Trump’s Economic adviser team
Via Thinkprogress:
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump announced his economic policy advisory team on Friday — a collection of 13 white men.
While the list does not include any women or racial minorities, it does include five Steves. The people Trump will ostensibly rely on for economic guidance are are:
- Steve Roth, a fellow real estate investor and the billioanire CEO of Vorando Reality. Roth and Trump reportedly co-own a Manhattan office tower together.
- Harold Hamm, an oil and gas billionaire and chairman and CEO of Continental Resources. He served as an energy adviser to Mitt Romney’s 2012 campaign and as a major donor to the pro-Romney Restore Our Future super PAC.
- Howard Lorber, president and CEO of Vector Group — a company that owns both real estate and tobacco companies.
- Steven Mnuchin, a hedge fund investor and co-CEO and chairman of Dune Capital Management, he is a longtime friend of Trump’s despite the candidate’s public criticism of hedge fund investors. In May, Trump appointed him national finance chairman for the campaign.
- Tom Barrack, another real estate investor and CEO of Colony Capital. He founded Rebuild America Now, a pro-Trump super PAC. During the Republican primary, Trump denouncedsuper PACs and requested the return of all donations to any supporting him, but he hasn’t rejected their support during the general campaign.
- Stephen M. Calk, CEO and chairman of Federal Savings Bank. He has been a critic of theObama administration’s banking regulations.
- John Paulson, another billionaire hedge fund manager and president of Paulson & Co. Paulson, made billions of dollars in profit from shorting the market during the 2007 housing bubble.
- Andy Beal, a billionaire investor and founder of Beal Bank. In addition to making a huge profit buying up undervalued assets during the 2008 recession, he has made waves as a mathematician and high-stakes poker player.
- Steve Feinberg, the secretive CEO of Ceberus Capital Management, a private investment firm which specializes in “distressed investing.” Among the firm’s assets: Remington, themanufacturer of the AR-15.
- David Malpass, founder and president of Encima Global, a economic consulting and research firm. He held positions in the Reagan and George W. Bush administrations andunsuccessfully ran for the New York Republican U.S. Senate nomination in 2010.
- Peter Navarro, a business school professor and anti-China author. He has praised Trump’s“peace through economic and military strength” strategy as “right out of the Reagan playbook.
- Stephen Moore, the Heritage Foundation scholar, former Wall Street Journal columnist and founder of the anti-tax Club for Growth. His economic predictions have been wildly inaccurate.
- Dan DiMicco, the former president and CEO of steel giant Nucor Corporation. DiMicco authored a 2015 book urging a return to American manufacturing.
Not single economist listed, Trump seems to have the same disdain for economists as he has shown for political scientists and the so-called political strategists.
It may be important to remember though that he was correct in his opinions of the mainstream thinking in regards to political strategy.
Yeah, that is a list to confirm that Trump’s success is due to his economic populism.
hehehehehe
What a list! It causes a person to doubt Trump’s sincerity about the TPP treaty and associated issues.
“DiMicco authored a 2015 book urging a return to American manufacturing.”
Even that last fellow. I looked him up to see if he had any redeeming features besides running his mouth. On Global Warming he says he is NOT a denier, but just doesn’t think anything ought to be done. Like there is a difference….
It is also important to remember that Trump’s so called business practices seem to always benefit his own wallet at the cost of others that have dealings with him.
If all of these others run transactions like Trump they will be busy looking for ways to get out of paying the bills of the US Government. Thus hurting US relationships with the world.
Kinda like putting a group of weasels in charge of security for the farmers he house.
Advisors? Just how much “advice” does the Trumpster listen to?
Stevefirmative action.
When I saw “Steve Roth” I thought for a moment it was our Steve. But not as far as I know Steve still lives in Seattle and is not a billionaire (if he was he should have picked up more than drinks and appetizers that day we met off Lake Union).
