# Essential Economics for Politicians



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 19, 2016)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 20, 2016)

*The Federal Reserve Is Hillary Clinton’s Secret Weapon*

*https://mises.org/blog/federal-reserve-hillary-clinton’s-secret-weapon*

Say what you want about Donald J. Trump, but he is correct about one thing: the Federal Reserve has, with near certainty, been holding interest rates down for political purposes — namely, to aid Hillary Clinton in getting elected president of the United States.

In September’s first presidential debate, Mr. Trump said:

We have a Fed that’s doing political things. … The Fed is [being awfully] political by keeping the interest rates at this level. And believe me: The day Obama goes off, and he leaves [office], and goes out to the golf course for the rest of his life to play golf, [is the day that] they raise interest rates. … The Fed is being more political than Secretary Clinton.

The Federal Open Market Committee's (FOMC) September meeting minutes, released on Wednesday, have proven Mr. Trump’s assertion to be true. As the 2016 election season draws to a close, the Fed has suddenly become more bullish on the prospect of raising interest rates — and this precipitous change-of-heart has come despite there being few notable signs of hope in the US’s economic data.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2016)

*Six Things to Consider About Inflation*

As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”

The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”

To address this conundrum, there are _six related factors_ that are noteworthy:

https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2016)

*Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.

*Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.

*Blowing Bubbles*
*Number Three:* newly created fiat money must go _somewhere_ — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. *So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.*

*Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.

*Number Five:* In the same vein, *you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.”* This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)

*Number Six:* the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided *suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, *or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2016)

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2016)

There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate.  This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because laws make them so.  Thus in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary  for the law to decree and sanction it.--Frederic Bastiat writing on government-sanctioned counterfeiting: 1. government paper money and fractional reserve banking.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 23, 2016)

This thread was created to show how clueless politicians really are about the economy.

*Obama Compares Obamacare to Smartphone That Was Recalled for Catching on Fire*

*It’s an apt metaphor for the health law—but not in the way the president thinks*

*https://reason.com/blog/2016/10/21/obama-compares-obamacare-to-smartphone-t*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 24, 2016)

....and Wez.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 25, 2016)

Ruling against Airbnb Proves New York Is Not in the 21st Century

https://fee.org/articles/ruling-against-airbnb-proves-new-york-is-not-in-the-21st-century/

The crusade against homesharing has never been about protecting New Yorkers from "illegal hotels," but about protecting the hotel industry from competition.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

There is growing public awareness that regulations are not primarily designed to protect us but to protect established interests.

https://fee.org/articles/how-information-entrepreneurs-are-outsmarting-regulators/?utm_medium=related_widget


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.
> 
> Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function. Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird without wings. Free market in the purest sense cannot exist without government enforcement. For example, freedom of contract is nothing more than an abstract concept without government enforcement through its court system. Practically speaking, you'll find the purer form of free market in China, Brasil, India and a few other emerging economies. If you speak to any businessman who's done transactions in these jurisdictions, the overwhelming majority of them would rather do a transaction in the US. As a matter of fact, they'd rather sell in the US at lower prices in the US. Aside from our infra structure, they have greater confidence in our legal system that spell out each party's rights and obligations. Such confidence arises precisely because UCC has been universally adopted in the US. That is government "intervention" you can call it, but it's precisely such government "intervention" that truly makes the market stable and free.

There're economists who argue otherwise, but they're on the fringe. They have an antiquated view of the market. Mainstream economists accept that there has to be government action to ensure a free market. The issue is no longer whether, but how much.


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced, you're pissing on the magic free market fantasies of the clowns who inhabit this forum...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Laced, you're pissing on the magic free market fantasies of the clowns who inhabit this forum...


You are a dope.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function. Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird without wings. Free market in the purest sense cannot exist without government enforcement. For example, freedom of contract is nothing more than an abstract concept without government enforcement through its court system. Practically speaking, you'll find the purer form of free market in China, Brasil, India and a few other emerging economies. If you speak to any businessman who's done transactions in these jurisdictions, the overwhelming majority of them would rather do a transaction in the US. As a matter of fact, they'd rather sell in the US at lower prices in the US. Aside from our infra structure, they have greater confidence in our legal system that spell out each party's rights and obligations. Such confidence arises precisely because UCC has been universally adopted in the US. That is government "intervention" you can call it, but it's precisely such government "intervention" that truly makes the market stable and free.
> 
> There're economists who argue otherwise, but they're on the fringe. They have an antiquated view of the market. Mainstream economists accept that there has to be government action to ensure a free market. The issue is no longer whether, but how much.


The U.S. Government does not issue money.  The Federal Reserve issues money to the Government by purchasing Government Treasury Bonds.  This is no small point.


----------



## espola (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The U.S. Government does not issue money.  The Federal Reserve issues money to the Government by purchasing Government Treasury Bonds.  This is no small point.


I have a quarter in my pocket that says you are wrong.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Laced, you're pissing on the magic free market fantasies of the clowns who inhabit this forum...


I didnʻt get that he is pissing on free markets at all.  Thatʻs your progressive inner dialogue.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

espola said:


> I have a quarter in my pocket that says you are wrong.


A coin quarter?  But what do you say?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function. Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird without wings. Free market in the purest sense cannot exist without government enforcement. For example, freedom of contract is nothing more than an abstract concept without government enforcement through its court system. Practically speaking, you'll find the purer form of free market in China, Brasil, India and a few other emerging economies. If you speak to any businessman who's done transactions in these jurisdictions, the overwhelming majority of them would rather do a transaction in the US. As a matter of fact, they'd rather sell in the US at lower prices in the US. Aside from our infra structure, they have greater confidence in our legal system that spell out each party's rights and obligations. Such confidence arises precisely because UCC has been universally adopted in the US. That is government "intervention" you can call it, but it's precisely such government "intervention" that truly makes the market stable and free.
> 
> There're economists who argue otherwise, but they're on the fringe. They have an antiquated view of the market. Mainstream economists accept that there has to be government action to ensure a free market. The issue is no longer whether, but how much.


Government does not set interest rates either.  The Federal Reserve does.  Agree that government must exist to enforce contracts and private property rights.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird withouFree market in the purest sense cannot exist without government enforcement.


How does that bird feel about negative interest rates?  Again, government does not enforce interest rates.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Practically speaking, you'll find the purer form of free market in China, Brasil, India and a few other emerging economies.


Practically huh?  Be more specific as to why the aforementioned countries practices a "purer" form of free markets.  No doubt it is refreshing reading.


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Government does not set interest rates either.  The Federal Reserve does.  Agree that government must exist to enforce contracts and private property rights.


The Feds website explicitly states that it is "an agency of the federal government." Here's the link: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Practically huh?  Be more specific as to why the aforementioned countries practices a "purer" form of free markets.  No doubt it is refreshing reading.


Let me just give you a simple example. Environmental regulations there are not nearly as vigorous as here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> The Feds website explicitly states that it is "an agency of the federal government." Here's the link: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm


Read that paragraph in itʻs entirety and tell me what it says in the end.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Let me just give you a simple example. Environmental regulations there are not nearly as vigorous as here.


Thatʻs pro-business not pro-market.  Common mis-understanding.


----------



## espola (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> The Feds website explicitly states that it is "an agency of the federal government." Here's the link: https://www.federalreserve.gov/faqs/about_14986.htm


I used to see on the 3AM cable channel cheap-buy time a guy who looked like his head was about to explode advancing theories about how the Fed is a criminal conspiracy.  He offered books for sale to explain things "I'm not allowed to say on television".  I think Izzie bought the full 24-volume set.


----------



## espola (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Read that paragraph in itʻs entirety and tell me what it says in the end.


"Some observers mistakenly consider the Federal Reserve to be a private entity because the Reserve Banks are organized similarly to private corporations."


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Read that paragraph in itʻs entirety and tell me what it says in the end.


You'd have to read yourself. You're not a 5th grader. Or are you? 

In addition to the plain language, it was created by Congress. Its governors are appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate. Its independence doesn't preclude it from being a government agency, no more than the Department of Justice. 

Colloquially, people often use "government" to specifically refer to the executive branch. When we discuss government as opposed to the free market, we use "government" in a more general sense, which includes all 3 branches of government.

As an aside, in a landmark case Shelley vs Kraemer, the Supreme Court ruled that enforcing discriminatory private covenants constitutes state action under the Fourteen Amendment. In other words, our judiciary is part of government. Shelley vs Kraemer, though not well known, is the seminal case of desegregation cases which culminated in Brown vs. Bd of Education. Robert Bork's opposition to Shelley vs Kraemer turned a lot of conservatives against him. That IMHO ultimately sank his nomination.


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> You'd have to read yourself. You're not a 5th grader. Or are you?
> 
> In addition to the plain language, it was created by Congress. Its governors are appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate. Its independence doesn't preclude it from being a government agency, no more than the Department of Justice.
> 
> ...


You gotta stop blowing up these Retardarians bro...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

espola said:


> I used to see on the 3AM cable channel cheap-buy time a guy who looked like his head was about to explode advancing theories about how the Fed is a criminal conspiracy.  He offered books for sale to explain things "I'm not allowed to say on television".  I think Izzie bought the full 24-volume set.


24 volume is the free government set.  You got ripped off.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> You'd have to read yourself. You're not a 5th grader. Or are you?
> 
> In addition to the plain language, it was created by Congress. Its governors are appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the Senate. Its independence doesn't preclude it from being a government agency, no more than the Department of Justice.
> 
> ...


From your link:

The Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., is an agency of the federal government. The Board--appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate--provides general guidance for the Federal Reserve System and oversees the 12 Reserve Banks. Board reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress but, unlike many other public agencies, it is not funded by congressional appropriations. In addition, though the Congress sets the goals for monetary policy, decisions of the Board--and the Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals *do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.*


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> From your link:
> 
> The Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., is an agency of the federal government. The Board--appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate--provides general guidance for the Federal Reserve System and oversees the 12 Reserve Banks. Board reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress but, unlike many other public agencies, it is not funded by congressional appropriations. In addition, though the Congress sets the goals for monetary policy, decisions of the Board--and the Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals *do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.*


The bold faced part states its independence. Independence and government agency are not mutually exclusive.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> The bold faced part states its independence. Independence and government agency are not mutually exclusive.


They are mutually exclusive.  Donʻt fool yourself.  They are not funded like other agencies.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> You'd have to read yourself. You're not a 5th grader. Or are you?


  I am!!  I canʻt believe you adults donʻt know this stuff!  We should have a CASHFLOW board game party.  Iʻve bee playing since I was 3.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> You gotta stop blowing up these Retardarians bro...


He didnʻt need 10 letters after his name to intelligently engage.  Go play in the traffic junior.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He didnʻt need 10 letters after his name to intelligently engage.  Go play in the traffic junior.


He's nothing more than a cheerleader. (wez)
Laced actually engaged with a point of reference.
Intelligent debate does not need an antagonist and a cheerleader.
espola and wez.
Do yourselves, and the rest of us a favor, throw an idea out or stay on the bench.


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Do yourselves, and the rest of us a favor, throw an idea out or stay on the bench.


Certain people here are not worthy of a response because they have no and never have had, any intent at intelligent debate.  They are worthless, so they get laughed at from afar...


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Certain people here are not worthy of a response because they have no and never have had, any intent at intelligent debate.  They are worthless, so they get laughed at from afar...


I know.
That was kinda my point, Mr. ten letters.


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> I know.
> That was kinda my point, Mr. ten letters.


Has there been any post on this thread worthy of a response from anyone other than an infantile free market boob?


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Has there been any post on this thread worthy of a response from anyone other than an infantile free market boob?


Do you ever read anything?


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2016)

Sure Bernie, what would you like me to read?


----------



## espola (Oct 26, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> He's nothing more than a cheerleader. (wez)
> Laced actually engaged with a point of reference.
> Intelligent debate does not need an antagonist and a cheerleader.
> espola and wez.
> Do yourselves, and the rest of us a favor, throw an idea out or stay on the bench.


It's not possible to have a serious discussion about whether the Fed is a government agency.  The best we can hope to do is to laugh along with the joke, even if the boobs don't get it.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Sure Bernie, what would you like me to read?


My post.


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> My post.


Let's move forward not backwards Bernie what message would you like to impart on me?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are a dope.


Thatʻs not what the 10 letters after his name tell his clients.  Scary isnʻt it?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Wez said:


> Has there been any post on this thread worthy of a response from anyone other than an infantile free market boob?


Nope.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

espola said:


> It's not possible to have a serious discussion about whether the Fed is a government agency.  The best we can hope to do is to laugh along with the joke, even if the boobs don't get it.


It is possible.  Lets just say that it is an unfunded agency.  Pretty cool if it wasnʻt for fiat money and fractional banking.


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> They are mutually exclusive.  Donʻt fool yourself.  They are not funded like other agencies.


If the Feds weren't a government agency as you so adamantly insist, it's just a free market participant which is not accountable to us voters or taxpayers. Then what's the fuss? What's your rant about in the first place? Isn't it how the free market works?


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> If the Feds weren't a government agency as you so adamantly insist, it's just a free market participant which is not accountable to us voters or taxpayers. Then what's the fuss? What's your rant about in the first place? Isn't it how the free market works?


Peter Shiff (sp?) wrote a pretty good book that detailed the origin, and intended purpose of the federal reserve.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> If the Feds weren't a government agency as you so adamantly insist, it's just a free market participant which is not accountable to us voters or taxpayers. Then what's the fuss? What's your rant about in the first place? Isn't it how the free market works?


First, your link to the Fed says that the BOG is the agency.  I am not disputing what the link says.  And I am not disputing that the link to the Fed says ....._"Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals _*do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government." *and neither are you.  But they cease to be a free market participant when they create fiat money like they did during QE1 thru QE3.  The market has to be free to fail as well.  That is when savers like you and I get to snatch up some assets at much cheaper then the inflated prices caused by an increase in the money supply.  Former Special Inspector General for the TARP program wrote a pretty good account of how the government allowed the Fed to bailout their friends in the financial sector.  It's a good read and I highly recommend it.  Or you can just google Neil Barofsky podcast interview at Econtalk and listen during traffic hour.  My fuss is that the most recent crisis is not the first crisis of its kind.  The Fed is the cause of the boom and bust cycles clear back to the great depression.  Even there you can see that the Fed began inflating the money supply in the early 20's.  Predictably, the stock market went crazy, all caused by the increase in the money supply.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Peter Shiff (sp?) wrote a pretty good book that detailed the origin, and intended purpose of the federal reserve.


I like Peter Schiff.  He has schooled many Keynesian professors.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I am!!  I canʻt believe you adults donʻt know this stuff!  We should have a CASHFLOW board game party.  Iʻve bee playing since I was 3.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Such confidence arises precisely because UCC has been universally adopted in the US. That is government "intervention" you can call it, but it's precisely such government "intervention" that truly makes the market stable and free.


*Always beware of industries that want to regulate themselves. * UCC works because it increases the number and ease with which transactions can happen.  In short, it increases and accelerates tax revenues to the government.  It also allows companies with a lot of cash or access to lots of cash to operate without boundaries.  Government wasn't smart enough to come up with UCC by themselves.  Only the profit motive can do that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> There're economists who argue otherwise, but they're on the fringe. They have an antiquated view of the market. Mainstream economists accept that there has to be government action to ensure a free market. The issue is no longer whether, but how much.


I agree that non-interventionist economist are on the fringe.  It reminds me of this scene in the Big Short.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> Mainstream economists accept that there has to be government action to ensure a free market.


Agree.  Abolish fiat money and fractional banking.  Too bad most Mainstream economist are throughly schooled in Keynesianism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

Laced said:


> There're economists who argue otherwise, but they're on the fringe. They have an antiquated view of the market.


The fringe economist have an antiquated view of the market because they know Roman history.  The Fed like Rome is debasing the U.S. dollar through the creation of fiat money.  Caesar did it buy clipping gold coins, melting the clippings to create more coins, albeit of a lesser weight, to pay for the expenses of the massive Roman Empire.  As these coins circulated throughout Roman Markets, merchants demanded additional gold coins to meet the original weight requirements of a gold coin to say buy a basket of fish that cost a single gold coin last week!  How's that for antiquated inflation?  The Roman people started to notch their original unclipped coins to tell the difference  because Caesar, instead of clipping coins was now just shaving the coins.  In response, whatever gold coins Caesar collected in taxes he would have them fully melted, adding a baser metal this time, hence the term debasing, to meet the weight requirements.  Eventually, it was a debased currency that destroyed an 800 year old empire.  

An antiquated view of the market?  Is there a fundamental difference?


----------



## espola (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The fringe economist have an antiquated view of the market because they know Roman history.  The Fed like Rome is debasing the U.S. dollar through the creation of fiat money.  Caesar did it buy clipping gold coins, melting the clippings to create more coins, albeit of a lesser weight, to pay for the expenses of the massive Roman Empire.  As these coins circulated throughout Roman Markets, merchants demanded additional gold coins to meet the original weight requirements of a gold coin to say buy a basket of fish that cost a single gold coin last week!  How's that for antiquated inflation?  The Roman people started to notch their original unclipped coins to tell the difference  because Caesar, instead of clipping coins was now just shaving the coins.  In response, whatever gold coins Caesar collected in taxes he would have them fully melted, adding a baser metal this time, hence the term debasing, to meet the weight requirements.  Eventually, it was a debased currency that destroyed an 800 year old empire.
> 
> An antiquated view of the market?  Is there a fundamental difference?


Are you trimming the ends off your Federal Reserve notes?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2016)

espola said:


> Are you trimming the ends off your Federal Reserve notes?


Now days I just manually add three zeroes to the current balance in my checking account and presto I have more cash.


----------



## Laced (Oct 26, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> First, your link to the Fed says that the BOG is the agency.  I am not disputing what the link says.  And I am not disputing that the link to the Fed says ....._"Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals _*do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government." *and neither are you.  But they cease to be a free market participant when they create fiat money like they did during QE1 thru QE3.  The market has to be free to fail as well.  That is when savers like you and I get to snatch up some assets at much cheaper then the inflated prices caused by an increase in the money supply.  Former Special Inspector General for the TARP program wrote a pretty good account of how the government allowed the Fed to bailout their friends in the financial sector.  It's a good read and I highly recommend it.  Or you can just google Neil Barofsky podcast interview at Econtalk and listen during traffic hour.  My fuss is that the most recent crisis is not the first crisis of its kind.  The Fed is the cause of the boom and bust cycles clear back to the great depression.  Even there you can see that the Fed began inflating the money supply in the early 20's.  Predictably, the stock market went crazy, all caused by the increase in the money supply.


Factual inaccuracies aside, how does any of what you said support your argument that there should be less government intervention and more free market?


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> Factual inaccuracies aside, how does any of what you said support your argument that there should be less government intervention and more free market?


You're going down the rabbit hole Laced, you will be disappointed to learn it leads nowhere, it's an empty space.



Bernie Sanders said:


> Peter Shiff (sp?) wrote a pretty good book that detailed the origin, and intended purpose of the federal reserve.


This clown is on CNBC all the time, he whips the conspiracy nuts into a lather...


----------



## Laced (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> You're going down the rabbit hole Laced, you will be disappointed to learn it leads nowhere, it's an empty space.


You'd be absolutely right if I were trying to change minds


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> You'd be absolutely right if I were trying to change minds


It's not even that, BIZ will ask you a million questions, as if he is carefully contemplating and forming thoughtful responses, but than just comes up with nothing and he'll resent you for not agreeing with him....


----------



## Laced (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> It's not even that, BIZ will ask you a million questions, as if he is carefully contemplating and forming thoughtful responses, but than just comes up with nothing and he'll resent you for not agreeing with him....


I did notice that his argument tends to be more complex than it need be. And he cites a lot of facts (which I dispute) and I have trouble figuring out how they even relate to the point he's making. However, it's been civil and respectful between us. It's been vigorous but pleasant.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> I did notice that his argument tends to be more complex than it need be. And he cites a lot of facts (which I dispute) and I have trouble figuring out how they even relate to the point he's making.


He'll cut and paste non-sequiturs all day long...



Laced said:


> However, it's been civil and respectful between us. It's been vigorous but pleasant.


Until you really start to probe and question his convictions and call BS on them....resentment time...


----------



## Laced (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> He'll cut and paste non-sequiturs all day long...
> 
> 
> 
> Until you really start to probe and question his convictions and call BS on them....resentment time...


I did learn something. To my surprise more people than I expected dispute that the Feds is a government agency, which I took for granted given that the Federal Reserve itself states so - not just the BOG. After a little research, I found that a significant minority has that view.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> I did learn something. To my surprise more people than I expected dispute that the Feds is a government agency, which I took for granted given that the Federal Reserve itself states so - not just the BOG. After a little research, I found that a significant minority has that view.


You will find that, "significant minority" is overly represented in here.


----------



## Laced (Oct 27, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You will find that, "significant minority" is overly represented in here.


Views are views. They are not to be feared, right?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> Factual inaccuracies aside, how does any of what you said support your argument that there should be less government intervention and more free market?


I actually think that there should be more government intervention.  Government should outlaw fiat money and fractional banking.  The chances of that happening is almost nil.  "Fragile by Design" by Charles Calomiris does a nice job of describing the cyclical incentives that politicians face when dealing with the reality of the Feds operations.  The only thing that will stop "money printing" is the complete devaluing of the dollar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> You're going down the rabbit hole Laced, you will be disappointed to learn it leads nowhere, it's an empty space.


Arenʻt you gonna roll out the red carpet for him and serve up some extra sweetened Kool-Aid.


----------



## Laced (Oct 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I actually think that there should be more government intervention.  Government should outlaw fiat money and fractional banking.  The chances of that happening is almost nil.  "Fragile by Design" by Charles Calomiris does a nice job of describing the cyclical incentives that politicians face when dealing with the reality of the Feds operations.  The only thing that will stop "money printing" is the complete devaluing of the dollar.


You basically share Peter Schiff's view.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> You'd be absolutely right if I were trying to change minds


Atta boy!  And I know youʻre not trying to change facts.


----------



## Laced (Oct 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The fringe economist have an antiquated view of the market because they know Roman history.  The Fed like Rome is debasing the U.S. dollar through the creation of fiat money.  Caesar did it buy clipping gold coins, melting the clippings to create more coins, albeit of a lesser weight, to pay for the expenses of the massive Roman Empire.  As these coins circulated throughout Roman Markets, merchants demanded additional gold coins to meet the original weight requirements of a gold coin to say buy a basket of fish that cost a single gold coin last week!  How's that for antiquated inflation?  The Roman people started to notch their original unclipped coins to tell the difference  because Caesar, instead of clipping coins was now just shaving the coins.  In response, whatever gold coins Caesar collected in taxes he would have them fully melted, adding a baser metal this time, hence the term debasing, to meet the weight requirements.  Eventually, it was a debased currency that destroyed an 800 year old empire.
> 
> An antiquated view of the market?  Is there a fundamental difference?


I think we understand "antiquated" differently. "Antiquated" to me means outdated. It doesn't reflect the reality of modern economic reality. It has a negative connotation. You seem to understand it to mean something totally different.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> It's not even that, BIZ will ask you a million questions, as if he is carefully contemplating and forming thoughtful responses, but than just comes up with nothing and he'll resent you for not agreeing with him....


I love Sarekʻs answer to how they should respond to the menacing probe that is vacuming the ocean in search of Humpback whales.  You have to get some understanding.  Some wisdom as opposed to Wezdumb.  Now scram and stop looking for sympathizers


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> He'll cut and paste non-sequiturs all day long...
> 
> 
> 
> Until you really start to probe and question his convictions and call BS on them....resentment time...


What non-seqs?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now scram and stop looking for sympathizers


Wez? Cue the image of the crying baby.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> I did notice that his argument tends to be more complex than it need be. And he cites a lot of facts (which I dispute) and I have trouble figuring out how they even relate to the point he's making. However, it's been civil and respectful between us. It's been vigorous but pleasant.


You found my response complex?  I was just scratching the surface!!  No wonder you have disputes.  Lets dig deeper.  We have awhile before we get down to the depth of Wezʻs rabbit hole.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> I did learn something. To my surprise more people than I expected dispute that the Feds is a government agency, which I took for granted given that the Federal Reserve itself states so - not just the BOG. After a little research, I found that a significant minority has that view.


I am willing to concede that they are an unfunded agency.  Itʻs that they operate without any operational mandates from our elected officials.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You will find that, "significant minority" is overly represented in here.


Despite being a minority.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> You basically share Peter Schiff's view.


Yes.  So does Wez.  He just doesnʻt know it.  He started a thread about it starting to feel like 2008 again.  Wez is right for all the reasons Shiff mentions.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Laced said:


> I think we understand "antiquated" differently. "Antiquated" to me means outdated. It doesn't reflect the reality of modern economic reality. It has a negative connotation. You seem to understand it to mean something totally different.


Macroeconomics is timeless when discussing the underlying principles that guide markets. Specifically, monetary policy, supply and demand, and inflation.  Please be more specific about what you consider "modern economic reality"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Wez? Cue the image of the crying baby.


Youʻre so vain


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Schiff is too bearish, most of the time.  He is too pessimistic, so he misses a lot of growth opportunities.  Over the long term, he has been a very poor money manager.  I don't fault bearishness, there are plenty of reasons to be, but you can't let it control you.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> Schiff is too bearish, most of the time.  He is too pessimistic, so he misses a lot of growth opportunities.  Over the long term, he has been a very poor money manager.  I don't fault bearishness, there are plenty of reasons to be, but you can't let it control you.


Go back to bed. Wezdumb, you add nothing to this or any other thread other than showing your complete lack of understanding.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> Schiff is too bearish, most of the time.  He is too pessimistic, so he misses a lot of growth opportunities.  Over the long term, he has been a very poor money manager.  I don't fault bearishness, there are plenty of reasons to be, but you can't let it control you.


So if it is starting to feel like 2008, what would you advise?


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Go back to bed. Wezdumb, you add nothing to this or any other thread other than showing your complete lack of understanding.


Cranky before your coffee in the morning, just go back to beating your wife or shooting at illegals from your pickup truck.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So if it is starting to feel like 2008, what would you advise?


That passed.  When DB looked like it was on the ropes a few weeks ago, it reminded me of 2008 when the banking sector was leading the way down.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> Schiff is too bearish, most of the time.  He is too pessimistic, so he misses a lot of growth opportunities.  Over the long term, he has been a very poor money manager.  I don't fault bearishness, there are plenty of reasons to be, but you can't let it control you.


Running with the bull.........shitters


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> That passed.  When DB looked like it was on the ropes a few weeks ago, it reminded me of 2008 when the banking sector was leading the way down.


What changed with DB? Are they not on the ropes anymore?  Have the Hedge funds returned?


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What changed with DB? Are they not on the ropes anymore?  Have the Hedge funds returned?


It's been recovering and there doesn't seem to be much fuss anymore.  For a bit, DB was dragging the whole EU banking sector down, but the trend didn't hold.... for now.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> Cranky before your coffee in the morning, just go back to beating your wife or shooting at illegals from your pickup truck.


I think you have those backwards, Wezdumb.
If you knew my wife you would understand.
I thought no one was illegal.
Maybe you are starting to get it. Wezdumb.
Also, I hit what I am at. Dummy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> It's been recovering and there doesn't seem to be much fuss anymore.  For a bit, DB was dragging the whole EU banking sector down, but the trend didn't hold.... for now.


DB is still in trouble donʻt be fooled.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> DB is still in trouble donʻt be fooled.


Not arguing, but I'm guessing you think all banks are in big trouble...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> Not arguing, but I'm guessing you think all banks are in big trouble...


Letʻs finish up DB first.  They, no doubt, were one of the TBTF banks and the only one targeted in The Big Short.  They have been paying huge legal fees to the U.S. for their involvement in the Motgage backed securities (jenga) scandal.  In 2010 they attempted to avoid the Dodd-Frank, 20 billion dollar reserve requirement by removing their American Subsidiaries from their holding company.  The Feds put the brakes on that attempt by DB to gain a competitive advantage on other American banks.  To be sure, DB is still in big trouble.  But not as big trouble as its depositers.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2016)

When I said "not arguing", in response to your statement, "DB is still in trouble donʻt be fooled.", what did you think that meant?

I've read plenty of bearish reports on DB and have been following them and other banks, so I'm not sure if you are speaking to others or me???


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Wez said:


> When I said "not arguing", in response to your statement, "DB is still in trouble donʻt be fooled.", what did you think that meant?
> 
> I've read plenty of bearish reports on DB and have been following them and other banks, so I'm not sure if you are speaking to others or me???


Both.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2016)

Another example of government agencies providing a false sense of Security

*What the Theranos Debacle Reveals about Government Regulation*


https://fee.org/articles/what-the-theranos-debacle-reveals-about-government-regulation/?utm_medium=trending_homepage_widget

“Given the pivotal role of labs in medicine, consumers need to trust the quality and accuracy of the tests they get,” Holmes wrote in a _WSJ_ op-ed. “The FDA sets the gold standard for quality assurance. Its review is data-driven, objective and uniquely rigorous. I know this firsthand because Theranos, the company I founded, voluntarily committed to submit all of its lab tests for review starting in 2013. On July 2, the FDA cleared the first of those tests, for herpes simplex virus 1, and the associated finger-stick blood-test technology and underlying system on which our tests are run.”

How odd that the “uniquely rigorous” FDA reviewed Theranos’s finger-stick blood-test technology and underlying testing system, yet didn’t catch that they don’t work. The company told federal health regulators in April that all test results from its proprietary Edison devices from 2014 and 2015 were void.

Steve Hammons isn’t the only person Elizabeth Holmes put in harm’s way. And despite the fact that the FDA scrutinized her company’s systems in-depth, from collection devices and software to analytics and methodology, some people are still going to look at this debacle and call for more government oversight.

This is not just the wrong approach, but a dangerous one.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)

The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent. Another way of saying this is that, in the free market society, people are morally and legally viewed as sovereign individuals possessing rights to their life, liberty, and honestly acquired property, who may not be coerced into any transaction that they do not consider to be to their personal betterment and advantage.

The rules of the free market are really very simple: you don’t kill, you don’t steal, and you don’t cheat through fraud or misrepresentation. You can only improve your own position by improving the circumstances of others. Your talents, abilities, and efforts must all be focused on one thing: what will others take in trade from you for the revenues you want to earn as the source of your own income and profits?

*Consent, Not Coercion, Is a Hallmark of the Market

https://fee.org/articles/free-markets-refine-good-manners/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)

"Is it really true that political interest is nobler somehow then economic self interest?"


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Oct 28, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Government does not set interest rates either.  The Federal Reserve does.  Agree that government must exist to enforce contracts and private property rights.


Tried to send you a PM, but it wouldnt take.
I dont know why.
Just a heads up if youre in Oceanside for a beer or two.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)

*It Literally Hurts My Brain to Read the Economic Idiocy Emitted by Trumpkins*

Here’s a letter to the _Wall Street Journal_:

Wilbur Ross’s and Peter Navarro’s defense of Donald Trump’s economic policies is mostly a mash of bunkum (“A Vote for Trump Is a Vote for Growth,” Oct. 26).  Consider this claim: “Donald Trump will cut taxes, reduce regulation … and eliminate our trade deficit through muscular trade negotiations that increase exports, [and] reduce imports….”

Cut taxes?  Bunk.  Trump famously promises to _raise_ taxes on Americans who buy imports.  Reduce regulation?  Rubbish.  Trump promises _more_government intrusions into Americans’ commerce with foreigners.

As for ‘eliminating’ our trade deficit, Trump might indeed succeed on that front.  But such ‘success’ would be regrettable, for it would be the inevitable outcome of the American economy being made an unattractive destination for investment.  (Ross and Navarro seem to be unaware that to “eliminate our trade deficit” – such as was done, for example, during the Great Depression – is to eliminate net contributions by foreigners to increasing the size of America’s capital stock.)

*But Trump’s most absurd promise is to enrich Americans by increasing exports and reducing imports.  Imports are what we voluntarily buy and exports are the price we pay.  Therefore, a policy meant to increase exports while decreasing imports is a policy meant to force Americans to pay more to foreigners and to receive less in return – a decidedly unartful deal the architect of which would deserved to be fired.*

*But the Trump camp’s confusion runs even more deeply.  Exporting for Americans is worthwhile only because it supplies us with the means to purchase imports, either currently or in the future.  So a policy that aims both to increase exports and to decrease imports is akin to a policy that aims both to increase people’s spending power and to decrease it.  It’s a policy meant to give Americans greater means for acquiring imports as it simultaneously strips Americans of the freedom to use those means.  It’s the economic policy equivalent of an attempt to square a circle.*

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA  22030


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)

*Desperate Measures to Stop Devastating Overtime Rules*

*https://fee.org/articles/desperate-measures-to-stop-devastating-overtime-rules/*


Our salaried employees enjoy being salaried and treated like adults. They are given tasks to do, and _they_ decide how and when to do them. Nobody looks over their shoulders with a stopwatch telling them how long they have to drink coffee.

Sure, they have some weeks that are very busy and which require long hours, but if they want to come in late for a few days in a row, leave early, or take an extra week off during the slow season, they get that flexibility too.

They get the flexibility to work from home or pursue job-related training opportunities. If they need to take a couple hours off to pick up a sick child from school or take care of some errands, they have that option.

Effective December 1, however, I have to take away that flexibility and freedom.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)

*Obama's Overtime Rules Will Kill Telework*

*https://fee.org/articles/obamas-overtime-rules-will-kill-telework/?utm_medium=popular_widget*

Consider what could be a real-life example: Peter, a fellow at a think tank who earns a salary of $45,000 a year. Now if he works late one night, he can come in later the following day, or take extra time off. He can duck out of the office to get a haircut without reporting to his boss. If he feels sick, he can ask to work from home. He can come home for dinner and catch up with his work in the evenings. His employer is free to say, “Peter, you worked a lot of evenings this week. Take some extra days off with your family over Thanksgiving.”

*On Dec. 1, Peter and his employer will no longer be able to have such an arrangement.* Along with others who make under $47,476 annually, Peter will have to keep track of his hours by clocking in and out. Because of his employer’s requirement to track his hours, telecommuting will be difficult. If he works longer in one particular week, his employer will not be legally allowed to give him “comp time” (time off instead of the extra hours), but will have to pay him overtime instead.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2016)

*Obama’s Egregious Overtime Rules Attack Prosperity **and Worker Rights*........

*https://fee.org/articles/obama-s-egregious-overtime-rules-attack-prosperity-and-worker-rights/?utm_medium=popular_widget*


The Department of Labor’s new regulation regarding working hours ranks among the most outrageously destructive actions by the Obama administration in its two-term history. It is going to profoundly affect the lives of many millions of people, shattering dreams and *smashing the human rights of workers to negotiate, produce, and achieve.*

*By executive fiat, the Department has now said that time-and-a-half rules on worker pay apply to workers earning up to $47,476 per year (such specificity!) whereas they used to apply only up $23,660.* The new rules apply to salaried as well as hourly workers. High-level executives (along with teachers and doctors) are exempt (how people will be classified is determined by a complicated test).


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function.


"If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldnʻt be any money"-- Mariner Eccles, Governor of the Federal Reserve System in 1941


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

If all the Bank loans were paid, no one could have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of coin or currency in circulation.--Robert Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve bank in Atlanta, 1936


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

B IZ, I have trouble figuring out what you're saying. Sometimes you appear to question the wisdom of government monetary policies. Other times you seem to object to any government intervention. For government to make wise policies,


Bruddah IZ said:


> The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent. Another way of saying this is that, in the free market society, people are morally and legally viewed as sovereign individuals possessing rights to their life, liberty, and honestly acquired property, who may not be coerced into any transaction that they do not consider to be to their personal betterment and advantage.
> 
> The rules of the free market are really very simple: you don’t kill, you don’t steal, and you don’t cheat through fraud or misrepresentation. You can only improve your own position by improving the circumstances of others. Your talents, abilities, and efforts must all be focused on one thing: what will others take in trade from you for the revenues you want to earn as the source of your own income and profits?
> 
> ...


I have trouble discerning your positions. Sometimes you appear to question the wisdom of government monetary policies. Other times you seem to object to any government intrusion to the extent you almost sound like an anarchist. The former is out of my depth. On your latter point of view, I feel confident enough to have a discussion


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

In any event, there is a large degree of truth in the claim that our fiat money, fractional reserve banking system, is one in which debt is intertwined with money.  This system features the utterly perverse properties that massive increases in indebtedness give rise to a euphoric boom (as the money supply grows ), while periods of frugality and debt payment coincide with periods of depression (as the money supply contracts).  *This is not a feature of the market economy, but instead a result of government intervention in the monetary and banking arenas.*--Carlos Lara & Robert Murphy, How Privatized Banking Really Works


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> In any event, there is a large degree of truth in the claim that our fiat money, fractional reserve banking system, is one in which debt is intertwined with money.  This system features the utterly perverse properties that massive increases in indebtedness give rise to a euphoric boom (as the money supply grows ), while periods of frugality and debt payment coincide with periods of depression (as the money supply contracts).  *This is not a feature of the market economy, but instead a result of government intervention in the monetary and banking arenas.*--Carlos Lara & Robert Murphy, How Privatized Banking Really Works


Could you expound?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> B IZ, I have trouble figuring out what you're saying. Sometimes you appear to question the wisdom of government monetary policies. Other times you seem to object to any government intervention. For government to make wise policies,
> 
> I have trouble discerning your positions. Sometimes you appear to question the wisdom of government monetary policies. Other times you seem to object to any government intrusion to the extent you almost sound like an anarchist. The former is out of my depth. On your latter point of view, I feel confident enough to have a discussion


The attachment should be helpful in explaining the "former".  

http://consultingbyrpm.com/uploads/HPBRW.pdf

Knowledge keeps me from being an anarchist while sounding like one to those who lack it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Could you expound?


Read Chapter 16, page 225, in the attached .pdf.  Although the entire book really is a good read for understanding the boom and bust cycles that we see in the U.S. and around the world.


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Read Chapter 16, page 225, in the attached .pdf.  Although the entire book really is a good read for understanding the boom and bust cycles that we see in the U.S. and around the world.


If I ask your position on a religious issue, giving me a copy of the Bible doesn't answer my question, does it? Can you just say in short, dumbed down language whether you think it's possible for free market to be truly free without government?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> If I ask your position on a religious issue, giving me a copy of the Bible doesn't answer my question, does it? Can you just say in short, dumbed down language whether you think it's possible for free market to be truly free without government?





Laced said:


> Could you expound?


LOL!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> If I ask your position on a religious issue, giving me a copy of the Bible doesn't answer my question, does it?


Is it a religious economic issue?


----------



## Wez (Oct 29, 2016)

Welcome to the rabbit hole Laced, I warned you.


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Read Chapter 16, page 225, in the attached .pdf.  Although the entire book really is a good read for understanding the boom and bust cycles that we see in the U.S. and around the world.


I read the part you recommended.

"In a pure market economy, there are strong _checks _against fractional reserve banking, which prevent any one bank from issuing an excessive number of unbacked notes." Pa 240. Tell me how its validity is verified by the financial crisis of 2008.

Didn't Glass Steagall Act precisely function as checks against fractional reserve banking? Didn't its repeal lead to market derivatives such as credit default swaps lead to the 2008 financial crisis? Weren't they the products of unregulated free market that led to the financial crisis? Is it not true that repeal of the Glass Steagall contribute to the financial crisis?


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Is it a religious economic issue?


Neither. It's just a metaphor to your habit of giving links as an answer to a question.


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Another question for you BIZ.

Is the value of fiat money affected by more than supply and demand? Does the velocity of circulation affect the value of money? If so, a vigorous market by itself would create inflation, doesn't it? If so, does it really matter if it's fiat money or commodity money? Whether it's fiat money or commodity money, what are free market checks against inflation? And how do they work?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> I read the part you recommended.
> 
> "In a pure market economy, there are strong _checks _against fractional reserve banking, which prevent any one bank from issuing an excessive number of unbacked notes." Pa 240. Tell me how its validity is verified by the financial crisis of 2008.
> 
> Didn't Glass Steagall Act precisely function as checks against fractional reserve banking? Didn't its repeal lead to market derivatives such as credit default swaps lead to the 2008 financial crisis? Weren't they the products of unregulated free market that led to the financial crisis? Is it not true that repeal of the Glass Steagall contribute to the financial crisis?


No.  It did not.  What would be a "strong check" against fractional reserve banking?


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  It did not.  What would be a "strong check" against fractional reserve banking?


LOL You asked me that question? The quote comes from the passage you recommended, and implicitly endorsed - never figured out the difference between "endorse" and "support" and "vote for" in this election cycle. I thought Glass Steagall was a strong check if fractional reserve banking is a concern to you. Or Lara and Murphy.

I'm not well versed in the monetary market or regulation. Fractional reserve banking is a reality of modern economics as I understand it, or any monetary system (that should answer your question partially what is the modern economic reality), but apparently it's what leads to all the woes of the financial market according to Lara and Murphy. You recommend it for understanding of the boom and bust cycles. According to Lara and Murphy, switching to commodity money would avoid fractional reserve banking. Or does it? Doesn't the velocity of circulation lead to inflation, or functional fractional reserve banking anyways in a completely free market? Hence my question, what strong checks are they talking about?

My elementary understanding of the monetary market, with logic and common sense, leads me to conclude that fractional reserve banking is nothing more than a byproduct of any monetary system. Focus on that is a bit superficial, isn't it?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> I read the part you recommended.
> 
> "In a pure market economy,* there are strong checks against fractional reserve banking, which prevent any one bank from issuing an excessive number of unbacked notes.*" Pa 240. *Tell me how its validity is verified by the financial crisis of 2008.*


In a pure market economy, each *Federal Reserve Note or Dollar *is backed up by a real asset like Gold.  Nixon closed the Gold window at the Fed in 1971.  2008 was not about validating a pure market economy.  On the contrary, it was about the Fed expanding access to an increased money supply in the early 20's to set the U.S. Stock Market up for the Great Depression in the early 30's.  American hubris bought stocks on margin in the early 20's and, homes with little to no money down in the early to mid 2000's.  Both markets crashed.  Both crashes caused by the Fed.  Hence the title of Chapter 16, Government Distortions.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Didn't Glass Steagall Act precisely function as checks against fractional reserve banking?


Why would it?  That was not the purpose of GS.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Didn't its repeal lead to market derivatives such as credit default swaps lead to the 2008 financial crisis?


No it did not.  Again, expansion of the money supply by the Fed is what caused the financial crisis.  Want me to "expound"?


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why would it?  That was not the purpose of GS.


I said "function," not "intended." As often the case, Congressional acts function quite differently than their intended purposes. Sherman Act is another example.

But let's not get into politics. That's the lower-end shit best left for Bernie Sanders to chew on. And bleeding heart libs like Wez, Dukes, espn, and that illegal alien whose name I have trouble pronouncing much less remembering. And the gun-wielding intellectual Moe. And that random guy who named himself after an animal part. Hyena's Butt, I think.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Weren't they (derivatives) the products of unregulated free market that led to the financial crisis?


What are you talking about?  Derivatives are regulated.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Is it not true that repeal of the Glass Steagall contribute to the financial crisis?


Contribute?  Maybe.  Cause?  Absolutely not.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Is it not true that repeal of the Glass Steagall contribute to the financial crisis?


