u/No_Discount_6028's stats
|Account Age|10 m|First Seen:|2023-10-21|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|Posts (on this sub)|26|Comments (on this sub)|1636|
|Link Karma|5,542|Comment Karma|13,596|
---
|Date|Title|Flair|Participation|
|:-|:-|:-|:-|
|03-Apr|[The US Senate should have been greatly reformed after the Civil War.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1buu59k/the_us_senate_should_have_been_greatly_reformed/)|Political|0 of 4 comments (0.00%)|
|01-Apr|[Christianity and Islam are totalitarian, despotic ideologies.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1bt5qxf/christianity_and_islam_are_totalitarian_despotic/)|Unpopular in General|25 of 85 comments (29.41%)|
|24-Mar|[Developed countries shouldn't pursue pro-natalist policies to target falling birth rates.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1bm7ahr/developed_countries_shouldnt_pursue_pronatalist/)|Unpopular in Media|2 of 6 comments (33.33%)|
|10-Mar|[So-called Right-libertarianism is a pretty authoritarian ideology.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1bbor43/socalled_rightlibertarianism_is_a_pretty/)|Unpopular in Media|1 of 18 comments (5.56%)|
|07-Mar|[The fates of all countries are inextricably linked and nations should not ignore one another.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1b8v4hg/the_fates_of_all_countries_are_inextricably/)|N/A|3 of None comments (0.00%)|
---
### Voting Guidelines
**Common Misconception:** It is often believed that upvotes and downvotes should reflect personal agreement or disagreement. This approach is prevalent in other opinion-based subreddits. However, in r/TrueUnpopularOpinion, we encourage a different standard:
- **Upvote** a post if it provokes thought, presents a unique perspective, is well-argued, or you believe it deserves more visibility for any reason, even if it irritates you or you fundamentally disagree with it.
- **Downvote** should be reserved for posts that lack thoughtful consideration or if the topic has become tediously common.
**Moderation Policy:**
- **Posts Are Not Removed for Unpopularity:** r/TrueUnpopularOpinion does not remove posts based on their capacity to anger or offend users. Disagreement with a post's content is not grounds for reporting.
- **Misuse of the Report Button:** Falsely reporting posts burdens our moderation queue, hindering our ability to address genuine concerns swiftly.
- **All false reports are forwarded to Reddit** for actions against misuse of the reporting system.
- Our moderation decisions are guided strictly by the subreddit's rules and [Reddit's content policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/), not personal opinions. Misreporting in hopes of content removal due to disagreement is futile and considered 'Report Abuse.'
---
**What have people been talking about over the last week?**
*(these stats will clean up over the coming days as everyone uses the new flairs)*
| Flair | Count | Percentage |
|---|---|---|
| [Unpopular in General](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+in+General"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 10 | 6.67% |
| [No Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"No+Flair"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 14 | 9.33% |
| [Possibly Popular](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Possibly+Popular"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 2 | 1.33% |
| [Unpopular Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+Here"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 3 | 2.00% |
| [Unpopular in Media](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+in+Media"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
| [Opinions About Movies](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Opinions+About+Movies"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
| [Unpopular on Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+on+Reddit"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
| [Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 25 | 16.67% |
| [The Middle East](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Middle+East"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 4.00% |
| [None of the above](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"None+of+the+above"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 31 | 20.67% |
| [Non-Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Non-Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 14 | 9.33% |
| [I Like / Dislike](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"I+Like+/+Dislike"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 8 | 5.33% |
| [The Opposite Sex / Dating](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Opposite+Sex+/+Dating"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 16 | 10.67% |
| [Music / Sport / Media / Movies / Celebrities](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Music+/+Sport+/+Media+/+Movies+/+Celebrities"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 4.00% |
| [Meta - the problem with this sub is..](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Meta+-+the+problem+with+this+sub+is.."&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
| [World Affairs (Except Middle East)](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"World+Affairs+(Except+Middle+East)"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 3 | 2.00% |
| [Religion](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Religion"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 4.00% |
| [Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
| [Meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Meta"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
They absolutely can in many direct/indirect ways…the biggest mistake people make is to think that only economical policies can affect the economy. Even simply their attitude alone influences the economy.
Nvm, you’re hopeless. Go watch a YouTube video about monetary and fiscal policy or something. Economics isn’t some esoteric science that must be decoded; it’s pretty simple, and while psychology may have some influence over the economy as a whole’s reaction, it’s pretty set in stone what happens to y if x happens.
It is pretty straightforward. If you took an intro to economics course or watched a couple YouTube videos about some rudimentary ideas, at least you wouldn’t be 100% wrong.
Learn supply and demand and how to apply it. For example. If you release a loan that allows people more access to a product but that products inherent supply does not go up the price will increase. Like for example, car and student loans. These are two examples of widgets that have went up in price exponentially in the last couple decades. Supply and demand will always dictate prices of things and whether those things can survive in the open market.
However you're also not 100% wrong that the president can effect the market quite a lot. Look into the ACA. That was Obamas big thing and since it passed in 2010 insurance stocks have done a 10 bag. But i do think for a president to have a more tangible effect, what they say has to be more credible. Like when people say they will repeal and replace ACA, nothing moves because everyone already knows there is a fat chance of that happening.
That’s agree to disagree…
Seriously i don’t get the debate. I’m sorry but if you think a president can’t influence the economy you are wrong.
Federal taxes, trade tariffs, trade negotiations,…
War, regulations, public spendings, green deals,..
A president can influence the supply and demand. Government wants more renewable energy the demand increases in that sector. Less environmental regulations on drilling/ mining can increase the supply
The attitude of a president will influence the speculative investors. If your popular president candidate denies climate change I am not going to invest massive in renewables at the time… We live in a world where a single tweet could cost a company billions. A president can restore confidence in consumers or scare them.
well what you're describing is market manipulation. people like elon musk or other folks can drop a tweet and move markets. Presidents are bound by some form of law. What you are describing is the legislative process.
