Not a "dissenter" per se, just a rational human trying to draw connections:
In service positions, I could see a rise in wages attributed to those jobs that might have previously been filled with migrants.
I might see legal immigration also being discouraged, but to be honest that includes tourism from abroad which is shrinking and potentially having a negative impact on the service sector.
The only direct _policy_ link I can see is not a policy but rather a "business friendly" climate that might lead companies to start to invest more, understanding that they probably won't be taxed or regulated more heavily in the next 3 years.
That, plus cheap credit (a big overheat risk IMO) means opportunities for growth.
In terms of actual policy, I'd say not much has happened but rather the economy is now recovering from the housing crisis and growth has picked up again across the board. This was occurring before Trump, and will continue until another systemic issue occurs and people panic I'd imagine.
That said, in my opinion, Presidents rarely have much to do with economic outcomes except to either inject risk / instability with policy initiatives or pronouncements. Some big policies have costs, but most of the day to day impacts are quite spread out. There has been no action yet on health care or taxes that would influence employer direct costs. Perhaps some regulation has not been implemented and some executive orders rolled back, but nothing that would impact markets.
One way that Trump helped is that the illegal migration rate dropped as soon as he came into office. He scared people out of even trying. You've also got his halt to the ever-expanding regulatory environment and his opposition to the TPP.
However, just to show that with the right zoom level, you can make data show you anything, look at 3 year graph, and it shows that up until Nov 2016, the graph was flat-lining, even with some large dips, but then it started going up and has been doing so since. I am sure Trump supporters will say "see, there's your cause!".
And maybe they are right somewhat. This is the stock market, so perceptions, and perceptions of perceptions of future income get folded into the price. So maybe a hope of a more business friendly environment was started to be factored in.
One thing I have little doubt of is that had the market done the opposite and gone down the same amount, every media outlet and Reddit's politics subs would immediately become macroeconomic experts and blame everything on Trump. The reason I say it is because there was a dip the night of the election, and I clearly remember how MSNBC hosts printed out after-hours and Japan stock market results on paper and happily were telling people how their 401k will burn, and jobs will be lost and how they, how had just had a major failure predicting the outcome of the election, had finally validated themselves regarding the stock market crash. But then the very next day the stock market shot up and has been going up since. That's why you don't really find them talking much about the economy. This was one of the surprising articles, and even that from a British company.
yeah i remember that election morning. upset liberals were saying how the market is going to be down 2000 points, etc and pointing to pre-market price changes. having invested before, I know you cant trust pre-market numbers at all, its extremely volatile.
i say that as a fly on the wall. i feel like i am outside some bubble where everyone flips out about the smallest things, and they forget that they did it at all. try asking people about how they flipped out about the premarket trading the day after the election and people are oblivious
In the US, the president (wrongly) gets evaluated on the economy, as if he were the only one that controls it, and as if it responded almost instantly to his direction. It's false every time, whether praise or blame, whatever the party of the president.
In particular, in this case, the rise started before Trump assumed office, so it seems reasonable to say that no, he didn't cause it.
also the massive increase in stock prices, which some attribute to things trump might do. companies do act very differently when their stock is doing well - hire more employees, take on more projects, etc. when stock is down - lay off employees, cut costs
Please, polite answers only. I'm just a foreigner that want to understand a little more.