 *Russ Roberts:*  I want to start with a very interesting point you make about the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Now, a lot of people blame the crisis on the repeal of Glass-Steagall and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, accomplished that in 1999. It was a Democratic president who signed that but I think it was a Republican Congress that pushed it; but it was a bipartisan bill. It got a lot of support from both sides of the aisle. And you make the argument that its direct effect in causing the crisis was very small. So I want you to explain that. And then the more interesting point--but you still point out the political implications of that were not small. That's fascinating. So, talk about those two things. First, why it had little direct impact but its political impact was not trivial. 
*
Luigi Zingales:* So, just to make sure that everybody is on board, I think that what Glass-Steagall used to do is to separate commercial banks from investment banks. And during the crisis, the banks that were most exposed and suffered the most and some of them failed to be bailed out were pure investment banks that would have existed even before the repeal of Glass-Steagall and would have got in trouble even before the repeal of Glass-Steagall. And in fact, one of the solutions or partial solutions to this crisis was to have some rescues, so you had J.P. Morgan buying Bear Stearns, and you had Bank of America buying Merrill Lynch, and this was made possible by the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Because during Glass-Steagall JPMorgan could not have bought Bear Stearns and Bank of America could not have bought Merrill Lynch. The only sort of bad example in this picture was Citigroup. Citigroup was both an investment bank and a commercial bank, and it was highly exposed and was really saved by the government because otherwise it would have gone bust. And by the way, during the crisis, the way you got some confidence back for banks like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs was for them to file as commercial banks. So, I think there is no question; in my view, the separation of investment banking and commercial banking was not the [?] factor in causing the crisis or precipitating the crisis. 
*
Russ:* Did you mean to say that without Glass-Steagall, that if Glass-Steagall were still in place, that JPMorgan could not have purchased Bear Stearns? *Guest:* Yeah. It could not. Because it was an investment bank. 
*
Russ:* Aren't they both investment banks? 
*
Guest:* JPMorgan is a commercial bank. JPMorgan Chase is actually both, a huge commercial franchise. 
*
Russ:* Okay. I get the point, then. The argument _for_ Glass-Steagall of course is that commercial banks are FDIC insured, and the story is that if you merged them the money would somehow get mixed together and that made the investment banks that had commercial arms or vice versa too big to fail. But the truth is, the investment banks were viewed as implicitly insured anyway. So, it's in a way it does seem to be not a very important piece of legislation, the repeal of it. 
*
Guest:* *In addition, the investment banks were heavily exposed to commercial banks through sort of a lot of loans. If an investment bank had failed, probably would have brought down the commercial banks that guaranteed the credit.* *So, the separation itself I don't think is the most effective way to limit risk.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Neither. It's just a metaphor to your habit of giving links as an answer to a question.


You mean "expounding" to the best of my ability upon your request given your self admitted lack of depth in the area?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> Another question for you BIZ.


Another 6 questions.



> Is the value of fiat money affected by more than supply and demand?


If it's fiat money why would it be affected by other then? 



> Does the velocity of circulation affect the value of money?


No, the supply of money determines velocity or the lack thereof.



> If so, a vigorous market by itself would create inflation, doesn't it?


What is the cause of the vigorous market? Typically it is an increase/inflation (Sub prime loans)  in the money supply/credit 



> If so, does it really matter if it's fiat money or commodity money?


Fiat money relies on inflation of supply without backing.  Commodity money is backed by real assets. 



> Whether it's fiat money or commodity money, what are free market checks against inflation?


Really dude?  Commodity money is the free market check. 



> And how do they work?


Fiat money doesn't work for anything but booms and bust.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 29, 2016)

Laced said:


> LOL You asked me that question? The quote comes from the passage you recommended, and implicitly endorsed - never figured out the difference between "endorse" and "support" and "vote for" in this election cycle. I thought Glass Steagall was a strong check if fractional reserve banking is a concern to you. Or Lara and Murphy.
> 
> I'm not well versed in the monetary market or regulation. Fractional reserve banking is a reality of modern economics as I understand it, or any monetary system (that should answer your question partially what is the modern economic reality), but apparently it's what leads to all the woes of the financial market according to Lara and Murphy. You recommend it for understanding of the boom and bust cycles. According to Lara and Murphy, switching to commodity money would avoid fractional reserve banking. Or does it? Doesn't the velocity of circulation lead to inflation, or functional fractional reserve banking anyways in a completely free market? Hence my question, what strong checks are they talking about?
> 
> My elementary understanding of the monetary market, with logic and common sense, leads me to conclude that fractional reserve banking is nothing more than a byproduct of any monetary system. Focus on that is a bit superficial, isn't it?


Just read the rest of the book.  It is not as complicated as you think.


----------



## Laced (Oct 29, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Just read the rest of the book.  It is not as complicated as you think.


I have actually read a good portion of that. Wasn't going to tell you that because on a forum, it's impossible to have an intelligent discussion if we keep expanding the topic. It may not be your intention, but giving links tends to exactly that.


----------



## Laced (Oct 30, 2016)

The linked articles, and by extension your point, is basically that the fiat money gives the government the ability to manipulate the supply of money, and therefore the relative prices of things. Manipulating money supply is effectively fractional reserve banking. Fundamentally this is the cause of boom and bust cycles. Commodity money, on the other hand, has intrinsic value, thus by definition, prevents fractional reserve banking. Magically it can avoid financial crises. Is this your point in a nutshell?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2016)

Laced said:


> I have actually read a good portion of that. Wasn't going to tell you that because on a forum, it's impossible to have an intelligent discussion if we keep expanding the topic. It may not be your intention, but giving links tends to exactly that.


Cool.  Expanding the topic within the intent of the thread, which is economics, is okay.  My intent is not to go beyond economics although the bible does contain many references to economics.


----------



## espola (Oct 30, 2016)

Laced said:


> The linked articles, and by extension your point, is basically that the fiat money gives the government the ability to manipulate the supply of money, and therefore the relative prices of things. Manipulating money supply is effectively fractional reserve banking. Fundamentally this is the cause of boom and bust cycles. Commodity money, on the other hand, has intrinsic value, thus by definition, prevents fractional reserve banking. Magically it can avoid financial crises. Is this your point in a nutshell?


If a big economic collapse occurs, what would you do with a closet full of gold coins or bullion?  You can't eat it, you can't wear it, you can't burn it for heat or to move a car or generate electricity...  Anyone who would accept it in trade for useful items would be relying entirely on its symbolic value.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2016)

Laced said:


> I said "function," not "intended." As often the case, *Congressional acts function quite differently than their intended purposes.*


Agree.  "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design.--F.A. Hayek




Laced said:


> The linked articles, and by extension your point, is basically that the fiat money gives the government the ability to manipulate the supply of money, and therefore the relative prices of things. Manipulating money supply is effectively fractional reserve banking. Fundamentally this is the cause of boom and bust cycles. Commodity money, on the other hand, has intrinsic value, thus by definition, prevents fractional reserve banking. Magically it can avoid financial crises. Is this your point in a nutshell?


Fiat money gives the Fed the ability to manipulate the supply of money through either the purchase or sale of Treasury bonds.  The Fed purchasing bonds from our Treasury increases the money supply and the opposite is true with the sale of Treasury bonds.  Fractional Reserve banking is what happens within the actual commercial banks that you and I use.  Chapter 16 contained some simplified balance sheets that may help.  Fundamentally, boom and bust is caused by an increase in the money supply.  An example of commodity money is what you see in post #7 (silver certificate commodity)  as opposed to post #6 (fiat) on page 1 of this thread.  Commodity money does not magically prevent fractional reserve banking or financial crisis.  Commodity money is the check on fractional reserve banking that mitigates or reduces the effects of a financial crisis.  How would you know if fractional reserve banking was happening with Silver Certificates that all look the same?  And how would you respond to that knowledge?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2016)

espola said:


> If a big economic collapse occurs, what would you do with a closet full of gold coins or bullion?  You can't eat it, you can't wear it, you can't burn it for heat or to move a car or generate electricity...  Anyone who would accept it in trade for useful items would be relying entirely on its symbolic value.


How much do you want for your gold?  I'll give you a paper dollar to snack on.


----------



## Laced (Oct 30, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fiat money gives the Fed the ability to manipulate the supply of money through either the purchase or sale of Treasury bonds.  The Fed purchasing bonds from our Treasury increases the money supply and the opposite is true with the sale of Treasury bonds.  Fractional Reserve banking is what happens within the actual commercial banks that you and I use.  Chapter 16 contained some simplified balance sheets that may help.  *Fundamentally, boom and bust is caused by an increase in the money supply.*  An example of commodity money is what you see in post #7 (silver certificate commodity)  as opposed to post #6 (fiat) on page 1 of this thread.  Commodity money does not magically prevent fractional reserve banking or financial crisis.  Commodity money is the check on fractional reserve banking that mitigates or reduces the effects of a financial crisis.  How would you know if fractional reserve banking was happening with Silver Certificates that all look the same?  And how would you respond to that knowledge?


For it to be true, the Feds would have to increase the money supply by a substantial amount, wouldn't it?


----------



## Laced (Oct 30, 2016)

espola said:


> If a big economic collapse occurs, what would you do with a closet full of gold coins or bullion?  You can't eat it, you can't wear it, you can't burn it for heat or to move a car or generate electricity...  Anyone who would accept it in trade for useful items would be relying entirely on its symbolic value.


That just shows that the "intrinsic value" of commodity money is not so "intrinsic" after all. Value comes from demand and faith.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2016)

Laced said:


> For it to be true, the Feds would have to increase the money supply by a substantial amount, wouldn't it?


Yes.  And they have.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2016)

Laced said:


> That just shows that the "intrinsic value" of commodity money is not so "intrinsic" after all. Value comes from demand and faith.


You are confusing fiat money which has intrinsic value that relies on supply and faith/ignorance with commodity money that you can trade for silver with a certificate like the one you see in post #7.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2016)

...the paper currency in your purse  or wallet is a liability of the Federal Reserve, legally speaking.  After all, these green  pieces of paper have "Federal Reserve Note" written on them.  This is an accounting fiction, of course, a throwback to the days when the notes were simply claims to actual gold or silver.  It's hardly a liability to have billions of dollars in "claims" against the Federal Reserve floating around, when they are claims to nothing. (If you tried to present a $20 bill for redemption at a Federal Reserve Office, you would be able to get two $10 dollar bills, or four $5 dollar bills, but certainly no other type of asset.)--HPBRW


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Just as a free press is necessary for a free citizenry, so too is sound money necessary for a free economy.  All other aspects of what is meant by the term "economic freedom" in conventional circles--low tax rates, mild regulation, no trade barriers -- are a moot point if the government has a printing press at its disposal.

That is why education is the first and most important step--people need to understand the importance of sound money, and the dangers of fiat money and central banking


----------



## Laced (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Just as a free press is necessary for a free citizenry, so too is sound money necessary for a free economy.  All other aspects of what is meant by the term "economic freedom" in conventional circles--low tax rates, mild regulation, no trade barriers -- are a moot point if the government has a printing press at its disposal.
> 
> That is why education is the first and most important step--people need to understand the importance of sound money, and the dangers of fiat money and central banking


I like that you started to state your position in your own words.

Shall we start a discussion about the latter, i.e., economic freedom and government's role?


----------



## espola (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ...the paper currency in your purse  or wallet is a liability of the Federal Reserve, legally speaking.  After all, these green  pieces of paper have "Federal Reserve Note" written on them.  This is an accounting fiction, of course, a throwback to the days when the notes were simply claims to actual gold or silver.  It's hardly a liability to have billions of dollars in "claims" against the Federal Reserve floating around, when they are claims to nothing. (If you tried to present a $20 bill for redemption at a Federal Reserve Office, you would be able to get two $10 dollar bills, or four $5 dollar bills, but certainly no other type of asset.)--HPBRW


You could ask for coins.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

espola said:


> You could ask for coins.


Right.  I could exchange a quarter for five nickles or two dimes and a nickel.  Copper would probably be best.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Laced said:


> I like that you started to state your position in your own words.
> 
> Shall we start a discussion about the latter, i.e., economic freedom and government's role?


$ure.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

espola said:


> You could ask for coins.


coins are not an asset.


----------



## espola (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> coins are not an asset.


Since when?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> coins are not an asset.


Including my 1909 s VDB penny in good shape?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> coins are not an asset.


Since they became fiat money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Including my 1909 s VDB penny in good shape?


Is it putting more money in your pocket?


----------



## Wez (Oct 31, 2016)

Biz, can you discuss some of the disadvantages of using commodity backed currency?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Wez said:


> Biz, can you discuss some of the disadvantages of using commodity backed currency?


Yes.  But only as it disadvantages banks who stray from commodity backed currency.


----------



## Wez (Oct 31, 2016)

I'm just curious if you have a full understanding of currencies and complex banking.  We know your opinion on fiat money and fractional reserve banking, can you show us both the advatages and disadvantages?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Is it putting more money in your pocket?


Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Wez said:


> I'm just curious if you have a full understanding of currencies and complex banking.  We know your opinion on fiat money and fractional reserve banking, can you show us both the advatages and disadvantages?


I can't show you any advantages to fiat money and fractional reserve banking.  Currency and banking are not that complex.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 31, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?


Yes.  That is the definition of an asset.


----------



## espola (Oct 31, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  That is the definition of an asset.


Since when?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> Since when?


Since they started putting money in peoples pockets as opposed to taking money out of.


----------



## Wez (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I can't show you any advantages to fiat money and fractional reserve banking.


Than your ideology outweighs your desire for a balanced discussion of pros and cons.  I'm not buying what you are selling, despite agreeing with you on many things.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> Than your ideology outweighs your desire for a balanced discussion of pros and cons.


Interesting choice of word, "outweigh".  Isn't the practice of fiat money and fractional reserve banking a literal outweighing of too much paper money and not enough gold to back it up?  And it's not like the Fed or our government had a balanced discussion, with citizens, of the pros and cons in 1913 when both the Fed and income taxes started, or in 2008 and beyond when the Fed started QE.  I would be happy to hear your disadvantages to a commodity system given our current financial situation.  After all, you're the one that started the thread about it feeling like 2008 again.  Why does it feel like that....again!!!  Perhaps our current system is outweighed with too much cash again.


----------



## Wez (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Interesting choice of word, "outweigh".  Isn't the practice of fiat money and fractional reserve banking a literal outweighing of too much paper money and not enough gold to back it up?  And it's not like the Fed or our government had a balanced discussion, with citizens, of the pros and cons in 1913 when both the Fed and income taxes started, or in 2008 and beyond when the Fed started QE.  I would be happy to hear your disadvantages to a commodity system given our current financial situation.  After all, you're the one that started the thread about it feeling like 2008 again.  Why does it feel like that....again!!!  Perhaps our current system is outweighed with too much cash again.


I've already discussed the 2008 thread and the reasoning, it didn't come to pass.  Google "problems with a gold backed currency system".  We're in uncharted territory in economics.  Nobody has ever tried to manage a multi trillion dollar economic system.  To sit here and do nothing but complain about it and put forth zero effort to have a balanced discussion is what you and many other Libertarians love to do.  I can't take to heart your complaints when there is no acknowledgement of the fruit our system has produced.


----------



## espola (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Interesting choice of word, "outweigh".  Isn't the practice of fiat money and fractional reserve banking a literal outweighing of too much paper money and not enough gold to back it up?  And it's not like the Fed or our government had a balanced discussion, with citizens, of the pros and cons in 1913 when both the Fed and income taxes started, or in 2008 and beyond when the Fed started QE.  I would be happy to hear your disadvantages to a commodity system given our current financial situation.  After all, you're the one that started the thread about it feeling like 2008 again.  Why does it feel like that....again!!!  Perhaps our current system is outweighed with too much cash again.


Coocoo.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> Coocoo.


Your liability.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> Google "problems with a gold backed currency system".