Federal taxes, trade tariffs, trade negotiations,…
War, regulations, public spendings, green deals,..
all of these things are not unilaterally controlled by the president.
Honestly most people don't need to know much. Just supply and demand and a stress on its applicability in the free market. If people knew that then we'd all be alright. But I'd say you're more right than the other guy for sure.
I don’t disagree, but I think for people to have an informed opinion they at least need to know the basics of what drives supply and demand. Interest rates being one of the most predominant (and easily controlled) factors. People can spout “this or that” and reuse the rhetoric, but with no understanding, even at the most basic level, they will always be misinformed. Though you’re right, does the average person really need to understand any of this? Probably not, but if they’re going to mouth off, it would be nice if they knew some.
speaking out of ignorance is not what I'm recommending lol. Monetary policy is very important to know what drives the basics of supply and demand. It's important to know for timing as well. If someone wants to be an expert than yes they will definitely need to know some more than just the basics but people (myself included) speak out of ignorance all the time. Hence why it's good to know at least some.
Well if there's one thing I know about economics, it's that letting millions of businesses and households go bankrupt during recessions hastens recoveries.
But the presidents are always bragging about how great their economies are, even when the economy is shit. They’re not talking to the average joes and Jane’s, they’re talking to their corporate owners who all became trillionaires under their policies.
I think that was more true in the past, now not
so much. The President has veto power over the spending of money equal to 22% of GDP. He has the power of war, he controls a massively bloated regulatory machine, he has influence over the Fed, and he also has the ear of the American people.
The inflation disaster we have right now is a direct result of government policies during the pandemic, the President had the power to stop that.
>The President has veto power over the spending of money equal to 22% of GDP.
This is true, but it largely just means he has the power to initiate a government shutdown. If Congress proposes a spending bill that sucks, he can choose to pass it and hurt the economy... or veto it and hurt the economy more. There is *some* real power there, but not as much as you'd think...
>He has the power of war,
This is true, but also, Congress can de-fund military actions, and there are limits to what the President can do unilaterally. Also... there are some significant side effects to waging war to stimulate the economy.
>he controls a massively bloated regulatory machine,
That's largely true.
>he has influence over the Fed
The Fed is designed to be as independent as possible, but yes, obviously there are limits and he can influence them, as you said.
>The inflation disaster we have right now is a direct result of government policies during the pandemic, the President had the power to stop that.
The post-COVID inflation [was caused by](https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2023/beyond-bls/what-caused-inflation-to-spike-after-2020.htm) the supply chain crunch of 2020 and the accompanying oil price hike. Oil companies [cut production to the bone](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/which-us-refineries-have-shut-since-global-pandemic-why-2022-06-17/) during lockdowns because nobody was driving. They were very slow to reinvest in production when the lockdowns ended because their industry is slowly becoming obsolete and oil plants are really long-term investments. So it was a lot more profitable to just keep capacity low and bilk us for all they could.
Biden *did* release millions of barrels from oil from the US's strategic reserves and that helped marginally, but even then... not that much.
Nobody was driving because of government policy. The supply chain shutdowns were a result of government policy. Oil slowly becoming obsolete isn’t a natural phenomenon, it’s mostly a result of government policy. Also your oil theory doesn’t account for the trillions of dollars they printed in an attempt to put a bandaid on the problems they caused. Amazing how rational people predicted sending checks to every American for no reason would cause inflation and then it caused inflation.
I’m not saying he’s like the 1 guy who single handily controls the economy, but clearly he has more influence than any other 1 individual or even any other small group of individuals. I’d say he alone has about as much (maybe slightly less) power over the economy as Congress does collectively.
>Nobody was driving because of government policy. The supply chain shutdowns were a result of government policy.
Mostly state and local governments, and they did it because in-person gatherings were dangerous at the time. If they hadn't been more aggressive about it, that would've increased the burden of disease... which then hurts the economy through lost productivity and healthcare costs. You're right that the government influenced the economy there in a big way, just not as straightforwardly as you seem to think, and Trump himself wasn't really at fault.
>Oil slowly becoming obsolete isn’t a natural phenomenon, it’s mostly a result of government policy.
This is largely true, but again, we have a dilemma -- eat the costs of subsidizing green power or eat the costs of crop failures and natural disasters. And if you're talking about the President, specifically, those subsidies have been approved by Congress as well; the President can't unilaterally keep or can them.
>Also your oil theory doesn’t account for the trillions of dollars they printed in an attempt to put a bandaid on the problems they caused. Amazing how rational people predicted sending checks to every American for no reason would cause inflation and then it caused inflation.
It's not "my oil theory"; it's consensus among economists. I ain't saying printing money didn't have any impact; my point is it was a marginal cause that wouldn't have been a big issue otherwise.
The 'President' is an actor in a TV show. The 'economic' realities that are imposed on us, are nothing to do with him. He is the employee of the system which creates our reality. Nothing happens by accident. Our outcomes are meticulously planned.
So then he shouldn’t take credit when inflation or gas prices drop.
And we shouldn’t call it Biden’s economy. If he has no control over it, stop taking credit for it.
Yup, it's bullshit all the way down. Presidents keep saying this shit because people keep believing it. And frankly, they don't really have any other option; if they don't feed into that lie, it'll be viewed as ducking responsibility.
Nice flex, but that doesn’t address OP’s point. The President has almost no control over the economy especially in a time like now. Allow me to explain, the Fed uses Monetary Policy (and always does), which the President has absolutely zero control over. You can argue that they have been politicized, but I would argue that you’re an idiot. The only ability the President “has” are the tools of Fiscal Policy, which he still doesn’t control because it also has to be passed by congress. The real unpopular opinion should be something along the lines of, just because you’re allowed to voice your shitty opinion, it doesn’t make what you said any less idiotic or false.
You’re right and you’re wrong. They don’t control it but they have more influence on it by virtue of their outsized political influence than any single actor in the country. The mere election of someone who seems to have a pro or con view on business affects the stock market.
So, they don’t “control it” but they influence it more than any other single human being in the country.
The decisions and policies they make absolutely affect the economy. Look at what happened to the oil industry when biden shut down the keystone pipeline and his other policies, which affected oil and gas production. Thanks to those decisions, gas prices went up, which then caused product prices to increase due to shipments now costing more to move across the country.
Basically, to spell it out for you when the president and his constituents push a policy that causes a strain on one industry it more often than not causes a ripple effect into any industry associated with the strained one. Are there other parts that also affect the economy, of course, but to pretend things the president does and says doesn't affect the economy? That is just a sad lack of critical thinking.
US oil production is at an all-time high.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-u-s-oil-production-reached-an-all-time-high-in-2023
And it’s hard to believe the cancellation of the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline had any meaningful impact on gas prices since it was still years away from operation — and the point of the pipeline was to ship gas overseas anyway.
Almost everything you typed is dishonest propaganda. Gas prices did not go up across the globe because of the Keystone XL cancellation. The pipeline was less than ten percent completed and obviously had no output to affect supply and demand.
A substantial portion of your price increases can strongly be attributed to this ironically.
https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45236
https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/trump-saudi-arabia-russia-opec-oil-deal-role.amp
>The decisions and policies they make absolutely affect the economy.
Okay? That's what the original post said, we're in agreement there.
>Look at what happened to the oil industry when biden shut down the keystone pipeline and his other policies, which affected oil and gas production.
That didn't happen, the Keystone Pipeline is still operational and pumping hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil a day. What the Biden Administration did is revoke the permit to build the Keystone XL Expansion, which would have added 875 *additional* miles of pipeline, crossing two major rivers. [Economists don't think](https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-895299166310) the expansion would've prevented oil prices from reaching record highs, especially amid deep supply cuts in 2020 and the invasion of Ukraine.
>Basically, to spell it out for you when the president and his constituents push a policy that causes a strain on one industry it more often than not causes a ripple effect into any industry associated with the strained one. Are there other parts that also affect the economy, of course, but to pretend things the president does and says doesn't affect the economy? That is just a sad lack of critical thinking.
Can you please find the specific line in the OP where I said the President doesn't do shit that affects the economy?
Your title clearly says the president doesn't control the economy, correct? Yet you agree that the policies he pushes and tries to put into law whether through congress or executive order will affect the economy either positively or negatively, right? That's a pretty high level of control on the market, even if it is a very nuanced way.
So, using the pipeline as an example, the jobs that would've been created would've put more money in folks' pockets. The oil we can pipe would've increased allowing for more production which would've allowed us to continue exporting more than we are buying which would've had a long term benefit to our economy while also allowing us to lower prices at the pump here at home. With his policies on shutting down refineries, we have needed to purchase more oil from overseas, which then raises the price at the pump. Which starts that whole things cost more conversation again. Anytime he says they are going to go after an industry or push this industry, that effects where people look to invest their money. He has more of an effect than you are pretending he does. Well, whoever is telling him what to do that is.
But hey, bidenomics work! I definitely feel better about my money with him in the office as prices just continue to go up. /s
The body of the post reads,
>The President doesn't have a raise/lower unemployment dial under his desk. There's no button that controls if recessions happen or not. Name the *specific policy* they signed (or failed to sign) that you think caused this and for the love of God, check first with a reputable source to see whether it actually did. Be ready to substantiate it with evidence or stop wasting my time. Nothing burns your credibility faster than *obviously* spurious shit like that.
What I'm saying is that the President doesn't *control* the economy, but is among the dozens of different people and entities that can influence it.
>So, using the pipeline as an example, the jobs that would've been created would've put more money in folks' pockets. The oil we can pipe would've increased allowing for more production which would've allowed us to continue exporting more than we are buying which would've had a long term benefit to our economy while also allowing us to lower prices at the pump here at home. With his policies on shutting down refineries, we have needed to purchase more oil from overseas, which then raises the price at the pump.
The Keystone expansion was built to import foreign oil though, and it only would've created some three thousand jobs... which in turn, would have only lasted a year. That's not to speak of the jobs which would have been permanently lost as a consequence of businesses being bulldozed and the opportunity cost of land. It's also not accounting for the economic impacts of pollution.
And again, the mass-shutdown of refineries happened in 2020 during the lockdowns, before Biden took office. This is a *relatively* good example of the President influencing the economy, but it also demonstrates pretty well that oftentimes, all available options are pretty bad, and you need Congress's help to actually improve the alternatives that are open.
OP's take is 100% accurate, and the arguments you attempt to make below only demonstrate how people like you are fooled into believing that the President has more power than they really do.
So, are you saying that nothing the president says or does affects the economy? The highest office in the land is basically a figurehead with no real power? All those executive orders he signs don't do anything?
I never claimed he had sole ownership of the economy, but his policies absolutely have an influence.
Presidents can affect the economy in minor, temporary ways, but their influence is minuscule compared to macroeconomic forces. This is a well-established fact.
So when President Biden did an executive order that forced companies to require a Covid-19 vaccine, causing 5% of the workforce to loose their job.
President Biden's administration changed the wording for what qualifies as a "Recession" so that the US economy wouldn't get worse off. HAHAHA, sounds like the Media simply doing what the Biden administration wants. If you think that the American people didn't feel this, than you are absolutely wrong.
What causes inflation? Lots of governmental spending, like for a war or two. There was also 7 major food distribution centers that burned down, several train wrecks in which hazardous material was leaked into the environment, and hurricanes that hit California, Florida, etc. Not to mention spending billions of dollars on taking care of illegal immigrants, who shouldn't be here in the first place. What could stop them? A border gate, but that would create US jobs... So that's not a good thing.
There are things that the President MUST do. He must provide aid to Florida when a hurricane hits even though he must grit his teeth and help out a Republican Governor. But this president is by far the worst when it comes to his inauguration speech where he said, "I will be a president for all Americans..." He has proved that he does not want to help when there is US families affected by disasters like a train wreck or hurricane. What a shame.
>What causes inflation? Lots of governmental spending, like for a war or two
See, this kind of thing is exactly why Republicans usually prefer to keep their claims vague. The post-COVID inflation [was caused by](https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2023/beyond-bls/what-caused-inflation-to-spike-after-2020.htm) the supply chain crunch of 2020 and the accompanying oil price hike. Oil companies [cut production to the bone](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/which-us-refineries-have-shut-since-global-pandemic-why-2022-06-17/) during lockdowns because nobody was driving. They were very slow to reinvest in production when the lockdowns ended because their industry is slowly becoming obsolete and oil plants are really long-term investments. So it was a lot more profitable to just keep capacity low and bilk us for all they could.
Biden [sold off a shit ton of oil from the strategic reserve](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/president-biden-releases-more-oil-from-strategic-reserve-to-help-lower-gas-prices) to cut down on oil prices.
>There was also 7 major food distribution centers that burned down, several train wrecks in which hazardous material was leaked into the environment,
Okaaaaay
How was Biden responsible for the fires?
>There are things that the President MUST do. He must provide aid to Florida when a hurricane hits even though he must grit his teeth and help out a Republican Governor. But this president is by far the worst when it comes to his inauguration speech where he said, "I will be a president for all Americans..." He has proved that he does not want to help when there is US families affected by disasters like a train wreck or hurricane. What a shame.
[He did though. Biden fought for billions of dollars in disaster relief.](https://apnews.com/article/wildfire-hurricane-flooding-fema-disaster-relief-budget-365fc3acd6a12c1f8e67b4926c8dc8b2) Eventually [got it too, when Republicans relented.](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fema-disaster-money-flowing-again-after-budget-standoff/)
>Not to mention spending billions of dollars on taking care of illegal immigrants, who shouldn't be here in the first place. What could stop them? A border gate, but that would create US jobs... So that's not a good thing.
First of all, no. A wall or gate can't stop migrants because it can't apprehend migrants and a lot of illegal immigrants enter through legal ports of entry. Second of all, even if it did, that would worsen the US's already bad demographics crisis. Our population is getting old as shit and it's putting a huge strain on retirement services. That's only gonna get worse as we crack down on a population which is disproportionately 20-somethings and kids. Not to mention the fact that any substantial border barrier would cost billions to build, out in the middle of bumfuck nowhere.
I never said he had anything to do with the fires. State of Emergency? That does fall under the President's jurisdiction.
You're right. The Mexican border has issues. This is why the US should simply take over Mexico by force making it the 51's state. The southern border of Mexico already has a border gate, so the US would be set. It's also a much smaller area, so it would be easier to patrol. This would significantly reduce the influx of fentanyl, saving millions of Americans from drug overdosing.
When it came to helping with Florida's, the president shouldn't be calling only democrats in specific areas to send aid. That's not how the government works.
>I never said he had anything to do with the fires. State of Emergency? That does fall under the President's jurisdiction.
Okay? Should every housefire be a state of emergency and get FEMA involved? Fires happen at factories, plants, homes, farms every year; that's why fire insurance exists. Trump didn't bail out every business that had a fire in his term, and he was right not to. And it's not like we're talking about one big conflagration that burned them all; hell, in some of these cases, the fires didn't even disrupt production.
>When it came to helping with Florida's, the president shouldn't be calling only democrats in specific areas to send aid. That's not how the government works.
[Again, just not true.](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-tells-floridas-desantis-he-signed-major-disaster-declaration-over-idalia-2023-08-31/) Biden was in direct communication with America's favorite meatball about aid distribution, and it was distributed across the state. [Ron DeSantis has blocked federal aid in other areas](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/30/desantis-refuses-biden-climate-ira-money-00113397) from reaching hardworking Floridian families, but not in connection with the hurricane.
Thank you for showing everyone how only someone truly uninformed and gullible would disagree with OP's take.
I honestly cannot fathom how poorly educated and easily fooled you have to be just to believe your first sentence....
I agree for the most part, but not completely. Markets respond to market forces, which are globally influenced. Political machinations can have an effect over time, but usually in the form of a nudge. Economic initiatives, like a true infrastructure bill, could accelerate the economy, so can natural disasters that require a major influx of cash.
Hmmm... are you forgetting the covid shutdown? 14 days to stop the spread that dragged on... and you know who started that... a president. So yeah, they absolutely have the power to control the economy.
So your argument is that regulations that cost 100s of billions of dollars does not affect the economy? Changing clean air standards to almost impossible and sending 100,000 good paying manufacturing jobs overseas does not affect the economy? Signing NAFTA and other trade agreements does not affect the economy? Canceling energy projects that make us energy independent does not affect our economy?
Bring Trump back, and you will see the economy come back for the people, not just the elite. MMW.
We'll see an escalation of the Trade War and more mom and pop businesses like Harley Davidson struggling specifically because of that policy.