The whole thing is shocking, even for Trump. Isn’t THIS the guy who is trying to appeal to anti-Wall Street Berniacs? Ya think that any of THESE guys object to TPP? It would be ’embarrassing’ if that was a word remotely applicable to Trump or any of His Works.
Trump is to give a major speech on this next week. It is straight supply-side economics on steroids.
Donald Trump will propose one of the biggest tax cuts since the days of Ronald Reagan.
Trump will reiterate his plan to cut the corporate tax rate to 15 percent.
Trump has managed to “whittle down the cost” in terms of LOST TAX REVENUE by about two-thirds, to $3 trillion, said Stephen Moore.
“If you’re a working-class American, there’s no question that an agenda that cuts taxes, that gets rids of regulations, redoes some of these trade deals in ways that are pro-America.”
Trump has as little idea about economics as he does choosing Supreme County Justices; he has farmed out his “thinking” to the Heritage Foundation (what a happy thought). He/They say they are going to “redo” some of these trade deals, which makes as much sense as saying the Mexicans will pay for his wall. If Mexico and Canada, for example, say thanks but no thanks to any offer to redo NAFTA, what then? The US abrogates those pacts, as Trump has suggested we should do with NATO? A return to protectionism? Don’t forget – Trump was the one who said he could eliminate the national debt in his 8 years in office. Complete bullshit.
If there is one single lesson to be learned from the supply-side experiment we have been through, it is that a rising tide does not lift all boats. The levels of income and wealth inequality have exploded since 1980, with a huge transfer of income having flowed to the top 1%. As things stand now, the top one-tenth of 1% owns nearly as much wealth as the bottom 90%. A team of “economic advisors” dominated by billionaire financiers puts the lie to any concern he brags of having for the little guy. To make up for that betrayal, of course, come the rosy projections of creating 400,000-500,000 jobs a month. How much job creation has the financial class been engaged in recently? I could have sworn that lax regulation of Wall Street contributed to the near collapse of the global financial system in 2008.
Trump has no desire to actually govern. He simply wants to be head of state while “making America great again.” Perfect folly.
Ms 57, regardless of what the elite or economist may call these economic systems. We have had free trade, deregulation, and tax cuts since Nixon.
Who do we have a better chance with correcting the trade issue, or not having emigrant problems like British and Europe?
Beene,
I’m interested in understanding your point but, probably through my own fault, I’m not sure I understand the comment.
Ms57, we only have two choices. Which candidate, more likely to restrict trade deals and immigration.
If its about the economy, I do not have a better answer than the one given of what the system really has been for the past 40 plus years.
Ms57, regardless of calling it supply side or trickle down; It all about deregulation, taxes, and free trade..
Beene,
If the choice is reducible to those two issues, which I don’t think it is by a long shot, Trump by far is the one who will restrict free trade and by far is the one who meaninglessly trumpets how he will deal with immigration: building a wall (never gonna happen) and getting the Mexican government to pay for it (pure fantasy — previous Presidents, the sitting President, the Mexican legislature have all told him to drop dead); rounding up and deporting 11 million undocumented workers (never gonna happen); denying entry to all Muslims from around the world… Anyone who actually believes any or all that needs a serious reality check
Ms 57, the immigrants I was referring was those fleeing the wars Hillary has supported, and promoted. As to our southern neighbors, Obama has deported more of them than any president.
The only other major issue is nukes, and I trust Trump is less likely to continue the present policies of irritating Putin.
” denying entry to all Muslims from around the world… Anyone who actually believes any or all that needs a serious reality check”
Both Britain an Europe have done a reality check. Seem they agree with Trump……..thou a little late.
At the Republican debate in December 2015, it was Trump – not Obama, not Clinton, but Trump himself — who said: “With nuclear, the power, the devastation is very important to me.” He emphasized that “nuclear changes the whole ballgame,” implying that “the power is so massive” that the US can maintain its security without having to forward deploy its military.
