the graph below, that things would have gone a lot better if the Magic Mullatto's administration had done nothing at all. ;-)

 

[Chris0nllyn]

It's interesting that the author states the deregulations, then dismisses them because of his bias that the cost savings to business isn't significant enough to justify saying they have an impact. But, then later in the article, he acknowledges the mere perception of deregulation has likely spurred on the economy. Then he summarily rejects his own acknowledgement of that concept.

The fact is that Trump cannot show any real reasons for the strong economy any more than for the historic drop in black unemployment or a plethora of other advantages his administration's time has seen. It seems likely that the hype is the main driver. American perception is far more powerful than reality and always has been.

This is why trying to pull the thread on the Trump administration, while failing to ever pull the threads of the Obama Administration or any other for that matter shows much more about the author than the various administrations.

The author points out Trump's exaggeration of his deregulations and their accomplishments.

The author clearly states that the deregulations that did lead to cost savings are important and should not be overlooked.

Observers should not minimize the importance of reducing paperwork in an overly complex health care system. These are real changes and they are likely important.

But he states that those changes by Trump that did result in cost savings amounted to $1.6 billion "in an economy where the GDP is more than $20 trillion." Making it tough for Trump to point out that his deregulations spawned a strong economy. Trump himself said, "And it is my opinion that the regulations had as big an impact as these massive tax cuts that we have given."

As you said, hype is the main driver because looking at the numbers, Trump's claim does not stack up. The author specifically states that.

President Trump’s repeated contention that deregulation has helped the economy, perhaps coupled with the fact that there are very few new regulations being issued, has clearly had an impact. The impact, however, has been on public perceptions, not an improved economy that can be traced to deregulatory actions. Claiming that deregulation is happening and helping business leads people—particularly those already inclined to believe it—to believe falsely that deregulation is making an economic difference.

 

[This_person]

Some on the left were quite open about their desire to see an economic collapse occur soon...Bill Maher comes quickly to mind.

And as far all that "already headed in this direction" nonsense goes, it's meaningless drivel because it blithely ignores the simple fact that the length and magnitude of the recovery, for the entire duration of the Obama administration, was the worst in modern history. You could make arguments supporting the hypothesis that the recovery that did eventually occur, did so in spite of things the Obama administration did, not because of.

You could even argue, based on results like those shown in the graph below, that things would have gone a lot better if the Magic Mullatto's administration had done nothing at all. ;-)

View attachment 125823

We're not disagreeing on the past before the indicators were moving. But, the American people were overcoming the Obama administration anyway.

 

[This_person]

The author points out Trump's exaggeration of his deregulations and their accomplishments.

The author clearly states that the deregulations that did lead to cost savings are important and should not be overlooked.


But he states that those changes by Trump that did result in cost savings amounted to $1.6 billion "in an economy where the GDP is more than $20 trillion." Making it tough for Trump to point out that his deregulations spawned a strong economy. Trump himself said, "And it is my opinion that the regulations had as big an impact as these massive tax cuts that we have given."

As you said, hype is the main driver because looking at the numbers, Trump's claim does not stack up. The author specifically states that.

Can you show where Trump claimed direct cause-effect? I hear Trump talking about deregulation, but I never hear him say, "this $5B came from here..."

Trump is telling us it is the perception, not the specifics. It's not that his claims don't stack up, it's that the author put assumptions on the claims that aren't there. They're based on the old paradigm of politicians saying, "I created $XB in savings by doing this thing." Trump doesn't claim that. He created a culture of deregulation, and that created a perception.

It's the claim they don't stack up that doesn't stack up.

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Can you show where Trump claimed direct cause-effect? I hear Trump talking about deregulation, but I never hear him say, "this $5B came from here..."

Trump is telling us it is the perception, not the specifics. It's not that his claims don't stack up, it's that the author put assumptions on the claims that aren't there. They're based on the old paradigm of politicians saying, "I created $XB in savings by doing this thing." Trump doesn't claim that. He created a culture of deregulation, and that created a perception.

It's the claim they don't stack up that doesn't stack up.

One quote is in my post you just quoted. But that came from his CPAC speech this year.

And we’ve, at the same time, eliminated a record number of job-killing regulations

No President has ever cut so many regulations in their entire term, okay — (applause) — as we’ve cut in less than a year. (Applause.)

And it’s my opinion that the regulations had as big an impact as these massive tax cuts that we’ve given. So I really believe it. (Applause.)

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...p-conservative-political-action-conference-2/

When has Trump ever mentioned specifics? His White House, however, has peddled falsehoods (as politicians do) about his actual accomplishments in this arena.