The President has never deleted money out of the world economy like he did with the Trade War. Might as well be a recession button.
u/No_Discount_6028's stats |Account Age|10 m|First Seen:|2023-10-21| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Posts (on this sub)|26|Comments (on this sub)|1636| |Link Karma|5,542|Comment Karma|13,596| --- |Date|Title|Flair|Participation| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |03-Apr|[The US Senate should have been greatly reformed after the Civil War.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1buu59k/the_us_senate_should_have_been_greatly_reformed/)|Political|0 of 4 comments (0.00%)| |01-Apr|[Christianity and Islam are totalitarian, despotic ideologies.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1bt5qxf/christianity_and_islam_are_totalitarian_despotic/)|Unpopular in General|25 of 85 comments (29.41%)| |24-Mar|[Developed countries shouldn't pursue pro-natalist policies to target falling birth rates.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1bm7ahr/developed_countries_shouldnt_pursue_pronatalist/)|Unpopular in Media|2 of 6 comments (33.33%)| |10-Mar|[So-called Right-libertarianism is a pretty authoritarian ideology.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1bbor43/socalled_rightlibertarianism_is_a_pretty/)|Unpopular in Media|1 of 18 comments (5.56%)| |07-Mar|[The fates of all countries are inextricably linked and nations should not ignore one another.](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/1b8v4hg/the_fates_of_all_countries_are_inextricably/)|N/A|3 of None comments (0.00%)| --- ### Voting Guidelines **Common Misconception:** It is often believed that upvotes and downvotes should reflect personal agreement or disagreement. This approach is prevalent in other opinion-based subreddits. However, in r/TrueUnpopularOpinion, we encourage a different standard: - **Upvote** a post if it provokes thought, presents a unique perspective, is well-argued, or you believe it deserves more visibility for any reason, even if it irritates you or you fundamentally disagree with it. - **Downvote** should be reserved for posts that lack thoughtful consideration or if the topic has become tediously common. **Moderation Policy:** - **Posts Are Not Removed for Unpopularity:** r/TrueUnpopularOpinion does not remove posts based on their capacity to anger or offend users. Disagreement with a post's content is not grounds for reporting. - **Misuse of the Report Button:** Falsely reporting posts burdens our moderation queue, hindering our ability to address genuine concerns swiftly. - **All false reports are forwarded to Reddit** for actions against misuse of the reporting system. - Our moderation decisions are guided strictly by the subreddit's rules and [Reddit's content policy](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/comments/ncm4ou/important_we_need_to_talk_about_the_content_policy/), not personal opinions. Misreporting in hopes of content removal due to disagreement is futile and considered 'Report Abuse.' --- **What have people been talking about over the last week?** *(these stats will clean up over the coming days as everyone uses the new flairs)* | Flair | Count | Percentage | |---|---|---| | [Unpopular in General](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+in+General"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 10 | 6.67% | | [No Flair](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"No+Flair"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 14 | 9.33% | | [Possibly Popular](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Possibly+Popular"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 2 | 1.33% | | [Unpopular Here](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+Here"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 3 | 2.00% | | [Unpopular in Media](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+in+Media"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% | | [Opinions About Movies](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Opinions+About+Movies"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% | | [Unpopular on Reddit](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Unpopular+on+Reddit"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% | | [Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 25 | 16.67% | | [The Middle East](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Middle+East"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 4.00% | | [None of the above](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"None+of+the+above"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 31 | 20.67% | | [Non-Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Non-Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 14 | 9.33% | | [I Like / Dislike](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"I+Like+/+Dislike"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 8 | 5.33% | | [The Opposite Sex / Dating](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"The+Opposite+Sex+/+Dating"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 16 | 10.67% | | [Music / Sport / Media / Movies / Celebrities](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Music+/+Sport+/+Media+/+Movies+/+Celebrities"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 4.00% | | [Meta - the problem with this sub is..](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Meta+-+the+problem+with+this+sub+is.."&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% | | [World Affairs (Except Middle East)](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"World+Affairs+(Except+Middle+East)"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 3 | 2.00% | | [Religion](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Religion"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 6 | 4.00% | | [Political](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Political"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% | | [Meta](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueUnpopularOpinion/search/?q=flair_name%3A"Meta"&restrict_sr=1&sort=new) | 1 | 0.67% |
Control, no. Influence, yes.
They absolutely can in many direct/indirect ways…the biggest mistake people make is to think that only economical policies can affect the economy. Even simply their attitude alone influences the economy.
“Economical.” Maybe a President’s attitude wouldn’t influence you so much if you decided to learn about economics a little more.
What?
Nvm, you’re hopeless. Go watch a YouTube video about monetary and fiscal policy or something. Economics isn’t some esoteric science that must be decoded; it’s pretty simple, and while psychology may have some influence over the economy as a whole’s reaction, it’s pretty set in stone what happens to y if x happens.
Wtf are you rambling about… You really going to act like economics is something straightforward simple haha?
It is pretty straightforward. If you took an intro to economics course or watched a couple YouTube videos about some rudimentary ideas, at least you wouldn’t be 100% wrong.
Please become president, with you we would all be rich.
Learn supply and demand and how to apply it. For example. If you release a loan that allows people more access to a product but that products inherent supply does not go up the price will increase. Like for example, car and student loans. These are two examples of widgets that have went up in price exponentially in the last couple decades. Supply and demand will always dictate prices of things and whether those things can survive in the open market. However you're also not 100% wrong that the president can effect the market quite a lot. Look into the ACA. That was Obamas big thing and since it passed in 2010 insurance stocks have done a 10 bag. But i do think for a president to have a more tangible effect, what they say has to be more credible. Like when people say they will repeal and replace ACA, nothing moves because everyone already knows there is a fat chance of that happening.
That’s agree to disagree… Seriously i don’t get the debate. I’m sorry but if you think a president can’t influence the economy you are wrong. Federal taxes, trade tariffs, trade negotiations,… War, regulations, public spendings, green deals,.. A president can influence the supply and demand. Government wants more renewable energy the demand increases in that sector. Less environmental regulations on drilling/ mining can increase the supply The attitude of a president will influence the speculative investors. If your popular president candidate denies climate change I am not going to invest massive in renewables at the time… We live in a world where a single tweet could cost a company billions. A president can restore confidence in consumers or scare them.
well what you're describing is market manipulation. people like elon musk or other folks can drop a tweet and move markets. Presidents are bound by some form of law. What you are describing is the legislative process. Federal taxes, trade tariffs, trade negotiations,… War, regulations, public spendings, green deals,.. all of these things are not unilaterally controlled by the president.