In an interview with the NYT editorial board in April 2016, it was Trump who claimed that the U.S. “may very well be better off” if allied countries, like Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia, developed nuclear weapons.
In a televised town hall on MSNBC in March ’16, it was Trump who said he wouldn’t rule out using nuclear weapons in Europe, saying, “I’m not going to take it off the table.” This followed an interview the week before with Bloomberg Politics, where he hinted at the possibility of using nuclear weapons against the Islamic State.
And just this week, Joe Scarborough said: “Several months ago, a foreign policy expert on the international level went to advise Donald Trump, and three times he asked about the use of nuclear weapons. Three times, he asked, at one point, ‘If we have them, we can’t we use them?’… Three times, in an hour briefing, ‘Why can’t we use nuclear weapons?’”
Now what was that you were saying about trusting Trump with nukes?
Regarding Syrian refugees, as of the end of June a total of 5,100 have been granted entry after going through a vetting process lasting 18 months conducted by Homeland Security and other agencies and 5 or 6 interviews. If you’re still afraid, watch out for your shadow.
Britain and Europe do not ban Muslims from entering their countries, as Trump proposes, and they object strenuously to Trump’s idea to do so.
Now what was that you were saying about trusting Trump with nukes?
I agree with the perception that both sides with the means to destroy the world do not need standing armies.
We could evaluate standing armies value, but we both know its only value today seems to be regime change; which only creates more problems.
Britain and Europe do not ban Muslims from entering their countries, as Trump proposes, and they object strenuously to Trump’s idea to do so.
I guess there is some dispute only with boarder guards with those immigrants trying to enter Europe threw Greece.
Ms 57, will give you that the press will do all that it can to help Trump defeat his self and help Hillary.
No expense will be spared to get Hillary installed; really not much different than the DNC did to Bernie.
I seriously doubt that a candidate that had to pay sitters to occupy sets at the DNC convention to make it look full will win; in spite of all the backing Hillary will receive.
I think what is meant by standing army is about having American troops stationed at camps all over the world, and in some places since the end of WWII.
Beene,
You are too quick to draw a false equivalency about Trump’s reckless dangerous unprecedented talk about using nukes. No presidential candidate since 1945 has ever so blithely and ignorantly even considered the possibility of using nukes. If there is one single disqualifier, that’s it, now and forever. If any of his supporters continue to follow him after such… It’s a final line for any sane person.
You and I are not engaged in a gotcha game, which I really thank you for, so when you say the media is helping Trump defeat himself, I can tell that your honesty bests your desire; you wish he wasn’t helping himself to defeat himself. But he is and does on a daily basis. Imagine what Trump supporters would be saying if Clinton was acting self-destructively but the media was refusing to report it. I don’t watch TV, but given what I know about the 24/hour news cycle (which is precisely why I don’t watch it anymore; I learn far, far more by reading), I’m sure they replay over and over again the bone-headed mistakes he’s making. But what would you have them do as he gives them so much ammo all the time? He made a living off of reality TV. He can’t complain now about the reality he’s responsible for creating in reality.
The distinction about Europe is that they do not ban entry to Muslims outright, but they have, in some places but perhaps everywhere, temporarily suspended their practice of admitting refugees. There’s a big difference, though, between what they have been talking about — sharing the burden of a million refugees — and what Obama’s policy is in practice — a goal of allowing 10,000 refugees this year.
Ms 57, at least we agree about TV vs blogs, I do watching evening news almost every evening and talking heads on Sunday mornings.
No we are not playing gotcha, we just disagree on the dangerousness that to me is proven fact vs what another may do in the future.
“Nuclear security experts are nervous about the prospect of a Donald Trump presidency.
Former officials from both Republican and Democratic administrations are expressing concern over what they describe as Trump’s cavalier rhetoric about using nuclear weapons and potentially allowing them to be obtained by U.S. allies.”
