When Economists Pick a Political Candidate, Their Analysis is Tainted by Their Candidate’s Biases: Leftist Economists and Trump Haters
Predicting what the economy is going to be like over the next six months is common, knowing with a reasonable degree of certainty what actually will happen, is next to impossible. This dismal probability assessment does not prevent economists like Simon Johnson (Professor at MIT Sloan) from pedaling their opinions.
Preposterously, Simon says, “the election of Donald Trump in the US – would likely cause the stock market to crash and plunge the world into recession.” If Trump wins, “we should expect a big markdown in expected future earnings for a wide range of stocks – and a likely crash in the broader market.”
As the late philosopher, ML Kotschade was fond of saying, “opinions are like assholes, everyone has one”– so it is with Simon and his pro-Clinton piece. Truth be told, Trump’s bold and promising proposals would likely bolster the economy in the United States (I have an asshole too).
Simon writes, “Growth in the US, as reported by the IMF, was 2.6% in 2015, and is forecast to slip to 1.6% this year before rebounding slightly to 2.2% in 2017. There has been a long steady recovery from the 2008 financial crisis, but the effects of that collapse still linger.” Then the writer concludes, “Trump promises to boost US growth immediately to 4-5%, but this is pure fantasy. It is far more likely that his anti-trade policies would cause a sharp slowdown, much like the British are experiencing.” Such gibberish!
OUR FREE OPINION
Simon’s numbers emanate from biased theories, numbers, charts, statistics and an apparent dislike for Trump. They are to be disregarded as more leftist propaganda. It is evident to a typical person that more jobs and incentives, as urged by Trump, would positively affect the economy– only biased observers would conclude otherwise.