But if it did happen in 2020, it would basically doom Trump's chances of reelection. Obama had a slight lead over McCain going into October, then the economy collapsed and he went sprinting out ahead.

Historically, they take advantage of economic downturns by looking for scapegoats. He will blame immigrants and liberals for the problem. Many will believe him, because it's easier to assign blame than to understand business cycles. Our political divides could get even worse than they are now.

tRump isn't a populist, he pretends to be one while doing the bidding of his billionaire "friends" (as if he has any). And now he's probably even pissing them off.

They all pretend to be for the people while they are really just looking for their own power and glory.

It's awful yes, but I just can't imagine any other possible way to defeat Trump.

He's solidifying his base, but not expanding it. He's also pissing off independants and firing up the Democratic base. I think even if the economy holds, a good candidate can beat him.

I'm a Cory Booker fan personally. Smart, young, energetic, has experience but not so much that it would be baggage, charismatic, pretty popular in his state and would probably get the Obama coalition out.

Any.

Its brought on by rich assholes gambling with people's savings accounts, 401k's and such. In other words, unmitigated greed and lack of morals.

The off the books war money was causing issuing of treasuries with no accounting that negatively affected inflationary pressures and diluted the equity flow into those markets. The result was that the market was actually overinflated, and was not rising at historical rates. So, then the sharks got in the pool and started the greed thing to speculate prices up (or hedged them down) but with insufficient macroeconomic foundation to support the inflated value.

There's less of that going this time (at least while the bank laws are still in place, and who knows how long that will last).

Last point: The OP is asking why the "experts" are expecting a downturn. Not all the experts are. Some are expecting a slow down, but that's quite a lot different than a crash.

It all means more poverty, bankruptcy and homelessness.

You can do the gloom and doom thing all you want, but i'm not playing that game.

There is a GIANT difference between a crash and a slow down. One leads to what you describe on a massive scale, the other doesn't.

1929 was a crash. 2008 was a near crash. We're heading for neither.

and no one can ever predict where and when it will happen...amazing when you consider all of the millions of figures and facts available online to just about anyone who seeks it out. It's the interpretation of these facts and what's used to compile these 'facts'. In the housing boom, massive amounts of substandard housing was included when it should have discounted to begin w/, but the powers that be back then hid these facts from the public.

Perhaps its the increasing discrepancy between low income and high income proportions that will lead the next recession/slump? Sure wages have been slowly creeping up, but far too slowly. However, asset prices across the board have been increasing at a higher rate. Eventually these two will run into conflict w/ each other. The federal debt can't continue to spiral out of control as the repugs allowed to do, when all of a sudden, this wasn't an issue w/ them, but instead, their donors were the issue. Thus, tailoring a tax cut specifically to one unique class of personnel (their donors) is bound to cause problems in multiple ways.

Just hunker down, and don't concentrate too much stuff in one stock or one asset class (spread it around baby) and this should minimize any unforeseen negative movements somewhat, although w/ the real estate crash of 2008/2009, it crossed over into the stock market too, as well as other asset classes, and brought their values down too.

It stimulated an already robust recovery, and may cause inflation, especially if you add these idiotic tariffs to the equation.

part Of the concern is that the inflation may cause a recession

and the list goes on. Everyone else is making a killing on something. More folks jump on the band wagon and then the wheels fall off. Prices go beyond value and it all comes crashing down. Wanna buy some Bennie Babies cheap?

... and it always fails harder without regulation

When Reagan and the Republicans cut taxes and rolled back banking regulations in the 1980's, the bottom didn't suddenly fall out. The US was sluggishly pulling out of the doldrums of the 1970's but was heading upward economically. Reagan's cuts had generated a bump, but predictably created a deficit because of the loss of revenue.

We are seeing the same thing here with Trump. President Obama cut unemployment from 10% to about 5% and under Trump it went down to 4%. Trump is taking credit for the low unemployment when he only was around for the final percentage point drop.

Republicans do it all the time. Democrats work their way from a downward turn, then Republicans use the good numbers to justify a tax cut for the richest people, and then revenue starts to breakdown, pessimism sets in, and we slide back into recession. Then the Democrats come in during the difficult times, piece together the economy while Republicans complain that it isn't happening fast enough, then idiot voters put Republicans back in charge and the cycle continues.

Just as Bush's crash was Clinton's fault
Funny how that works