Top Ten Reasons Why Fiat Currency Is Superior to Gold (or Silver) Money



> *Number 10: There Is Not Enough Gold (or Silver) In the World to Serve as Money*
> Let’s begin with the obvious. We know that central banks the world over have printed money at exponentially growing rates for years. There is now so much paper and electronic money floating around the world that gold (or silver) cannot possibly be expected to keep up. You can’t print gold, after all, you need to find it, dig it out of the ground, refine it, etc., a hugely expensive and time-consuming process which practically ensures a stable rather than exponentially growing supply of the stuff.
> 
> Of course, we know that an exponentially growing supply of money is a good thing. How else can an economy hope to grow, especially one bearing in an exponentially rising debt burden! We need all that new money to pay all that new interest, don’t we? And don’t forget, most things keep getting more expensive, like food and fuel. Don’t we need more money to pay for all that too? What about government entitlements that keep growing in size? If we didn’t have a constant flow of new money, how on earth would we pay for all of that? It is _essential_ that we keep the printing presses rolling.


Are you okay with this explanation?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

> *Number 9: Gold and Silver are Old-Fashioned, Cumbersome Money*
> Here’s another obvious one for you: Gold is HEAVY! Who wants to carry it around? It might be nice and shiny, but hey, it really belongs around your neck.
> 
> The more you think about it, in an age of electronic, plastic or internet money, the whole concept of coinage begins to seem a bit anachronistic. Who even uses small denomination coins anymore, except as household poker betting tokens? I suppose larger coins are still of some use, but let’s face it folks, even those are almost worthless anymore. Coinage is just so passé.
> ...


I can't believe this link made page 1 on the google search.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

> *Number 8: Gold Restrains Growth*
> OK, this reason is a little bit wonkish, but if you’ll bear with me I’ll explain why gold-backed money would put the brakes on the healthy growth the world has been experiencing all through this prosperous modern period of an exponentially rising money supply and might even send us back to the poor house. We already touched on this in Number 10 but let’s go off on a tangent here. You see, back when gold was money, people were poorer. Way poorer. And economic growth was often much weaker.
> 
> I mean, before the industrial revolution, we didn’t even have machines to do basic work like farming, so people had to have loads of children just to get basic work done, resulting in a cycle of poverty. Sure, a handful of landed aristocrats held most of the wealth, and they did just fine, but really, do we want to go back to that sort of wealth disparity?
> ...


Is restraining growth bad?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Is restraining growth bad?


It seems you are desperately attempting to convince someone that you know what you are talking about, is that someone you?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

> *Number 7: The Gold Standard Caused the Great Depression*
> This is related to the above but hugely important in its own right so I’m treating it as a separate critique of gold- or silver-backed money.
> 
> Milton Friedman is famous in part for blaming the Federal Reserve for causing the Great Depression. This runs contrary to what many believe, however, that the gold standard itself caused the Depression. Of course, they are right. We all know that WWI was hugely inflationary as Britain, Germany and other belligerents went off the gold standard in order to finance the war by printing money.
> ...


Funny how this section is titled *The Gold Standard Caused the Great Depression *while it clearly documents the expansion of the money supply for the benefit of the UK who subsequently devalued their currency


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It seems you are desperately attempting to convince someone that you know what you are talking about, is that someone you?


Speaking of desperation.



> *Number 6: Rules Can Be Broken*
> Returning to the obvious, this reason is so simple a child can understand it. Rules are nice on paper but we all know they can be broken. Just because a country is on a gold standard doesn’t mean it can’t just devalue. Britain and Germany did so in 1914 and inflated like crazy to pay for WWI as explained above. The US devalued the dollar some 60% versus gold in 1934 and left the gold standard entirely in 1971.
> 
> Let’s face it, if rules can be broken, what’s the point having them in the first place? The claim that gold-backed money is stable and prevents runaway inflation is just hogwash. Whenever governments choose, they can ditch gold-backed money, devalue and create as much inflation as they desire. They can even hyperinflate if they like. What’s to stop them? They set the rules. *Gold advocates are just so naïve*!


Biting off a bit more then they can chew here


----------



## Wez (Nov 1, 2016)

Are you dismissing each of these points?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

> *Number 5: Gold-Backed Money Favours the US versus the Rest of the World*
> 
> Now for those of us residing outside the USofA, we’re sometimes concerned that the US has the largest gold reserves in the world. If the world went back on a gold standard, then the US would be even more powerful than it already is. It would throw its weight around even more, use that gold to pay for an even larger military and open up more bases abroad, including where they aren’t even wanted, like in Bulgaria. The US might even start more wars, as if it hasn’t started enough already, financed as they are with the Fed’s printing press.
> 
> ...


Coocoo


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> Are you dismissing each of these points?


Yes.  Would you like to hear why for each and then provide some balance or are you in full agreement with each?


----------



## Wez (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  Would you like to hear why for each and then provide some balance or are you in full agreement with each?


I'm not arguing one way or another, I don't pretend to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy.  I'm assuming the Gold standard was dropped for good reason...


----------



## espola (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> I'm not arguing one way or another, I don't pretend to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy.  I'm assuming the Gold standard was dropped for good reason...


Not enough gold, and gold too good an industrial process element to be kept locked in a vault.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> I'm not arguing one way or another, I don't pretend to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy.  I'm assuming the Gold standard was dropped for good reason...


It was dropped for good reason if you are a Central banker.  If you are not a Central banker, dropping the Gold standard is not so good.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> I'm not arguing one way or another, I don't pretend to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy.  I'm assuming the Gold standard was dropped for good reason...


Why would you assume that "the Gold Standard was dropped for good reason" if you aren't pretending to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> Not enough gold, and gold too good an industrial process element to be kept locked in a vault.


Not enough Gold for what?  At what price would Gold become too valuable to sit in a vault?


----------



## Wez (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why would you assume that "the Gold Standard was dropped for good reason" if you aren't pretending to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy?


Do you read your responses, they make no sense?

You are taking the stance you know what is the best way for us to handle banking and currencies.  I'm admitting that is a topic above my pay grade.

You imply what we are doing is way wrong and we are headed for an eventual meltdown.  Of course you "could be" right, but you are already admitting to dismissing entirely all arguments for getting off a gold standard, so I don't feel you are making a reasonable case.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> Do you read your responses, they make no sense?
> 
> You are taking the stance you know what is the best way for us to handle banking and currencies.  I'm admitting that is a topic above my pay grade.
> 
> You imply what we are doing is way wrong and we are headed for an eventual meltdown.  Of course you "could be" right, but you are already admitting to dismissing entirely all arguments for getting off a gold standard, so I don't feel you are making a reasonable case.


I did read my response.  You typed that you* assumed* the Gold Standard was abandoned *for good reason*.  What did you base your *good* assumptions on?  I googled "problems with the gold standard" and read the top ten problems.  Paper money has no value in and of itself.  Conversely, even Espola realizes that Gold is "too good an industrial process element..."  Would you consider his statement a reasonable case for arguing the merits of the gold standard?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez said:


> Do you read your responses, they make no sense?
> 
> You are taking the stance you know what is the best way for us to handle banking and currencies.  I'm admitting that is a topic above my pay grade.
> 
> You imply what we are doing is way wrong and we are headed for an eventual meltdown.  Of course you "could be" right, but you are already admitting to dismissing entirely all arguments for getting off a gold standard, so I don't feel you are making a reasonable case.


Trying to sound smart isn't working, Wezdumb.
The street lights are on, get to stepping little guy.


----------



## espola (Nov 1, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I did read my response.  You typed that you* assumed* the Gold Standard was abandoned *for good reason*.  What did you base your *good* assumptions on?  I googled "problems with the gold standard" and read the top ten problems.  Paper money has no value in and of itself.  Conversely, even Espola realizes that Gold is "too good an industrial process element..."  Would you consider his statement a reasonable case for arguing the merits of the gold standard?


No.


----------



## Andy Dukes (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> No.


 Maybe we should be on the lithium standard, or the heroin standard.


----------



## espola (Nov 1, 2016)

Andy Dukes said:


> Maybe we should be on the lithium standard, or the heroin standard.


The most valuable commodity traded in dollars is petroleum, so we are on a carbon standard.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> No.


You're wrong.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Wez,
        do you agree with the following?:



> *Number 10: There Is Not Enough Gold (or Silver) In the World to Serve as Money*
> 
> Let’s begin with the obvious. We know that central banks the world over have printed money at exponentially growing rates for years. There is now so much paper and electronic money floating around the world that gold (or silver) cannot possibly be expected to keep up. You can’t print gold, after all, you need to find it, dig it out of the ground, refine it, etc., a hugely expensive and time-consuming process which practically ensures a stable rather than exponentially growing supply of the stuff.
> 
> Of course, we know that an exponentially growing supply of money is a good thing. How else can an economy hope to grow, especially one bearing in an exponentially rising debt burden! We need all that new money to pay all that new interest, don’t we? And don’t forget, most things keep getting more expensive, like food and fuel. Don’t we need more money to pay for all that too? What about government entitlements that keep growing in size? If we didn’t have a constant flow of new money, how on earth would we pay for all of that? It is _essential_ that we keep the printing presses rolling.


----------



## espola (Nov 1, 2016)

Anyone who wants to return to gold-backed economy may purchase a gold contract from a commodity dealer.  The dealer will send the buyer the gold, or, as an option, store the gold securely and issue the buyer a certificate of ownership.  The buyer can then search for another economic re-enactor willing to trade goods in exchange for the gold certificate, or for a contract declaring a partial interest in the certificate.  The commodity dealer will send to the contract buyer, or his designated agent, the gold in question, on demand.  For all practical purposes, this parallels transactions done with gold certificates before gold was confiscated in the 30's, except that improvements in technology allow much of the paperwork to be done electronically, and deliveries can be accomplished overnight.

So what are  you waiting for?


----------



## Andy Dukes (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> The most valuable commodity traded in dollars is petroleum, so we are on a carbon standard.


 I would say it was hope and prayers. Why would any nation, unless it is like the Saudi's and oil, want to tie it's money to a single commodity?  I ran across this article today about the top industries based on GDP for each state.  Notice how few economies are based on an element.

http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/09/23/largest-industry-in-each-state-3/2/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

espola said:


> Anyone who wants to return to gold-backed economy may purchase a gold contract from a commodity dealer.  The dealer will send the buyer the gold, or, as an option, store the gold securely and issue the buyer a certificate of ownership.  The buyer can then search for another economic re-enactor willing to trade goods in exchange for the gold certificate, or for a contract declaring a partial interest in the certificate.  The commodity dealer will send to the contract buyer, or his designated agent, the gold in question, on demand.  For all practical purposes, this parallels transactions done with gold certificates before gold was confiscated in the 30's, except that improvements in technology allow much of the paperwork to be done electronically, and deliveries can be accomplished overnight.
> 
> So what are  you waiting for?


Who said I was waiting?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2016)

Andy Dukes said:


> I would say it was hope and prayers. Why would any nation, unless it is like the Saudi's and oil, want to tie it's money to a single commodity?


You mean because it is better to tie your money to nothing?   



Andy Dukes said:


> I ran across this article today about the top industries based on GDP for each state.  Notice how few economies are based on an element.
> http://247wallst.com/special-report/2016/09/23/largest-industry-in-each-state-3/2/


Notice how few if any of those economies print their own currency.


----------



## Wez (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Wez,
> do you agree with the following?:


That was written as a parody BIZ, nice try.


----------



## Wez (Nov 2, 2016)

Here's a brief overview that was the 1st hit when I Googled "problems with a gold standard":

http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/why-the-gold-standard-is-the-worlds-worst-economic-idea-in-2-charts/261552/

...you can find plenty more academic studies if you keep going down the list.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

Wez said:


> That was written as a parody BIZ, nice try.


That's perfect, fiat money and fractional reserve banking as parody.  That's the whole point.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

Wez said:


> Here's a brief overview that was the 1st hit when I Googled "problems with a gold standard":
> 
> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/why-the-gold-standard-is-the-worlds-worst-economic-idea-in-2-charts/261552/
> 
> ...you can find plenty more academic studies if you keep going down the list.


Ah yes, the CPI basket that never contains any of the goods or services that cause financial crisis.


----------



## Wez (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That's perfect, fiat money and fractional reserve banking as parody.  That's the whole point.


It's your whole point, this we know...


----------



## Wez (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ah yes, the CPI basket that never contains any of the goods or services that cause financial crisis.


I agree that CPI has become politicized and messed with too much.  It's your solution I'm not down with...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

Wez said:


> I agree that CPI has become politicized and messed with too much.  It's your solution I'm not down with...


Most aren't despite what you just mentioned about the CPI.  Homes are not in the CPI basket neither are stocks.  I am reading the attached paper to the Atlantic article.  I am not surprised that the Atlantic left out the two most important events, The creation of the Fed and the Federal income tax of 1913, when discussing the charts.  The article makes key points about the gold standard  restricting the printing of  more money to combat inflation of prices.  That is just a complete mis-understanding of the symptoms as opposed to the cause of inflation.


----------



## Wez (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Most aren't despite what you just mentioned about the CPI.  Homes are not in the CPI basket neither are stocks.


Homes shouldn't be in CPI, but rents probably should.  Why would stocks be in CPI, that's not an item people need to buy?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

Wez said:


> Homes shouldn't be in CPI, but rents probably should.  Why would stocks be in CPI, that's not an item people need to buy?


Right but those are the items that they spend the most on in life and the two sectors where the Great recession and the great depression happened.  Both events caused by an inflation of the money supply.


----------



## Wez (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Right but those are the items that they spend the most on in life and the two sectors where the Great recession and the great depression happened.  Both events caused by an inflation of the money supply.


You're confused as to what CPI is supposed to represent.  It's not what people spend the most on, it's a sampling of typical goods and services.  You can't put everything in there, stocks, Real Estate, etc. are more speculative investments that would make CPI a meaningless index.  People with modest incomes and savings don't care what people are paying for their speculative investments, they need to know how much the stuff they do buy is changing in price.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

Wez said:


> You're confused as to what CPI is supposed to represent.  It's not what people spend the most on, it's a sampling of typical goods and services.  You can't put everything in there, stocks, Real Estate, etc. are more speculative investments that would make CPI a meaningless index.  People with modest incomes and savings don't care what people are paying for their speculative investments, they need to know how much the stuff they do buy is changing in price.


Totally agree.  That is why I wouldnʻt use the CPI to argue against the gold standard. Printing more fiat money or extending more credit typically increases the cost of not just CPI items but goods and services as a whole. Not printung does the opposite obviously.


----------



## espola (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ah yes, the CPI basket that never contains any of the goods or services that cause financial crisis.


 What goods and services are those?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

espola said:


> What goods and services are those?


Housing and Financial services.


----------



## espola (Nov 2, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Housing and Financial services.


The C in CPI stands for Consumer.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

espola said:


> The C in CPI stands for Consumer.


Yes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 2, 2016)

The P stands for price.  I stands for index.


----------



## Wez (Nov 3, 2016)

Please tell us more about how Libertarian policy is what we need...

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-kansas-economy-20161031-story.html

*"Kansas is still bleeding, thanks to tea party economics"*
*
"Who’s to blame for this? The state’s voters are. While they already were feeling the pain, they reelected Brownback to a second term in 2014, at which point things got worse. Why? Maybe the electorate revels in the state’s role as a “laboratory for supply side nostrums,” as economist Menzie Chinn of the University of Wisconsin called it recently. Some of those who voted for Brownback deserve what they’re getting. But they’re imposing the disaster on a lot of innocent people."*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2016)

Wez said:


> Please tell us more about how Libertarian policy is what we need...
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-kansas-economy-20161031-story.html
> 
> ...


Libertarian policy?  You mean because people spend their money better then the government can?  
*
Kansas: An Unsung Hero For Economic Growth*
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinquefield/2016/07/18/kansas-an-unsung-hero-for-economic-growth/#3272806a5992


----------



## Wez (Nov 4, 2016)

Is the Tea Party most closely aligned with the Libertarian party ideals?


----------



## Wez (Nov 4, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Kansas: An Unsung Hero For Economic Growth*
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/rexsinquefield/2016/07/18/kansas-an-unsung-hero-for-economic-growth/#3272806a5992


Did you see the authors bio?  "I focus on pro-growth, free market tax reform solutions in states."  That article, praising Brownback, would be consistent with his agenda.  The data however, contradicts his hopes...

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2016-10-24/kansas-ends-bad-economic-news-by-not-reporting-it


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 4, 2016)

I'm glad to see IZ found someone else to talk to besides himself.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2016)

Wez said:


> Is the Tea Party most closely aligned with the Libertarian party ideals?


Libertarians are fiscally conservative so I assume so.


----------



## Wez (Nov 4, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mean because people spend their money better then the government can?


This statement in isolation, is not true.  Free market solutions are usually preferable, but not always.  Prisons would be a good example of where market based solutions are a very bad idea.  Finding the right balance between municipal services that need to be paid for with taxes and market solutions is best, imo.  What taxation level is best is up for debate and I think is not a set number, but varies incredibly based on many different factors.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2016)

Wez said:


> This statement in isolation, is not true.  Free market solutions are usually preferable, but not always.  Prisons would be a good example of where market based solutions are a very bad idea.  Finding the right balance between municipal services that need to be paid for with taxes and market solutions is best, imo.  What taxation level is best is up for debate and I think is not a set number, but varies incredibly based on many different factors.


Didn't you mean in isolation my statement is true?  Our government has no problem implementing private prisons in the aggregate.  That's how we got ACA.  You seem to agree that one size fits all policies yield less then favorable results.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 6, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm glad to see IZ found someone else to talk to besides himself.


It's just marketing son.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 6, 2016)

*CHART: Here's How 175 Various Items Affect The Rate Of Inflation*

http://www.businessinsider.com/breakdown-of-consumer-price-index-basket-2014-1

Somehow we always interpret "inflation" as price change (symptom) as opposed to the cause, an increase in money supply.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 6, 2016)

On pages 642-643 of Will Durant’s remarkable book _Caesar and Christ_(1944) he discusses Diocletian‘s economic policies. (Diocletian reigned from 282 to 305 A.D.)

In years of peace Diocletian, with his aides, faced the problems of economic decay. To overcome depression and prevent revolution he substituted a managed economy for the law of supply and demand…. To ensure the supply of necessaries for the cities and the armies, he brought many branches of industry under complete state control, beginning with the import of grain; he persuaded the shipowners, merchants, and crews engaged in this trade to accept such control in return for government guarantee of security in employment and returns…. In 301 Diocletian and his colleagues [joint rulers of an administratively divided empire] issued an Edictum de pretiis, dictating maximum legal prices or wages for all important articles or services in the Empire…. The Edict was until our time the most famous example of an attempt to replace economic laws by governmental decrees. Its failure was rapid and complete.


----------



## Laced (Nov 7, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *CHART: Here's How 175 Various Items Affect The Rate Of Inflation*
> 
> http://www.businessinsider.com/breakdown-of-consumer-price-index-basket-2014-1
> 
> Somehow we always interpret "inflation" as price change (symptom) as opposed to the cause, an increase in money supply.


Money supply is not the only cause of inflation. A low level of inflation actually helps cushion the impact of a recession.

You believe that the Fed is responsible for the bust and boom cycles because it manipulates money supply that causes inflation. That belief is not supported empirically. In the 100 years before the Fed was created, there were 44 recessions. In the 100+ years since, there were 22. The boom and bust cycle is inherent in a free market. A free market is not entirely rational.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money supply is not the only cause of inflation. A low level of inflation actually helps cushion the impact of a recession.


So itʻs your understanding that the 2008 crisis was cushioned by low inflation?


----------



## Laced (Nov 7, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So itʻs your understanding that the 2008 crisis was cushioned by low inflation?


To be honest with you, I'm very tempted to give you links, but you're already very well read. Plus, I definitely don't want to start a links war with you.


----------



## espola (Nov 7, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So itʻs your understanding that the 2008 crisis was cushioned by low inflation?


One of the forces that disturbed the economy in 2008 was the liquidity crisis encountered by some big operators.

In other words, not enough money.


----------



## espola (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> To be honest with you, I'm very tempted to give you links, but you're already very well read. Plus, I definitely don't want to start a links war with you.


I'm not sure Izzy reads much of the stuff he copies.  He is rarely able to discuss any of the content in a manner that would lead me to believe he understands it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> To be honest with you, I'm very tempted to give you links, but you're already very well read. Plus, I definitely don't want to start a links war with you.


Inflation of money supply caused an increase in home prices.  Agreed?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

espola said:


> One of the forces that disturbed the economy in 2008 was the liquidity crisis encountered by some big operators.
> 
> In other words, not enough money.


You're babbling.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

espola said:


> I'm not sure Izzy reads much of the stuff he copies.  He is rarely able to discuss any of the content in a manner that would lead me to believe he understands it.





espola said:


> One of the forces that disturbed the economy in 2008 was the liquidity crisis encountered by some big operators.
> 
> In other words, not enough money.


"Liquidity" is not an economic "forces"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> You believe that the Fed is responsible for the bust and boom cycles because it manipulates money supply that causes inflation.


An increase in money supply (inflation of money supply) causes a decrease in the price of borrowing money (interest).  A decrease in the cost of money (interest rates) causes an increase in home prices because more people have access to more money to buy/sell homes.  You don't need links to understand the economic forces of supply and demand.


----------



## Laced (Nov 7, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Inflation of money supply caused an increase in home prices.  Agreed?


I know where you're going with this but go ahead


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money supply is not the only cause of inflation. A low level of inflation actually helps cushion the impact of a recession.
> 
> You believe that the Fed is responsible for the bust and boom cycles because it manipulates money supply that causes inflation. *That belief is not supported empirically. In the 100 years before the Fed was created, there were 44 recessions. In the 100+ years since, there were 22.* The boom and bust cycle is inherent in a free market. A free market is not entirely rational.


"That belief" is not only empirically supported but historically supported as well.  The Roman's inflated their money supply through counterfeiting /debasing until the people no longer valued Roman money for exchange.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> I know where you're going with this but go ahead


I already did. One post prior.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2016)

Laced said:


> The boom and bust cycle is inherent in a free market. A free market is not entirely rational.


This is one of those cliche' oft used rarely understood.


----------



## Laced (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> "That belief" is not only empirically supported but historically supported as well.  The Roman's inflated their money supply through counterfeiting /debasing until the people no longer valued Roman money for exchange.


Why do we need to look at what Romans did when we have our own history for comparison? Recession, or boom and bust cycle as your favorite economists put it, is as old as the free market. It existed before and after the creation of the Fed. Before and after the gold standard. That fact flies in the face of your argument for elimination of the Fed and reversion back to the gold standard.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

Laced said:


> Why do we need to look at what Romans did when we have our own history for comparison? Recession, or boom and bust cycle as your favorite economists put it, is as old as the free market. It existed before and after the creation of the Fed. Before and after the gold standard. That fact flies in the face of your argument for elimination of the Fed and reversion back to the gold standard.


How does it go?  "Those who don't know history.....repeat it"  Why is U.S. monetary policy fundamentally unlike Rome's monetary policy?


----------



## Laced (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How does it go?  "Those who don't know history.....repeat it"  Why is U.S. monetary policy fundamentally unlike Rome's monetary policy?


We have to know all history, not selectively.

Even if we eliminate the Fed, we still need a central bank. How would a central bank be different from the Fed that enjoys independence from political influences? A private central bank doesn't mean lack of government interference, as there would be government-set boundaries on the private central bank.

On a more fundamental level, government is not some abstract evil entity. Rather it's the will of the majority in a political sense. The principle of limited government is to protect minority rights free from the whims of the majority.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How does it go?  "Those who don't know history.....repeat it"  Why is U.S. monetary policy fundamentally unlike Rome's monetary policy?


It's interesting to see that Izzy has given up his 1890's economics theory and replaced it with 4th century economics.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

Laced said:


> Recession, or boom and bust cycle as your favorite economists put it, is as old as the free market. It existed before and after the creation of the Fed. Before and after the gold standard. That fact flies in the face of your argument for elimination of the Fed and reversion back to the gold standard.


You are missing the cause of the Boom and Bust cycle.  Did you know that Canada has never had a financial crisis?  They've (Canada) had recessions which are not the same as a Boom and Bust cycle that lead to all U.S. financial crisis from the depression to present day.  Recessions are healthy corrections to the market when not bailed out by inflating the money supply through so called quantitative easing.  How perverted that, in the U.S., inflating money supply causes booms followed by bust that rely on a rescue plan that further inflates the money supply through so called quantitative easing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> It's interesting to see that Izzy has given up his 1890's economics theory and replaced it with 4th century economics.


It's called monetary history E-nanke.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

Laced said:


> We have to know all history, not selectively.


Who's being selective?  You still haven't answered what the fundamental differences between Roman and modern American monetary policies are. Like E-nanke said I've gone from 4th Century to 1890 and beyond from Europe to the U.S. to South America.  Please let me know what relevant history I've left out.


----------



## Laced (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You are missing the cause of the Boom and Bust cycle.  Did you know that Canada has never had a financial crisis?  They've (Canada) had recessions which are not the same as a Boom and Bust cycle that lead to all U.S. financial crisis from the depression to present day.  Recessions are healthy corrections to the market when not bailed out by inflating the money supply through so called quantitative easing.  How perverted that, in the U.S., inflating money supply causes booms followed by bust that rely on a rescue plan that further inflates the money supply through so called quantitative easing.


Cite a country with a central bank whose directors are appointed by the government hardly supports your argument.


----------



## Laced (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Who's being selective?  You still haven't answered what the fundamental differences between Roman and modern American monetary policies are. Like E-nanke said I've gone from 4th Century to 1890 and beyond from Europe to the U.S. to South America.  Please let me know what relevant history I've left out.


The 44 recessions before the Fed was created.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You are missing the cause of the Boom and Bust cycle.  Did you know that Canada has never had a financial crisis?  They've (Canada) had recessions which are not the same as a Boom and Bust cycle that lead to all U.S. financial crisis from the depression to present day.  Recessions are healthy corrections to the market when not bailed out by inflating the money supply through so called quantitative easing.  How perverted that, in the U.S., inflating money supply causes booms followed by bust that rely on a rescue plan that further inflates the money supply through so called quantitative easing.


Canada has had a centralized banking under a government system that the WSJ has called "liberal democracy".  Are you sure you want to pursue this?  It's a big deviation from your usual position of free market conservatism.


----------



## Laced (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> Canada has had a centralized banking under a government system that the WSJ has called "liberal democracy".  Are you sure you want to pursue this?  It's a big deviation from your usual position of free market conservatism.


"Liberal" here doesn't mean progressive as opposed to conservative. It means protection of minority and individual rights.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Laced said:


> "Liberal" here doesn't mean progressive as opposed to conservative. It means protection of minority and individual rights.


I understand that, but the word is poison to Izzy and his ilk on the forum.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

Laced said:


> Cite a country with a central bank whose directors are appointed by the government hardly supports your argument.


Why?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

Laced said:


> The 44 recessions before the Fed was created.


What was the fundamental cause of the 44 recessions and what measures were taken in the wake of those recessions if any?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> Canada has had a centralized banking under a government system that the WSJ has called "liberal democracy".  Are you sure you want to pursue this?  It's a big deviation from your usual position of free market conservatism.


I would love to pursue it!  How about you?  Why did WSJ call it a "liberal democracy"?  Post the link if you like.  That way someone can read and explain it to you.  I doubt that a deviation will arise.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I would love to pursue it!  How about you?  Why did WSJ call it a "liberal democracy"?  Post the link if you like.  That way someone can read and explain it to you.  I doubt that a deviation will arise.


http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/04/09/why-canada-can-avoid-banking-crises-and-u-s-cant/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> I understand that, but the word is poison to Izzy and his ilk on the forum.


I like classic liberals.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/04/09/why-canada-can-avoid-banking-crises-and-u-s-cant/


Ah yes, Calomiris and Haber wrote the book I have referenced here before, "Fragile by Design".  So, where is the deviation.  I don't see any.  You should read the linked paper in the article that you link or the book "Fragile by Design" .  It is chocked full of banking and economic history.  Thanks for bringing this up.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ah yes, Calomiris and Haber wrote the book I have referenced here before, "Fragile by Design".  So, where is the deviation.  I don't see any.  You should read the linked paper in the article that you link or the book "Fragile by Design" .  It is chocked full of banking and economic history.  Thanks for bringing this up.


Where is the free market capitalism you are so fond of?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2013/04/09/why-canada-can-avoid-banking-crises-and-u-s-cant/


Calomiris and Haber Podcast interview on Fragile by Design:

So the basic idea of the book is that banking systems are fragile by design because it is impossible to take politics out of bank regulation. And it's impossible to do so because there are inherent conflicts of interest between government and banking systems such that banks need governments and governments need banks. Those conflicts of interest basically boil down to three features. *First,* governments simultaneously regulate banks and borrow from banks. *Second,* governments simultaneously use their police power in order to enforce debt contracts on behalf of banks; but people who are being, let's say, forced out of their houses because they've defaulted on a mortgage are voters, and so when banking crises occur governments often have reasons to _not_ enforce those debt contracts. *Third,* governments are in charge of liquidating failed banks. But the biggest group of creditors to a bank when a bank is liquidated are its depositors--who are voters. And so governments have incentives to change the rules of government deposit insurance for political ends--so often extend deposit insurance beyond its statutory limits. Because of those three basic inherent conflicts of interest, it's extremely difficult to remove politics from banking. Governments have, or parties inside the government have inherent reasons for wanting to use the banking system for their own ends, and at the same time, bankers need the government in order to do things like enforce debt contracts. There's no getting politics out.


http://www.econtalk.org/archives/2014/02/calomiris_and_h.html


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> Where is the free market capitalism you are so fond of?


Good question.  Read above.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Good question.  Read above.


What does that have to do with Canada?

Canadian government has a long history of interfering with Canadian industry, ostensibly to help the Canadian workers and investors - agriculture, railroads, aircraft, automobiles, lumber, mining, fishing...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> What does that have to do with Canada?
> 
> Canadian government has a long history of interfering with Canadian industry, ostensibly to help the Canadian workers and investors - agriculture, railroads, aircraft, automobiles, lumber, mining, fishing...


Ostensibly?  Please continue.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ostensibly?  Please continue.


Why bother?  You have already demonstrated your ignorance on this topic, as on so many others.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> Why bother?  You have already demonstrated your ignorance on this topic, as on so many others.


Strong exit strategy.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Strong exit strategy.


It beats circling around the drain playing word games like a JaP junior trainee.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> It beats circling around the drain playing word games like a JaP junior trainee.


Ostensibly.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ostensibly.


q.e.d.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> q.e.d.





espola said:


> What does that have to do with Canada?
> 
> Canadian government has *a long history of interfering with Canadian industry*, ostensibly to help the Canadian workers and investors - agriculture, railroads, aircraft, automobiles, lumber, mining, fishing...


Not long enough apparently.


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not long enough apparently.


Starting before 1700 and continuing until today.  Is that long enough?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> Starting before 1700 and continuing until today.  Is that long enough?


Sure.



> Canadian government has *a long history of interfering with Canadian industry*, ostensibly to help the Canadian workers and investors - agriculture, railroads, aircraft, automobiles, lumber, mining, fishing...


Can you tell us what the Canadian government did to "interfere" with Canadian industry?


----------



## espola (Nov 8, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sure.
> 
> Can you tell us what the Canadian government did to "interfere" with Canadian industry?


How about the Automotive Products Trade Agreement of 1965?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 8, 2016)

espola said:


> How about the Automotive Products Trade Agreement of 1965?


How did that interfere or contribute to zero financial crisis for Canada?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Here’s a letter to the _Wall Street Journal_:

Sen. Elizabeth Warren supports those who oppose school choice (“Progressive Values on the Ballot,” Nov. 10), presumably because she believes that competition causes suppliers (in this case K-12 schools) to worsen their service to customers.  Yet Sen. Warren also supports – because she thinks that it will intensify competition throughout the economy – active antitrust enforcement, presumably because she believes that competition causes suppliers to _improve_ their service to customers.

Is it too much to ask Sen. Warren to decide one way or another if she believes that competition for customers worsens or improves suppliers’ performance – or, alternatively, to ask her to explain why K-12 schooling is an exception to the well-established rule that competition doesn’t worsen, but improves, the performance of its suppliers?--Donny B.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Richard Epstein's advice to Trump:

You should take a similar hard look to actions take by the Department of Labor that disrupt all businesses. The recent decision to roughly double the wage and overtime provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act to people who earn under $47,476 per year cannot be ducked by any firm. The administrative and financial burdens make it especially difficult for tech start-ups to sign up employees and for universities to compensate the graduate students so necessary for engineering and the natural sciences. These rules have to be pulled right away to give breathing room to American firms. In the slightly longer horizon, once your administration can name a majority of the members to the National Labor Relations Board, it has to reverse ground on virtually every major ruling that has come down, and to immediately terminate with prejudice the litigation that seeks to treat franchisors like MacDonald’s as “joint employers” subject to the jurisdiction of the NLRB. The Obama administration takes the view that successful business models have to be destroyed in the name of social justice, even if job stagnation results.

http://www.hoover.org/research/open-letter-president-trump


----------



## Wez (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ...presumably because she believes that competition causes suppliers (in this case K-12 schools) to worsen their service to customers.


If your premise is wrong, your conclusion will be.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> If your premise is wrong, your conclusion will be.


Competition for customers is good for customers.  Especially the poor.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Competition for customers is good for customers.  Especially the poor.


Are you one of those that feel everything should be privatized?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Competition for customers is good for customers.  Especially the poor.





Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you one of those that feel everything should be privatized?


No.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.


Roads?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Roads?


Where it makes $ense, yes.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Where it makes $ense, yes.


Hospitals?


----------



## espola (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Where it makes $ense, yes.


Does it make $ense to allow private businesses to compete in the tax-free bond market?  Or giving them eminent domain power to confiscate private land?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

espola said:


> Does it make $ense to allow private businesses to compete in the tax-free bond market?  Or giving them eminent domain power to confiscate private land?


Who is offering the bond?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Hospitals?


Again where it makes $ense.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Again where it makes $ense.


Prisons?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Prisons?


If they make $ense.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If they make $ense.


So no personal opinion on that, check.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So no personal opinion on that, check.


On the contrary.  Nothing more personal then me paying for something that doesn't make $ense.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

espola said:


> Or giving them eminent domain power to confiscate private land?


Eminent domain only works if there is Federal money and cronyism.  $4 billion for a rail project that confiscates land, or $600 million for a double decker freeway in Hawaii that would have built above the existing freeway to West Oahu.  What do you think the dip shit GOP Mayor did?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> On the contrary.  Nothing more personal then me paying for something that doesn't make $ense.


There is a lot of waste in the military, that makes no sense to me.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Eminent domain only works if there is Federal money and cronyism.  $4 billion for a rail project that confiscates land, or $600 million for a double decker freeway in Hawaii that would have built above the existing freeway to West Oahu.  What do you think the dip shit GOP Mayor did?


$4 billion was just the down payment now wasn't it . . . and it ain't even to Ala Mo yet?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> $4 billion was just the down payment now wasn't it . . . and it ain't even to Ala Mo yet?


Maybe a project for Donald to work on . . . "on time and under budget!".


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> There is a lot of waste in the military, that makes no sense to me.


Criminal even.  It made me sick how we would spend like crazy every September to use up our budget before next fiscal year, 1 October. Gotta get the same budget or more for next year!  We get new copiers leased whether we needed them or not.  We would send pilots to Vegas/Nellis for the weekend just to burn our monthly gas allowance.  Annoying.  I see Solar Panels all over MCAS Miramar that the base general told me are not paying for themselves as promised.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 12, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> $4 billion was just the down payment now wasn't it . . . and it ain't even to Ala Mo yet?


I was just talking to my nieces husband last night about rail.  He is with IBEW the electricians union.  He stands to gain from the contract but admits that U.S. Representative, Democrat Colleen Hanabusa's preference for a double decker freeway fell amongst deaf ears with $4 billion dollars on the table.  GOP idiots should be in OCCC.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Nov 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Criminal even.  It made me sick how we would spend like crazy every September to use up our budget before next fiscal year, 1 October. Gotta get the same budget or more for next year!  We get new copiers leased whether we needed them or not.  We would send pilots to Vegas/Nellis for the weekend just to burn our monthly gas allowance.  Annoying.  I see Solar Panels all over MCAS Miramar that the base general told me are not paying for themselves as promised.


We hired a President who won the election on roughly one fifth the budget the establishment threw at him.
Maybe we can get some "trickle down" fiscal management.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 13, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> We hired a President who won the election on roughly one fifth the budget the establishment threw at him.
> Maybe we can get some "trickle down" fiscal management.


Ha ha ha.  Donald's victory speech location not quite as glitz as Hillary's "glass house" location.  What a freakin' waste of tax payer money....again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 13, 2016)

*What Is Cronyism and Why Is It a Cancer?*

It’s easy to define and/or understand most statist policies.


We know that a tax increase is when politicians take (or, given the Laffer Curve, try to take) more of your money based on your decisions to work, save, shop, or invest.
We know that protectionism is when politicians use taxes and other policies to restrict your freedom to buy goods and services produced in other nations.
We know that a minimum wage mandate is when politicians criminalize employment contracts between consenting adults, thus harming low-skilled workers.
We know that Keynesian “stimulus” is when politicians borrow from one part of the economy and spend in another part of the economy and pretend there’s more money.
The list is potentially endless, but there’s one statist policy – cronyism – that I haven’t added to the list because I haven’t thought of a simple definition.

Are bailouts cronyism? Yes, but it’s more than that. Are subsidies cronyism? Yes, but it’s more than that. Are favors in the tax code cronyism? Yes, but it’s more than that. Are trade barriers cronyism? Yes, but it’s more than that.

https://fee.org/articles/what-is-cronyism-and-why-is-it-a-cancer/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 13, 2016)

And the battle to separate *capitalism from cronyism* is further hindered when major figures in the business world (such as Warren Buffett) get in bed with government.

Another example is Elon Musk, the head of Tesla, Solar City, and SpaceX. He is known as a visionary entrepreneur, which is good. But Andy Quinlan of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity explains that he also has put taxpayers on the hook to underwrite and prop up much of his business activities.

"It was announced this week that one of Elon Musk’s companies, Tesla Motors, will buy one of his other companies, SolarCity, for an all-stock deal worth $2.6 billion. …*With the amount of taxpayer support both companies have received, perhaps the rest of us should get a vote*… *The deal comes as SolarCity has floundered despite significant taxpayer support through a bevy of state and federal tax credits and subsidies. *Nevertheless, the solar energy company’s stock has been in long term decline as the company struggles to develop a profitable market not reliant on generous helpings of taxpayer support. Tesla, too, has fed repeatedly at the government trough. *The government provided federal loan guarantees and tax credits to help manufacture its electric vehicles. It also subsidized the purchase of those same vehicles to increase sales. Even still, the company makes more money selling “carbon credits” to other manufacturers than it does electric vehicles. *…Musk’s other endeavor, SpaceX, also relies heavily on government. Obviously much of its business comes from government contracts, but more interesting is how those contracts are apparently obtained. …this year’s National Defense Authorization Act contains an amendment from Senator John McCain designed to eliminate from competition the Defense Department’s current supplier of rockets and pave the way for SpaceX to take over, despite the fact that its rockets aren’t yet powerful enough for the job."


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2016)

> Obama is meeting with President Prokopis Pavlopoulos (Greece) as part of his final foreign trip. Obama says he considered it important to visit the birthplace of democracy.
> 
> As they begin their meeting, Pavlopoulos is telling Obama that the U.S. has every reason to look forward to a strong and prosperous Europe, and that Greece is committed to the European Union.http://townhall.com/news/politics-elections/2016/11/15/the-latest-obama-arrives-in-greece-for-final-foreign-tour-n2245904


Germany's Duetsche Bank and the Italian banks have a large number of loans that are non-performing at the moment.  Italy is at 17% of loans non-performing!  Who does the ECB save? Italy or continue Greece's experimental "Bail In" in which all bond holders and depositors (savings) have seen their "safe money" turn in to equity or stock positions in defunct banks.


----------



## Wez (Nov 15, 2016)

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/15/obama-arrives-athens-bringing-message-trump/93870706/

I hope Greece does get some debt relief.  I have some money in the GREK ETF.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2016)

Wez said:


> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2016/11/15/obama-arrives-athens-bringing-message-trump/93870706/
> 
> I hope Greece does get some debt relief.  I have some money in the GREK ETF.


Yes but at least you are aware of your risk.  Greek Bond holders and depositors had their contracts cancelled.


----------



## Wez (Nov 15, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes but at least you are aware of your risk.  Greek Bond holders and depositors had their contracts cancelled.


Yea, Greece has been awful for a very long time.  I'm hoping to catch a falling knife...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 19, 2016)

*California's Dubious Decision*

https://fee.org/articles/california-set-a-tax-trap-for-both-smokers-and-quitters/

The only sensible interpretation of California’s ballot initiative is a highly cynical one: California wants its tobacco tax to be a lucrative source of revenue, but economics gets in the way. Policymakers are therefore willing to trap smokers into their bad habits by instituting similar taxes on safer alternatives to tobacco such as e-cigarettes.

This is irresponsible. States should pursue broad-based taxes to raise revenue, and only use narrow-based taxes to achieve specific social ends, such as reducing cigarette use. California hardly needs the money—it ran a $4.9 billion surplus in the 2015 fiscal year, and Governor Jerry Brown signed a $167 billion budget into law earlier this year without making any cuts. The long term is a different story—the state has hefty pension liabilities that appear to grow by the day—but a revenue source as unreliable as tobacco taxes would hardly put a dent in that problem.

Poor tax policy is not unique to California, and the tobacco tax increase may come to be repealed. *But in three out of four states, at least, the voters appear to be smarter than the politicians.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2016)

*Thanksgiving Was a Triumph of Capitalism over Collectivism*

*https://fee.org/articles/thanksgiving-was-a-triumph-of-capitalism-over-collectivism/*


Hard experience had taught the Plymouth colonists the fallacy and error in the ideas of that since the time of the ancient Greeks had promised paradise through collectivism rather than individualism. As Governor Bradford expressed it:

The experience that was had in this common course and condition, tried sundry years, and that amongst the Godly and sober men, may well convince of the vanity and conceit of Plato’s and other ancients; -- that the taking away of property, and bringing into a common wealth, would make them happy and flourishing; as if they were wiser than God. For this community (so far as it was) was found to breed confusion and discontent, and retard much employment that would have been to their benefit and comfort.


----------



## Wez (Nov 21, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Thanksgiving Was a Triumph of Capitalism over Collectivism*
> 
> *https://fee.org/articles/thanksgiving-was-a-triumph-of-capitalism-over-collectivism/*
> 
> ...


Didn't the colonists survive because of a Native bail out?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2016)

*Welfare by Government Contradicts Welfare*

*https://fee.org/articles/welfare-by-government-contradicts-welfare/*

In 1959, prior to the War on Poverty, the poverty rate in the United States was 22.4%. The rate precipitously decreased to 12.1% in 1969, after the declaration of the War on Poverty. As of 2015, the poverty rate is 13.5%. It is important to mention the government spends 16 times more on welfare and anti-poverty programs than it did in 1965, with very little to show for it. The stagnation of the poverty rate was caused by governmental disincentives to productivity and work.

Only 33% of heads of households currently in poverty have earned income versus unearned income, compared to the estimated 66% in 1960.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2016)

Wez said:


> Didn't the colonists survive because of a Native bail out?


Yes, but only on the condition that the colonist recognize private property rights.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2016)

*TRUMP DID NOT WIN BECAUSE OF THE 'WHITE VOTE'! PUBLISHED BY: BEINGLIBERTARIAN.COM*

November 12, 2016
BARUTI LIBRE

http://www.barutilibre.com/single-post/2016/11/13/TRUMP-DID-NOT-WIN-BECAUSE-OF-THE-WHITE-VOTE


----------



## Wez (Nov 22, 2016)

Wez said:


> I hope Greece does get some debt relief.  I have some money in the GREK ETF.


10 year avg. annl. return for the Greek stock market is -29%.  It's due for some mean reversion for those contrarians out there...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2016)

Wez said:


> 10 year avg. annl. return for the Greek stock market is -29%.  It's due for some mean reversion for those contrarians out there...


lol!  Not until they get some private property rights.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 23, 2016)

*Tax Avoidance Is an American Tradition*

One wonders how the schoolbook mentions of “taxation without representation,” are so easily forgotten, or why they are never applied to the IRS, a vehicle that makes regulations governing taxation without the representation of the people. Then one realizes that tax-financed schools are unlikely to criticize taxes. Dear reader, you are entitled to some plain speech.--W. Sabot

https://fee.org/articles/tax-avoidance-is-an-american-tradition/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2016)

Observe that both “socialism” and “fascism” involve the issue of property rights. The right to property is the right of use and disposal. Observe the difference in those two theories: socialism negates private property rights altogether, and advocates “the vesting of _ownership and control” _in the community as a whole, _i.e., _in the state; fascism leaves _ownership in the _hands of private individuals, but transfers _control _of the property to the government.