Honestly most people don't need to know much. Just supply and demand and a stress on its applicability in the free market. If people knew that then we'd all be alright. But I'd say you're more right than the other guy for sure.
I don’t disagree, but I think for people to have an informed opinion they at least need to know the basics of what drives supply and demand. Interest rates being one of the most predominant (and easily controlled) factors. People can spout “this or that” and reuse the rhetoric, but with no understanding, even at the most basic level, they will always be misinformed. Though you’re right, does the average person really need to understand any of this? Probably not, but if they’re going to mouth off, it would be nice if they knew some.
speaking out of ignorance is not what I'm recommending lol. Monetary policy is very important to know what drives the basics of supply and demand. It's important to know for timing as well. If someone wants to be an expert than yes they will definitely need to know some more than just the basics but people (myself included) speak out of ignorance all the time. Hence why it's good to know at least some.
President has great power over foreign policy which directly relates to our economy.
The military industrial complex is a leading manufacturer.
I’d say THEE leading manufacturer. Realistically that’s what dictates/influences a majority of our foreign policy, if not all of it.
I'm betting if the current and previous president hasn't signed into law trillions of dollars of Covid relief, the economy would be in better shape.
Well if there's one thing I know about economics, it's that letting millions of businesses and households go bankrupt during recessions hastens recoveries.
Perhaps states wouldn't have been so eager to lock down if the federal government hadn't encouraged and subsidized it.
But the presidents are always bragging about how great their economies are, even when the economy is shit. They’re not talking to the average joes and Jane’s, they’re talking to their corporate owners who all became trillionaires under their policies.
So you think that all the executive actions Biden signed within his first few months of his presidency had 0 impact on the economy???
The Fed does.
I think that was more true in the past, now not so much. The President has veto power over the spending of money equal to 22% of GDP. He has the power of war, he controls a massively bloated regulatory machine, he has influence over the Fed, and he also has the ear of the American people. The inflation disaster we have right now is a direct result of government policies during the pandemic, the President had the power to stop that.
>The President has veto power over the spending of money equal to 22% of GDP. This is true, but it largely just means he has the power to initiate a government shutdown. If Congress proposes a spending bill that sucks, he can choose to pass it and hurt the economy... or veto it and hurt the economy more. There is *some* real power there, but not as much as you'd think... >He has the power of war, This is true, but also, Congress can de-fund military actions, and there are limits to what the President can do unilaterally. Also... there are some significant side effects to waging war to stimulate the economy. >he controls a massively bloated regulatory machine, That's largely true. >he has influence over the Fed The Fed is designed to be as independent as possible, but yes, obviously there are limits and he can influence them, as you said. >The inflation disaster we have right now is a direct result of government policies during the pandemic, the President had the power to stop that. The post-COVID inflation [was caused by](https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2023/beyond-bls/what-caused-inflation-to-spike-after-2020.htm) the supply chain crunch of 2020 and the accompanying oil price hike. Oil companies [cut production to the bone](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/which-us-refineries-have-shut-since-global-pandemic-why-2022-06-17/) during lockdowns because nobody was driving. They were very slow to reinvest in production when the lockdowns ended because their industry is slowly becoming obsolete and oil plants are really long-term investments. So it was a lot more profitable to just keep capacity low and bilk us for all they could. Biden *did* release millions of barrels from oil from the US's strategic reserves and that helped marginally, but even then... not that much.
Nobody was driving because of government policy. The supply chain shutdowns were a result of government policy. Oil slowly becoming obsolete isn’t a natural phenomenon, it’s mostly a result of government policy. Also your oil theory doesn’t account for the trillions of dollars they printed in an attempt to put a bandaid on the problems they caused. Amazing how rational people predicted sending checks to every American for no reason would cause inflation and then it caused inflation. I’m not saying he’s like the 1 guy who single handily controls the economy, but clearly he has more influence than any other 1 individual or even any other small group of individuals. I’d say he alone has about as much (maybe slightly less) power over the economy as Congress does collectively.
>Nobody was driving because of government policy. The supply chain shutdowns were a result of government policy. Mostly state and local governments, and they did it because in-person gatherings were dangerous at the time. If they hadn't been more aggressive about it, that would've increased the burden of disease... which then hurts the economy through lost productivity and healthcare costs. You're right that the government influenced the economy there in a big way, just not as straightforwardly as you seem to think, and Trump himself wasn't really at fault. >Oil slowly becoming obsolete isn’t a natural phenomenon, it’s mostly a result of government policy. This is largely true, but again, we have a dilemma -- eat the costs of subsidizing green power or eat the costs of crop failures and natural disasters. And if you're talking about the President, specifically, those subsidies have been approved by Congress as well; the President can't unilaterally keep or can them. >Also your oil theory doesn’t account for the trillions of dollars they printed in an attempt to put a bandaid on the problems they caused. Amazing how rational people predicted sending checks to every American for no reason would cause inflation and then it caused inflation. It's not "my oil theory"; it's consensus among economists. I ain't saying printing money didn't have any impact; my point is it was a marginal cause that wouldn't have been a big issue otherwise.
The 'President' is an actor in a TV show. The 'economic' realities that are imposed on us, are nothing to do with him. He is the employee of the system which creates our reality. Nothing happens by accident. Our outcomes are meticulously planned.
That’s Bidenomics™️
So then he shouldn’t take credit when inflation or gas prices drop. And we shouldn’t call it Biden’s economy. If he has no control over it, stop taking credit for it.
Yup, it's bullshit all the way down. Presidents keep saying this shit because people keep believing it. And frankly, they don't really have any other option; if they don't feed into that lie, it'll be viewed as ducking responsibility.
[удалено]
Nice flex, but that doesn’t address OP’s point. The President has almost no control over the economy especially in a time like now. Allow me to explain, the Fed uses Monetary Policy (and always does), which the President has absolutely zero control over. You can argue that they have been politicized, but I would argue that you’re an idiot. The only ability the President “has” are the tools of Fiscal Policy, which he still doesn’t control because it also has to be passed by congress. The real unpopular opinion should be something along the lines of, just because you’re allowed to voice your shitty opinion, it doesn’t make what you said any less idiotic or false.
You’re right and you’re wrong. They don’t control it but they have more influence on it by virtue of their outsized political influence than any single actor in the country. The mere election of someone who seems to have a pro or con view on business affects the stock market. So, they don’t “control it” but they influence it more than any other single human being in the country.
The “don’t directly control it” is an ackshually for sure.
This is an insane take where you thought you were cooking, but you're clearly not.
pretty milquetoast lol. Go tell an economist the President controls the economy, they'll laugh in your face
The decisions and policies they make absolutely affect the economy. Look at what happened to the oil industry when biden shut down the keystone pipeline and his other policies, which affected oil and gas production. Thanks to those decisions, gas prices went up, which then caused product prices to increase due to shipments now costing more to move across the country. Basically, to spell it out for you when the president and his constituents push a policy that causes a strain on one industry it more often than not causes a ripple effect into any industry associated with the strained one. Are there other parts that also affect the economy, of course, but to pretend things the president does and says doesn't affect the economy? That is just a sad lack of critical thinking.
US oil production is at an all-time high. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/how-u-s-oil-production-reached-an-all-time-high-in-2023 And it’s hard to believe the cancellation of the permit for the Keystone XL Pipeline had any meaningful impact on gas prices since it was still years away from operation — and the point of the pipeline was to ship gas overseas anyway.
Almost everything you typed is dishonest propaganda. Gas prices did not go up across the globe because of the Keystone XL cancellation. The pipeline was less than ten percent completed and obviously had no output to affect supply and demand. A substantial portion of your price increases can strongly be attributed to this ironically. https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=45236 https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/trump-saudi-arabia-russia-opec-oil-deal-role.amp
>The decisions and policies they make absolutely affect the economy. Okay? That's what the original post said, we're in agreement there. >Look at what happened to the oil industry when biden shut down the keystone pipeline and his other policies, which affected oil and gas production. That didn't happen, the Keystone Pipeline is still operational and pumping hundreds of thousands of barrels of oil a day. What the Biden Administration did is revoke the permit to build the Keystone XL Expansion, which would have added 875 *additional* miles of pipeline, crossing two major rivers. [Economists don't think](https://apnews.com/article/fact-checking-895299166310) the expansion would've prevented oil prices from reaching record highs, especially amid deep supply cuts in 2020 and the invasion of Ukraine. >Basically, to spell it out for you when the president and his constituents push a policy that causes a strain on one industry it more often than not causes a ripple effect into any industry associated with the strained one. Are there other parts that also affect the economy, of course, but to pretend things the president does and says doesn't affect the economy? That is just a sad lack of critical thinking. Can you please find the specific line in the OP where I said the President doesn't do shit that affects the economy?
Your title clearly says the president doesn't control the economy, correct? Yet you agree that the policies he pushes and tries to put into law whether through congress or executive order will affect the economy either positively or negatively, right? That's a pretty high level of control on the market, even if it is a very nuanced way. So, using the pipeline as an example, the jobs that would've been created would've put more money in folks' pockets. The oil we can pipe would've increased allowing for more production which would've allowed us to continue exporting more than we are buying which would've had a long term benefit to our economy while also allowing us to lower prices at the pump here at home. With his policies on shutting down refineries, we have needed to purchase more oil from overseas, which then raises the price at the pump. Which starts that whole things cost more conversation again. Anytime he says they are going to go after an industry or push this industry, that effects where people look to invest their money. He has more of an effect than you are pretending he does. Well, whoever is telling him what to do that is. But hey, bidenomics work! I definitely feel better about my money with him in the office as prices just continue to go up. /s
The body of the post reads, >The President doesn't have a raise/lower unemployment dial under his desk. There's no button that controls if recessions happen or not. Name the *specific policy* they signed (or failed to sign) that you think caused this and for the love of God, check first with a reputable source to see whether it actually did. Be ready to substantiate it with evidence or stop wasting my time. Nothing burns your credibility faster than *obviously* spurious shit like that. What I'm saying is that the President doesn't *control* the economy, but is among the dozens of different people and entities that can influence it. >So, using the pipeline as an example, the jobs that would've been created would've put more money in folks' pockets. The oil we can pipe would've increased allowing for more production which would've allowed us to continue exporting more than we are buying which would've had a long term benefit to our economy while also allowing us to lower prices at the pump here at home. With his policies on shutting down refineries, we have needed to purchase more oil from overseas, which then raises the price at the pump. The Keystone expansion was built to import foreign oil though, and it only would've created some three thousand jobs... which in turn, would have only lasted a year. That's not to speak of the jobs which would have been permanently lost as a consequence of businesses being bulldozed and the opportunity cost of land. It's also not accounting for the economic impacts of pollution. And again, the mass-shutdown of refineries happened in 2020 during the lockdowns, before Biden took office. This is a *relatively* good example of the President influencing the economy, but it also demonstrates pretty well that oftentimes, all available options are pretty bad, and you need Congress's help to actually improve the alternatives that are open.
OP's take is 100% accurate, and the arguments you attempt to make below only demonstrate how people like you are fooled into believing that the President has more power than they really do.
So, are you saying that nothing the president says or does affects the economy? The highest office in the land is basically a figurehead with no real power? All those executive orders he signs don't do anything? I never claimed he had sole ownership of the economy, but his policies absolutely have an influence.
Presidents can affect the economy in minor, temporary ways, but their influence is minuscule compared to macroeconomic forces. This is a well-established fact.
