Demolition: Bonus-Paying CEO Schools Pelosi on Economics

|
|
Posted: Jan 16, 2018 10:25 AM
Demolition: Bonus-Paying CEO Schools Pelosi on Economics

An appropriate bookend to yesterday's post, which mentioned the aspiring Speaker's "crumbs" comment, an instant Pelosi classic.  Throughout the tax reform debate, liberals pounded the table insisting that corporate tax cuts would not benefit workers or consumers -- just fat cat shareholders and executives.  But much like they were disastrously wrong about how much tax reform would benefit working and middle income households, they've also been proven wrong on the corporate side, as literally millions of Americans workers have already received bonuses, wage increases, improved bonuses and other concrete benefits.  (Incidentally, if you missed it earlier, this clip juxtaposing liberal talking points with actual outcomes, it's worth watching, if only for the pure schadenfreude and to aid future assessments of credibility).  

How are Democrats dealing with reality's immediate, real-time refutation of their scare tactics and bogus predictions?  By ignoring them completely, by downplaying them by focusing on other issues ('s***hole,' another instance of Trump being his own worst enemy), or by making bone-headed remarks like Pelosi's, which only highlights her own elitist condescension and aloofness.  Fox Business Network invited Waste Management CEO James Fish on the air to react to what Pelosi said, breaking down whether his company's investments in its workforce could reasonably be characterized as "pathetic" or "crumbs."  The clip begins with anchor Liz Claman mocking the San Francisco leftist's strange use of the odd phrase "put the schmooze on," then proceeds from there:

Claman asks Fish how he'd reply to Pelosi's comments if she deigned to meet with him, and his answer is terrific -- polite, informative, and devastating.  He calmly explains three points: (1) The tens of thousands of employees receiving $2,000 tax reform-inspired bonuses are working people -- "drivers, helpers on the back of trucks, recycle workers, landfill workers, customer service agents" -- who earn $40-$60k annually.  An extra two grand in their pockets (in addition to their tax cuts) is a big deal.  "We're giving [these bonuses] to those folks because not only because they're hardworking, but they don't participate in our annual bonus plans, which typically are for salaried employees," he says.  (2) Injecting $68 million into the economy in the form of augmented income for middle class employees has a stimulative effect on the broader economy.  (3) "From a shareholder standpoint, this is good for us because retention is always an issue for our company. It's always an issue for companies that employ drivers and hourly employees like these, so this is good for us in terms of retention."  He goes on to say that turnover in Waste Management's ranks often occurs during an employee's first two years with the company, so "hopefully this encourages them to stay."  

Thus concludes a compelling economics lesson for an out-of-touch politician, delivered in a tidy package of less than two minutes.  Meanwhile, President Trump tweeted out a polling data point from Quinnipiac last week regarding Americans' sky high economic outlook:


This prompted a round of "actually..." replies from journalists, who noted that respondents in the same survey split (49/40) on whether President Obama or Trump deserves more credit for the country's thriving economy (it also shows Democrats with a hefty midterm lead on the generic ballot).  Given the two men's disparate personal favorability numbers, I'd argue that this is actually a pretty strong outcome for Trump, especially since he hasn't yet completed his first year in office.  The editors of Investors Business Daily also echo the sentiments of a number of economists who've made the case that the current president and his administration deserve a good deal of the credit:

The recession ended six months after Obama took office, but the recovery he presided over for the following 7 1/2 years was the worst since World War II. Yearly GDP growth never once reached 3%, job growth was anemic, wages stagnated, and unemployment dropped mainly because so many people left the workforce. Then Trump unexpectedly won the election, promising to undo most of Obama's economic policies — deregulating, cutting taxes, etc. Almost immediately, business optimism shot up and the stock market roared. And now with the tax cuts on the books, dozens of major companies have handed out bonuses to hundreds of thousands of workers and announced pay hikes — with Wal-Mart (the country's largest employer) boosting its starting wage to $11...None of this would be happening if Hillary Clinton — who promised to raise taxes and impose still more regulations — were president, and all of it will help stimulate economic growth in the months ahead. No matter what anyone thinks about Trump, he clearly deserves credit for much of the economic gains we're seeing today.

This president is self-destructive in so many ways, but a fair assessment of his early tenure in office simply cannot look away from positive policy outcomes: