Image 01 Image 03

Bad News for Democrats: U.S. economy trumps Hong Kong’s as “most competitive in the world”

Bad News for Democrats: U.S. economy trumps Hong Kong’s as “most competitive in the world”

It’s the economy, stupid (they once said)

The U.S. has trumped Hong Kong to retake first place among the world’s most competitive economies, thanks to faster economic growth and deregulation that is promoting innovation.

The Switzerland-based IMD World Competitiveness Center, which conducted the analysis, had Singapore, the Netherlands, and Switzerland rounding out the top 5 spots.

Hong Kong, scoring first in categories for government and business efficiency, held an edge over regional rival Singapore, which kept its No. 3 spot from 2017. Rounding out the top five were the Netherlands, which jumped one spot, and Switzerland, which tumbled three slots as it endures a slowdown in exports and concerns about its potential relocation of research and development facilities.

The U.S., which reclaimed the No. 1 spot for the first time since 2015, scored especially well in international investment, domestic economy and scientific infrastructure sub-categories while earning below-average marks in public finance and prices.

The renewed top ranking aligns with the positive U.S. growth narrative over the past year. Growth averaged 2.9 percent in the four quarters through March, versus 2 percent in the prior period.

There is even more #WINNING to report: 71% of global chief financial officers believe the American economy is going to remain robust for the next 3 years at least.

Of the 497 CFOs across 30 countries surveyed by Zurich Insurance Group, EY and the Atlantic Council, 71 percent expected continued improvement in the U.S. business environment over the next three years, while 61 percent “felt confident or extremely confident about investing in the U.S.”

…A decade after the financial crisis, corporate players cited global economic recovery, domestic tax reform and deregulation as core factors contributing to the strong sentiment gauged in the report, entitled “Borders vs Barriers: Navigating uncertainty in the U.S. business environment.”

The respondents came from all industry sectors in foreign and domestic companies, and roughly half had investments in the U.S.

“A majority — 68 percent — of CFOs say U.S. tax reform will have a positive impact on their bottom line,” the report said.

About half of companies benefiting from tax savings said they would use them to re-invest in plants and equipment, while almost two-thirds of those with U.S. employees said they planned to increase their headcount over the next six months.

Perhaps this explains why the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta is forecasting economic growth will exceed 4% for the current 2nd quarter of 2018.

So, as we wrap-up the first half of 2018 this month, we have ever reason to believe that the American economy will remain MAGA-nificent.

The only people who will be upset by this news are the Democrats and their media minions, who have been wish nothing but disaster for President Trump and his policies since his upset win in 2016. It will be interesting to see if any media outlet will feature the IMD World Competitiveness Center report, the Zurich Insurance Group survey, the Federal Reserve Back of Atlanta’s projections.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Clearly, the U.S. results omitted California.

Hmm, one more of these and it will be bad news for them.

Henry Hawkins | May 28, 2018 at 10:06 pm

This news is a definite ‘spike this’ story at CNN, NBC, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, etc., unless it becomes so talked about they’re forced to cover it, at which point they’ll pitch it briefly and from the negative with chyrons and headlines like: FEDERAL RESERVE BANK PREDICTS TRUMP ECONOMY IN CURRENT QUARTER WILL REACH ONLY 4%… or… ONLY THREE FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WILLING TO PREDICT GROWTH FOR TRUMP ECONOMY.

They’ll just call it ‘obama’s economy’

There was a YUGE bank of pent-up economic goodness waiting for anybody-but-Barracula!

It’s too bad that the growth could be greater, but for the uncertainty injected into the whole deal by T-rumpian Bernie Sander’s “economics”.

You should ask yourself, “What might have been…?”

    Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2018 at 1:27 am

    The progs favorite enabler and all around fool speaks.

    Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2018 at 1:30 am

    “You should ask yourself, “What might have been…?””

    You should ask yourself, “Why are my Trump predictions always wrong…?”

    Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2018 at 6:42 am

    Sorry, Butt-hurt Barri, that was a thought question, which clearly excludes you. It isn’t meant to, of course, you just chose for it to. So you lie, stupidly and aggressively, about the questioner. Your goal is obviously to shut down thinking, like any slavish cultist.

    Here’s another one you won’t even be able to tolerate thinking people considering, as actual American citizens should; given that Duh Donald is POTUS, and that his tariff tantrums hurt American consumers and businesses, shouldn’t we encourage T-rump to adopt a course of liberty and sound economics?

    Outside of a very few big union and other VERY special interests, that would only serve to expand our economic recovery, while merely allowing Americans the use of their own property and choices.

      Personally, I think the only one being “slavish” here is you…holding onto your old, outdated opinions of who and what President Trump is.

      It has been very clear to those of us who follow President Trump without hate or disdain that he has grown in the office. I think the campaign transformed him, and that he has really grown in office…and has much more grace now than when he started.

      You are confusing the “tools” that Trump uses, with the man.

      The results (hostages home, economy booming, wars ending) show that he is everything opposite of your assertions…which have remained changeless through the course of Trump’s political career.

      You still hate President Trump? That’s OK, he is still going to work on your behalf because he loves America and Americans.

        Ragspierre in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 29, 2018 at 9:30 am

        It’s sweet of you to share your thoughts, such as they are.

        You’ll forgive me…and not ascribe my thinking to “hate”…for not agreeing. Or not.

        Would you not join me in encouraging T-rump to follow a pattern of liberty and sound economics?

        Ragspierre in reply to Leslie Eastman. | May 29, 2018 at 9:38 am

        “That’s OK, he is still going to work on your behalf because he loves America and Americans.”

        Woodrow Wilson would be your kinda guy, too. SUPER nationalist-populist who “loved American and Americans”…in his own way…


          Stop attacking LI authors, Rags. It won’t end well for you.

          As to your insanely bizarre reference to Woodrow Wilson, . . . wtf? That makes exactly zero sense in relation to what Leslie said.

          Wilson, as you well know, was a Democrat progressive, a racist who re-segretated our military and was a proponent of eugenics, and who was a fascist before fascism was a thing. He was a disgrace, but one thing he was not was a nationalist populist as we understand the term today. Even as the term was understood in his day (completely differently than it is understood today). Wilson’s populism was rooted in his progressivism and only paid lip service to the needs and will of the people.

          Your point is specious and laughable, in other words. Oooh, someone called Trump a “nationalist populist” that must mean he’s just like Woodrow Wilson. Good grief, the holes in this troll are a mile high and a mile wide.

          Here’s a fun exercise: Shakespeare wrote plays. You know who else wrote plays? That commie loon “Bertolt” Brecht. Wow, who knew Shakespeare was a commie loon just like Brecht?! And so long before communism even existed on the planet?!

          Hey, Andrew Jackson was also a populist. That baahhh-stid was just like Trump. And just like Woodrow Wilson. Just like them both! Exactly the same! You know who else was an ebil populist? Ronald Reagan! And Woodrow Wilson. Peas in a pod, those four. Exactly the same!

          Your comments to Leslie were notably condescending (right up there with your suggesting an LI commenter ask her husband to explain things to her).

          You wrote:

          It’s sweet of you to share your thoughts, such as they are.

          Ah, yes, “such as they are.” Newsflash: Leslie can think circles around you in her sleep, yet you condescend to her like this? Seriously?

          You also wrote:

          Woodrow Wilson would be your kinda guy, too. SUPER nationalist-populist who “loved American and Americans”…in his own way…

          Wilson, as you well know, was a despicable, racist, eugenicist and abortion supporting progressive democrat. So, yeah, saying he’s Leslie’s “kind of guy” is a ridiculously insulting comment. Right up there with, “wow, Charles Manson would be your kinda guy, too.” These examples aren’t “attacks” in that you didn’t insult her with a sexual slur or by directly calling her names, but it would take a moron not to see what you mean here.

          Rags, are you seriously pretending that “national-populist” means the same thing today that it did in the Progressive Era? Do you think we all just fell off the turnip truck? Next you’ll be telling us that today’s Democratic Party is just like the party of JFK.

          You are certainly aware that such labels change, so why pretend that you aren’t? Do you think you seem intelligent by making such wildly incorrect (and shockingly unintelligent) claims? I don’t get it.

          Dude, you really want to have this debate? Shrug. Cool, I love the smell of Ragspalm in the morning.

          You wrote:

          If Wilson were around today, how would he differ from Duh Donald? And, again, you simply lie like a wet dog is saying I put them in identity. And you know it.

          Addressing only the first part of this (because the rest is incoherent blather): Has Trump desegregated our military? No? There’s one. Has Trump tried to get us out of various UN craziness that Wilson would have loved? Erm, yeah, he has. There’s two (and three, he’s bucked the UN at least twice). Would Wilson have moved the U.. S. embassy to Jerusalem? Wilson was an avid and bizarrely proud anti-Semite, so no. That’s four. I can go on and on, but what’s the point? Comparing Trump to Wilson is patently ridiculous on its face.

          Now, TRY to deal with the #reality. Duh Donald, in pure authoritarian AND DICTATORIAL fashion, has imposed (suspended by his whim) tariffs that harm EVERY American consumer and business (save a few favored ones).

          THIS blows up uncertainty for the entire economy, and acts as an anchor to what could be greater expansion.

          That’s the point, the truth, and you flucking well know it.

          Now, TRY to TRUTHFULLY deal with what I HAVE said, not your lying depiction of what I said.

          What? This is word salad, Rags.

          No tariffs have yet been imposed or suspended (you seem to think that proposed tariffs were suspended or something?). Rags; what are you talking about? Anchor for what? Expansion of what? You are not making sense. So far, the Trump admin is talking (we usually refer to this process as “trade talks”), but what has actually been implemented that would justify your crazed TDS pearl-clutching? What specific action are you so upset about? I’m not doubting that there is some unilateral Trump tariff action that might be harmful, but your ravings are not helpful. Include a link here so that I can look at it.

          Heh, so you mean the ongoing trade talks that have not resulted in any tariffs, just rumors and threats of tariffs? And you mean that you are rending your garments over trade talks? Over nothing? Again. Got it.

          Get back to me when something actually happens, Rags.

          Not quite so daft that I imagine any LI author shares your view of President Trump. I’m still smh over that one.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2018 at 1:36 pm

          Yeh. Heh, heh. That lie is just SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooo cute.

          Meanwhile, you still CANNOT address the point I reised. So you deflect and attack.

          Poor old lying thing…

          Don’t be ridiculous, Rags. Of course I know what is going on with Trump and tariffs. Unlike you, however, I am not yanking out my hair and rending my garments while perched atop a stool and clutching my pearls. Nothing is done yet, Rags. All is still in negotiation, and the stuff you are setting yourself on fire over is just part of that negotiation process.

          As a fan of our articles, you might want to refer to the LI post I wrote about the Trump admin putting trade talks on hold and suspending tariffs. The tariffs in questions were not levied, Rags, they were pending, and this decision put that tariff action on hold. What is wrong with you? You have to know this. It’s not some sort of secret, right? Your TDS has made you not only unreasonable but irrational. The suspension of the process of enactment is what happened, Rags. Here’s a fun exercise: do a little search on when the tariffs were set to go into effect.

          Go ahead, it will be fun. I’ll wait.

          Do you get it yet? Trump is wheeling and dealing, and your prissy hissy fits are ridiculously laughable. Wait and see what actually happens before lifting your skirts and leaping on the nearest stool.

          Despite your bizarre gloating over my not addressing this point, the answer is simple: I didn’t address this because you come off like an idiot, Rags. I was trying to do you a favor, but what’s the point?

          Personally, my second favorite President is Calvin Coolidge. You know, the one who said, “the business of America is business.”

          Trump is now my first favorite! And Fuzzy kindly explained to you about Wilson, which I appreciate. The Legal Insurrection editors are outstanding.

          Ragspierre in reply to Ragspierre. | May 29, 2018 at 7:02 pm

          Of course, Leslie! He had you at “Hello”! You’ve been a pom-pom girl ever since.


          Would you not join me in encouraging T-rump to follow a pattern of liberty and sound economics?

          Like Coolidge and CONTRA Wilson?

      Barry in reply to Ragspierre. | May 30, 2018 at 4:46 pm

      “Sorry, Butt-hurt Barri, that was a thought question, which clearly excludes you.”

      Clearly it didn’t. I responded with what everyone who “thinks” knows to be true.

      “So you lie, stupidly and aggressively, about the questioner.”

      All truth. You are the progs best friend, always on their side.

      “Your goal is obviously to shut down thinking, like any slavish cultist.”

      No, my goal, such that it is here, is to have you expose yourself for the mean, nasty, hateful person you are. Thanks for helping me realize my goal.

      “…shouldn’t we encourage T-rump to adopt a course of liberty and sound economics?”

      Certainly. But that is not what you do.

And democrats are just dying to get into office to throw a billion pound millstone around the neck of all that prosperity. People start getting kinda uppity when they start getting some money and some independence from daddy government.

a competitive economy is bad, because that means there might be winners and losers, and that isn’t fair.

we need the government to step in and make sure everyone has an equal chance at success.


    Vascaino in reply to redc1c4. | May 29, 2018 at 1:54 pm

    ” make sure everyone has an equal chance at success. ”

    If you’re talking of chance then obviously there is the possibility that there will be no success for some.

    Henry Hawkins in reply to redc1c4. | May 29, 2018 at 4:44 pm

    Everyone already has an equal chance at success, plus a legal system to address any attempts to unlawfully thwart that chance.

The Left will always choose shared misery for all.

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.” – Winston Churchill

    Henry Hawkins in reply to alaskabob. | May 29, 2018 at 5:37 pm

    The problem with Winston’s formula is that blessings are shared, that one receives blessings when shared by others. But how did those others get their blessings? Perhaps someone shared there’s with them, but at some point in the regression, somebody earned those blessings. Blessings are earned, often by hard work through hard times. They may be shared only after being earned.

    Another thing is his declaring that ‘unequal’ sharing of blessings is a vice, a very bad thing. In fact, in most cases, it isn’t at all difficult to explain why one person has more blessings, however defined, than another. We’ve all watched COPS.

    Just spitballin’, Bob.