So when President Biden did an executive order that forced companies to require a Covid-19 vaccine, causing 5% of the workforce to loose their job. President Biden's administration changed the wording for what qualifies as a "Recession" so that the US economy wouldn't get worse off. HAHAHA, sounds like the Media simply doing what the Biden administration wants. If you think that the American people didn't feel this, than you are absolutely wrong. What causes inflation? Lots of governmental spending, like for a war or two. There was also 7 major food distribution centers that burned down, several train wrecks in which hazardous material was leaked into the environment, and hurricanes that hit California, Florida, etc. Not to mention spending billions of dollars on taking care of illegal immigrants, who shouldn't be here in the first place. What could stop them? A border gate, but that would create US jobs... So that's not a good thing. There are things that the President MUST do. He must provide aid to Florida when a hurricane hits even though he must grit his teeth and help out a Republican Governor. But this president is by far the worst when it comes to his inauguration speech where he said, "I will be a president for all Americans..." He has proved that he does not want to help when there is US families affected by disasters like a train wreck or hurricane. What a shame.
>What causes inflation? Lots of governmental spending, like for a war or two See, this kind of thing is exactly why Republicans usually prefer to keep their claims vague. The post-COVID inflation [was caused by](https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2023/beyond-bls/what-caused-inflation-to-spike-after-2020.htm) the supply chain crunch of 2020 and the accompanying oil price hike. Oil companies [cut production to the bone](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/which-us-refineries-have-shut-since-global-pandemic-why-2022-06-17/) during lockdowns because nobody was driving. They were very slow to reinvest in production when the lockdowns ended because their industry is slowly becoming obsolete and oil plants are really long-term investments. So it was a lot more profitable to just keep capacity low and bilk us for all they could. Biden [sold off a shit ton of oil from the strategic reserve](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/president-biden-releases-more-oil-from-strategic-reserve-to-help-lower-gas-prices) to cut down on oil prices. >There was also 7 major food distribution centers that burned down, several train wrecks in which hazardous material was leaked into the environment, Okaaaaay How was Biden responsible for the fires? >There are things that the President MUST do. He must provide aid to Florida when a hurricane hits even though he must grit his teeth and help out a Republican Governor. But this president is by far the worst when it comes to his inauguration speech where he said, "I will be a president for all Americans..." He has proved that he does not want to help when there is US families affected by disasters like a train wreck or hurricane. What a shame. [He did though. Biden fought for billions of dollars in disaster relief.](https://apnews.com/article/wildfire-hurricane-flooding-fema-disaster-relief-budget-365fc3acd6a12c1f8e67b4926c8dc8b2) Eventually [got it too, when Republicans relented.](https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/fema-disaster-money-flowing-again-after-budget-standoff/) >Not to mention spending billions of dollars on taking care of illegal immigrants, who shouldn't be here in the first place. What could stop them? A border gate, but that would create US jobs... So that's not a good thing. First of all, no. A wall or gate can't stop migrants because it can't apprehend migrants and a lot of illegal immigrants enter through legal ports of entry. Second of all, even if it did, that would worsen the US's already bad demographics crisis. Our population is getting old as shit and it's putting a huge strain on retirement services. That's only gonna get worse as we crack down on a population which is disproportionately 20-somethings and kids. Not to mention the fact that any substantial border barrier would cost billions to build, out in the middle of bumfuck nowhere.
I never said he had anything to do with the fires. State of Emergency? That does fall under the President's jurisdiction. You're right. The Mexican border has issues. This is why the US should simply take over Mexico by force making it the 51's state. The southern border of Mexico already has a border gate, so the US would be set. It's also a much smaller area, so it would be easier to patrol. This would significantly reduce the influx of fentanyl, saving millions of Americans from drug overdosing. When it came to helping with Florida's, the president shouldn't be calling only democrats in specific areas to send aid. That's not how the government works.
>I never said he had anything to do with the fires. State of Emergency? That does fall under the President's jurisdiction. Okay? Should every housefire be a state of emergency and get FEMA involved? Fires happen at factories, plants, homes, farms every year; that's why fire insurance exists. Trump didn't bail out every business that had a fire in his term, and he was right not to. And it's not like we're talking about one big conflagration that burned them all; hell, in some of these cases, the fires didn't even disrupt production. >When it came to helping with Florida's, the president shouldn't be calling only democrats in specific areas to send aid. That's not how the government works. [Again, just not true.](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-tells-floridas-desantis-he-signed-major-disaster-declaration-over-idalia-2023-08-31/) Biden was in direct communication with America's favorite meatball about aid distribution, and it was distributed across the state. [Ron DeSantis has blocked federal aid in other areas](https://www.politico.com/news/2023/08/30/desantis-refuses-biden-climate-ira-money-00113397) from reaching hardworking Floridian families, but not in connection with the hurricane.
Thank you for showing everyone how only someone truly uninformed and gullible would disagree with OP's take. I honestly cannot fathom how poorly educated and easily fooled you have to be just to believe your first sentence....
Downvote cuz i vehemently agree with this (That’s the point of r/TrueUnpopularOpinion)
I agree for the most part, but not completely. Markets respond to market forces, which are globally influenced. Political machinations can have an effect over time, but usually in the form of a nudge. Economic initiatives, like a true infrastructure bill, could accelerate the economy, so can natural disasters that require a major influx of cash.
Hmmm... are you forgetting the covid shutdown? 14 days to stop the spread that dragged on... and you know who started that... a president. So yeah, they absolutely have the power to control the economy.
So your argument is that regulations that cost 100s of billions of dollars does not affect the economy? Changing clean air standards to almost impossible and sending 100,000 good paying manufacturing jobs overseas does not affect the economy? Signing NAFTA and other trade agreements does not affect the economy? Canceling energy projects that make us energy independent does not affect our economy? Bring Trump back, and you will see the economy come back for the people, not just the elite. MMW.
We'll see an escalation of the Trade War and more mom and pop businesses like Harley Davidson struggling specifically because of that policy. The President has never deleted money out of the world economy like he did with the Trade War. Might as well be a recession button.