“This is THE MOST DANGEROUS thing that he has said, among many dangerous and stupid things,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, 26-year veteran of the State Department who worked on nonproliferation issues under former Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.”
http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/290538-nuke-fears-grow-over-trump
“Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump claimed Japan, an ally of the United States, can “sit home and watch Sony television” if the U.S. is ever attacked.
“You know we have a treaty with Japan, where if Japan is attacked, we have to use the full force and might of the United States,” Trump said during an appearance in Iowa on Friday. “If we’re attacked, Japan doesn’t have to do anything. They can sit home and watch Sony television, OK?”
Trump told The New York Times in July that he would judge NATO members’ spending on security before helping them face down a potential invasion. The businessman had previously stated he wants Japan, Germany, Saudi Arabia, South Korea and NATO countries to “pay up.”
“They owe us tremendously, we’re taking care of all those people and what I want them to do is pay up,” he said in June.
Earlier this week, a group of foreign policy experts ― including several Republicans ― denounced what they called the “disgraceful” Trump comments on NATO, along with his call for Russia to find Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s missing emails from her time as U.S. secretary of state.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-japan-sony_us_57a638d8e4b03ba680128d39?kjnyuus0pf95uq5mi
“Mr. Trump’s remarks are almost as disturbing as his uncontrolled impulses and that’s a scary combination for a leader with access to the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. Trump’s aggressive and retaliatory tendencies, demonstrated throughout his pursuit of power, are enough proof that he is unfit to have access to the nuclear codes.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-rosenthal/trump-is-a-real-nuclear-threat_b_11366304.html?
Ms 57, I take the attacks on Trump with the same veracity, as Peak Oil, or attacks on E. Snowdon, by the elites and the press.
Thanks for the URL’s.
Beene,
To include Trump and Snowden in the same sentence is among the most odd associations I can think of.
You’re welcome.
Beene,
Completely off subject and not having to deal with Trump at all, I found this very severe critique of neoliberalism yesterday and I thought you might be interested.
http://evonomics.com/rise-of-neoliberalism-inequality/
“What the history of both Keynesianism and neoliberalism show is that it’s not enough to oppose a broken system. A coherent alternative has to be proposed. For Labour, the Democrats and the wider left, the central task should be to develop an economic Apollo programme, a conscious attempt to design a new system, tailored to the demands of the 21st century.”
More………….http://evonomics.com/rise-of-neoliberalism-inequality/
Perhaps our founders have given the answer in the constitution. The “general welfare” clause is mentioned twice in the U.S. Constitution: first, in the preamble and second, it is found in Article 1, Section 8. Those individuals or companies found in violation should be prosecuted under the RICO.
First, the answers for our Republic must be found in the Constitution.
The “general welfare” is of course not enough; it would have to be codified under statutes, but as for the main thrust of your comment — man, I could not agree more. What else is it, how can the current system be described as anything other than a corrupt racket in which elites conspire against the general welfare of the country in favor of their own. The political class, because of the way campaigns are conducted, has been bought and paid for and serve the interests of their masters. It’s important to remember, too that fully half of the entire Congress — 535 men and women — are millionaires, a lot of them multi-millionaires and a few of them in the hundreds of millions. What slightest concern do they have for the general welfare? Witness the rebellions on the left and right this year by citizens who recognize all too clearly — not intellectually but emotionally, experientially, viscerally — that they are getting the shaft and have been for a long, long time — betrayed by their “representatives.”
The general welfare clause is the one I come back to time and again. Cheers, Beene… I’m going out.
Beene,
One more thing (it’s always one more thing with me). It does have to do with Trump so if you’re tired of the conversation just delete the comment and get on with your day. I’ll understand completely and won’t be offended — nor am I looking for a response. I offer it solely for your own contemplation.
This story was in The Hill today. If you’re of a mind to, read it, then ask yourself one question, purely for yourself: Is this a man concerned with ensuring domestic tranquility?
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/290596-trump-casts-doubt-on-electoral-system
Cheers, brother…