The author makes is crystal clear what the piece is about and covers, in depth, why Trump's deregulation claims are exaggerated and/or false.

No one has claimed that Trump specifically spelled out how deregulation affected the economy. He (and his White House) did, however, claim that his deregulation moves are unprecedented; that it had as much of an economic impact as tax cuts; or that he eliminated regulations 22:1. These are not made up claims. These are directly from Trump's words or White House releases. The author (and he's not the only one) simply talks about why those claims are un true.

 

[This_person]

One quote is in my post you just quoted. But that came from his CPAC speech this year.


https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...p-conservative-political-action-conference-2/

When has Trump ever mentioned specifics? His White House, however, has peddled falsehoods (as politicians do) about his actual accomplishments in this arena.

Again, as you accurately state and reiterate my position, he does not give specifics or even direct causation. I read, "I did stuff, and good things happened" which is NOT a statement of direct cause/effect. It's an implication of it for those who want that inference.

The author makes is crystal clear what the piece is about and covers, in depth, why Trump's deregulation claims are exaggerated and/or false.

No, he subtracts deregulations he feels are not sufficient to meet his interpretation of Trump's claims. That's not the way facts work.

No one has claimed that Trump specifically spelled out how deregulation affected the economy. He (and his White House) did, however, claim that his deregulation moves are unprecedented; that it had as much of an economic impact as tax cuts; or that he eliminated regulations 22:1. These are not made up claims. These are directly from Trump's words or White House releases. The author (and he's not the only one) simply talks about why those claims are un true.

Because he subtracts ones that he feels don't matter. If it was already in the works, that doesn't count (to the author). That's not the way facts work.

 

[itsbob]

It doesnt matter to his cultists. He has convinced them that every source except his Twitter or himself is either biased or out right lying. They don't want to and couldn't handle knowing the truth at this point as they are so deeply entrenched.

He cut taxes for the rich and they claim he is putting money in their pockets. He sleeps and watches Tv and golfs most of the day and they swear no president has ever worked harder or more selflessly.


He shows a despicable lack of respect for the troops and they claim he is out there singlehandedly nursing the wounded.


They don't deserve the time or energy to try to educate them at this point

1.6 Billion in savings is only trivial when Trump does it.. if Obama could have claimed 10% of that he would have been hailed a hero..

What a bunch of hypocritical morons ...

 

[Chris0nllyn]

Again, as you accurately state and reiterate my position, he does not give specifics or even direct causation. I read, "I did stuff, and good things happened" which is NOT a statement of direct cause/effect. It's an implication of it for those who want that inference.

No, Trump specifically stated that "the regulations had as big an impact as these massive tax cuts that we’ve given". He specifically correlates regulations and tax cuts as both having a big impact on the economy.

He specifically says he is deregulating at some alarming rate. Or that he's done the most deregulating.

These are words. These are his claims. Those words and claims will always be scrutinized by others.

No, he subtracts deregulations he feels are not sufficient to meet his interpretation of Trump's claims. That's not the way facts work.

No, the author did not. The author accurately walks through the deregulations the White house itself said they accomplished. It's a list from the White House and the author walks through it finding that the WH said it took 57 deregulator actions. 11 of those 57 were actually issued by Obama; they just happened under Trump. 5 of the remaining 46 were simply proposed rules that were withdrawn. Not regulation. Of the remaining 41, 4 were closing out deregulation started by the Obama administration (The author then gives credit to the Trump administration for following through. The author concludes that they did reduce cost but that it's simply "disingenuous to include them in a total designed to give the impression of a change in direction in regulatory policy".

From there, of the 37 left the White House simply doesn't include their own numbers on cost savings. In 15 of those 37, the White House itself says the cost savings are negligible.

The author then points out that the White House was unable to point out cost savings for 21 deregulations actually undertaken by the Trump administration. The author then states that these 21 deregulations are important and should not be minimized. That being said, the author simply states that based on White House numbers, the cost savings are $1.6 billion "in an economy where the GDP is more than $20 trillion". My bad math says that's about 0.008% of GDP.

Do you believe the tax cuts only had a 0.008% effect on GDP?


Because he subtracts ones that he feels don't matter. If it was already in the works, that doesn't count (to the author). That's not the way facts work.

Which one would that be? The ones not initiated by Trump? Or the ones the White House couldn't quantify?

 

[Gilligan]

But, the American people were overcoming the Obama administration anyway.

Demonstrated most strikingly, perhaps, in the US "oil boom" and our ascendancy to position of worlds #1 in oil and gas. Barry must have hated that.