Ownership without control is a contradiction in terms: it means “property,” without the right to use it or to dispose of it. It means that the citizens retain the responsibility of holding property, without any of its advantages, while the government acquires all the advantages without any of the responsibility.

In this respect, *socialism is the more honest of the two theories. I say “more honest,” not “better”—because, in practice, there is no difference between them: both come from the same collectivist-statist principle, both negate individual rights and subordinate the individual to the collective, both deliver the livelihood and the lives of the citizens into the power of an omnipotent government —and the differences between them are only a matter of time, degree, and superficial detail, such as the choice of slogans by which the rulers delude their enslaved subjects.--Ayn Rand*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2016)

Rand conceded that most American advocates of the welfare state “are not socialists, that they never advocated or intended the socialization of private property.” These welfare-statists “want to ‘preserve’ private property” while calling for greater government control over such property. *“But that is the fundamental characteristic of fascism.”

https://fee.org/articles/ayn-rand-predicted-an-american-slide-toward-fascism/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2016)

(Those who mistakenly dub Rand a “conservative” should read “Conservatism: An Obituary” [_CUI, _Chapter 19], a scathing critique in which she accused conservative leaders of “moral treason.” In some respects *Rand detested modern conservatives more than she did modern liberals.* She was especially contemptuous of those conservatives who attempted to justify capitalism by appealing to religion or to tradition.) Rand illustrated her point in “The Fascist New Frontier,” a polemical _tour de force _aimed at President Kennedy and his administration.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2016)

I shall conclude this essay on a personal note. Before I began preparing for this essay, I had not read some of the articles quoted above for many, many years. In fact, I had not read some of the material since my college days 45 years ago. I therefore approached my new readings with a certain amount of trepidation. I liked the articles when I first read them, but would they stand the test of time? Would Rand’s insights and arguments appear commonplace, even hackneyed, with the passage of so much time? Well, I was pleasantly surprised. Rand was exactly on point on many issues. *Indeed, if we substitute “President Obama,” for “President Kennedy” or “President Johnson” many of her points would be even more pertinent today than they were during the 1960s. Unfortunately, the ideological sewer of American politics has become even more foul today than it was in Rand’s day, but Rand did what she could to reverse the trend, and one person can only do so much. And no one can say that she didn’t warn us.*
*
https://fee.org/articles/ayn-rand-predicted-an-american-slide-toward-fascism/*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 24, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I shall conclude this essay on a personal note. Before I began preparing for this essay, I had not read some of the articles quoted above for many, many years. In fact, I had not read some of the material since my college days 45 years ago. I therefore approached my new readings with a certain amount of trepidation. I liked the articles when I first read them, but would they stand the test of time? Would Rand’s insights and arguments appear commonplace, even hackneyed, with the passage of so much time? Well, I was pleasantly surprised. Rand was exactly on point on many issues. *Indeed, if we substitute “President Obama,” for “President Kennedy” or “President Johnson” many of her points would be even more pertinent today than they were during the 1960s. Unfortunately, the ideological sewer of American politics has become even more foul today than it was in Rand’s day, but Rand did what she could to reverse the trend, and one person can only do so much. And no one can say that she didn’t warn us.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/ayn-rand-predicted-an-american-slide-toward-fascism/*


Hey haole boy, do real Hawaiians celebrate Thanksgiving?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Hey haole boy, do real Hawaiians celebrate Thanksgiving?


No, the way Ms. IZ cooks, we actually give thanks everyday.  Real Haaaaaaawaiians don't need to have a Holiday to know when to give Thanks.  How bout you?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 24, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No, the way Ms. IZ cooks, we actually give thanks everyday.  Real Haaaaaaawaiians don't need to have a Holiday to know when to give Thanks.  How bout you?


Me like laulau.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Me like laulau.


"Wendell's get da biggest"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2016)

The Economic Stupidity of the Carrier Bailout 
 Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442665/trump-carrier-bailout-economically-unsound

For Carrier’s accountant, any pecuniary benefit will do. So far as the bottom line is concerned, a $7 million tax credit is the same as a $7 million check or $7 million in Apple stock or $7 million in gold. It’s all +$7 million on the line where you want it. 

The ethical question is more complicated than the pop-cons let on, too. Our government runs deficits, which means that a federal tax credit of $1 million given to Smith is $1 million in taxes that eventually will have to be paid — by Jones, and Wilson, and Humperdink — with interest. *Carrier is a division of United Technologies (the Otis elevator and Pratt & Whitney engines people), which is first and foremost a government contractor, a firm that derives at least a quarter of its revenue from government contracts, and 10 percent of it from Pentagon contracts alone. It is a company that has competitors — competitors who employ Americans and pay taxes, just as Carrier does. *These firms and their employees are put at an economic disadvantage by the subsidies paid to Carrier thanks to Trump and Pence. That means that some of these companies probably will be less profitable, and that they will not hire people they otherwise would have hired. But you’ll see no Trump press conference celebrating that. This is a case of Frédéric Bastiat’s problem of the seen vs. the unseen. *The benefits are easy to see, all those sympathetic workers in Indiana. The costs are born by sympathetic workers, too, around the country, and by their families and by their neighbors. But those are widely dispersed, so they are harder to see and do not hit with the same dramatic impact.* The math is the math. Trump and Pence are trying to sell you a free lunch. But the math is the math is the math. Trump and Pence are trying to sell you a free lunch, the same way the Keynesians and their magical spending multiplier do when they promise that government stimulus programs (Trump is pushing one of those, too) will somehow magically pay for themselves.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2016)

There is no magical revenue fairy. And, as a budgetary matter, targeted tax benefits are identical to spending, both for the government and for the beneficiary. This is not a question of ethics but a question of accounting. Somebody always has to pay the bill, eventually. It probably won’t be the pop-con on the radio telling you that we can make money by giving it away, so long as we give it away to the right sort of people: *Solyndra bad, Carrier good. Conservatives have a hard enough time of it as it is without inflicting needless stupidity on themselves.*

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442665/trump-carrier-bailout-economically-unsound


----------



## Wez (Dec 3, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> There is no magical revenue fairy. And, as a budgetary matter, targeted tax benefits are identical to spending, both for the government and for the beneficiary. This is not a question of ethics but a question of accounting. Somebody always has to pay the bill, eventually. It probably won’t be the pop-con on the radio telling you that we can make money by giving it away, so long as we give it away to the right sort of people: *Solyndra bad, Carrier good. Conservatives have a hard enough time of it as it is without inflicting needless stupidity on themselves.*
> 
> Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442665/trump-carrier-bailout-economically-unsound


Bravo!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 3, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> There is no magical revenue fairy. And, as a budgetary matter, targeted tax benefits are identical to spending, both for the government and for the beneficiary. This is not a question of ethics but a question of accounting. Somebody always has to pay the bill, eventually. It probably won’t be the pop-con on the radio telling you that we can make money by giving it away, so long as we give it away to the right sort of people: *Solyndra bad, Carrier good. Conservatives have a hard enough time of it as it is without inflicting needless stupidity on themselves.*
> 
> Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/442665/trump-carrier-bailout-economically-unsound


. . . and this is just the first case. With Trump's worldwide business dealings the conflicts of interest will be endless as foreign, and domestic, governments and businessmen strive to curry favor with the soon to be president of the United States of America. The wolf is already in the hen house and we let him in . . . welcomed him! Well, at least a minority (in the right states) voted him in.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and this is just the first case. With Trump's worldwide business dealings the conflicts of interest will be endless as foreign, and domestic, governments and businessmen strive to curry favor with the soon to be president of the United States of America. The wolf is already in the hen house and we let him in . . . welcomed him! Well, at least a minority (in the right states) voted him in.


The Fed Reserve Wolf has been in the hen house for quite some time now and there is nothing Trump can or will do about that.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 3, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Fed Reserve Wolf has been in the hen house for quite some time now and there is nothing Trump can or will do about that.


They may now be pointing at the wrong wolf for you to fear.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> They may now be pointing at the wrong wolf for you to fear.


They always do.  Regardless of who is in the White House.


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2016)

Wez said:


> Bravo!


Wouldn't the threatened 35% import tariff on Carrier products made in Mexico make more sense?  Trump could even direct the tariff money be spent on make-work projects for the laid-off workers in Indiana.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Dec 3, 2016)

espola said:


> Wouldn't the threatened 35% import tariff on Carrier products made in Mexico make more sense?  Trump could even direct the tariff money be spent on make-work projects for the laid-off workers in Indiana.


The stick never needs to be used if you know how to dangle a fresh carrot.
Incentives spur optimism, while penalties create distrust and pessimism.
The best thing the government can do, is take less.


----------



## Wez (Dec 3, 2016)

"Trump warns that Companies shipping jobs overseas will be slapped with huge bribes!"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 4, 2016)

Wez said:


> "Trump warns that Companies shipping jobs overseas will be slapped with huge bribes!"


Government Business as usual.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 4, 2016)

espola said:


> Wouldn't the threatened 35% import tariff on Carrier products made in Mexico make more sense?  Trump could even direct the tariff money be spent on make-work projects for the laid-off workers in Indiana.


He could do that since Carrier products would become more expensive.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

“There is no such thing as a legitimate price for anything in healthcare,” according to George Halvorson, former chairman of Kaiser Permanente, the giant health maintenance organization based in California. *“Prices are made up depending on who the payer is.”*

https://fee.org/articles/how-to-repeal-and-replace-obamacare/?utm_medium=popular_widget


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> “There is no such thing as a legitimate price for anything in healthcare,” according to George Halvorson, former chairman of Kaiser Permanente, the giant health maintenance organization based in California. *“Prices are made up depending on who the payer is.”*
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/how-to-repeal-and-replace-obamacare/?utm_medium=popular_widget


Fix the cost problem, you fix the whole problem.  I wish Price success and I also wish the GOP had spent one minute of time addressing the cost problem instead of just obstructing anything Obama was doing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> Fix the cost problem, you fix the whole problem.  I wish Price success and I also wish the GOP had spent one minute of time addressing the cost problem instead of just obstructing anything Obama was doing.


A government mandate to pay for other peoples health insurance while providing that $ame care for your Ohana will always be unpopular to say the least.


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> A government mandate to pay for other peoples health insurance while providing that $ame care for your Ohana will always be unpopular to say the least.


The system needed fixing, why didn't they participate?  ACA fixed one problem, millions of uninsureds, it didn't fix the rising cost problem, which in the end, is the most important to fix.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> The system needed fixing, why didn't they participate?  ACA fixed one problem, millions of uninsureds, it didn't fix the rising cost problem, which in the end, is the most important to fix.


ACA did not fix the uninsured problem because there are not enough "subsidizers" going forward.


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ACA did not fix the uninsured problem because there are not enough "subsidizers" going forward.


It did, it just didn't fix the rising costs, so the whole thing can't work if we just let our healthcare system continue fucking us...

Admit it, US Healthcare is a total failure of free markets.  This from a guy who is a fan of our free market system, just have to be able to admit where it's limitations are.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> It did, it just didn't fix the rising costs, so the whole thing can't work if we just let our healthcare system continue fucking us...
> 
> Admit it, US Healthcare is a total failure of free markets.  This from a guy who is a fan of our free market system, just have to be able to admit where it's limitations are.


You're a finance guy.  You know about ignoring risk.  ACA ignores risk pools.


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You're a finance guy.  You know about ignoring risk.  ACA ignores risk pools.


Risk pools are not an issue if everyone is covered.  The problem is the "coverage" was/is too expensive.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> Risk pools are not an issue if everyone is covered.  The problem is the "coverage" was/is too expensive.


....because of the risk pools.  Same thing happened when sub prime loans were mixed in with


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ....because of the risk pools.  Same thing happened when sub prime loans were mixed in with


No Biz, not because everyone is covered, it's the broken out of control costs in every part of our health system.

The financial crisis was fraud, not "risk pools".


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> No Biz, not because everyone is covered, it's the broken out of control costs in every part of our health system.
> 
> The financial crisis was fraud, not "risk pools".


ACA is legitimized fraud.


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ACA is legitimized fraud.


I disagree.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> I disagree.


On what grounds?  It doesnʻt meet the definition of Insurance.


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

So what.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> No Biz, not because everyone is covered, it's the broken out of control costs in every part of our health system.
> 
> The financial crisis was fraud, not "risk pools".


The financial crisis was both fraud and risk pools.  Go watch the big short again.  The Jenga scene is the best illustration of risk pools and the Standard and Poor lady highlighted the fraud.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2016)

Wez said:


> So what.


So why sell it as "insurance" when itʻs not?  That is fraud.


----------



## espola (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> On what grounds?  It doesnʻt meet the definition of Insurance.


Coocoo.


----------



## espola (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So why sell it as "insurance" when itʻs not?  That is fraud.


Coocoo.

But I repeat myself.


----------



## Wez (Dec 9, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So why sell it as "insurance" when itʻs not?  That is fraud.


You're reaching...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 9, 2016)

Universal healthcare for all or we just go back to paying extra to cover the uninsured in the filled to capacity and beyond ER's.


----------



## nononono (Dec 9, 2016)

*Cloward - Piven is the opposite of Capitalism and Productivity*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2016)

Wez said:


> You're reaching...


Apparently not.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2016)

Wez said:


> You're reaching...


https://fee.org/articles/health-insurance-is-illegal/


----------



## Wez (Dec 10, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> https://fee.org/articles/health-insurance-is-illegal/


Yup, still reaching...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2016)

Wez said:


> Yup, still reaching...


Stick to retail finance.


----------



## Wez (Dec 10, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Stick to retail finance.


Not all of us are "all knowing"...


----------



## Wez (Dec 10, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Stick to retail finance.


What do you do for a living?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2016)

Wez said:


> What do you do for a living?


I work for the tax payer 28% of the time.   You?  And don't tell me Finance.  We all know that's not true.


----------



## Wez (Dec 11, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I work for the tax payer 28% of the time.   You?  And don't tell me Finance.  We all know that's not true.


You like to talk shit and pretend to be an expert on all things, just thought you might like to back some of it up.  You on disability?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 11, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I work for the tax payer 28% of the time.   You?  And don't tell me Finance.  We all know that's not true.


So you are a weekend warrior, national guard, and work in a cubicle farm from 9 to 5? Probably spend a lot of time day dreaming about the good old days in high school hanging out in the 7/11 parking lot screaming "HELL YEAH!" a lot?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2016)

Wez said:


> You like to talk shit and pretend to be an expert on all things, just thought you might like to back some of it up.  You on disability?


How would you know  I was pretending if you arenʻt an expert?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you are a weekend warrior, national guard, and work in a cubicle farm from 9 to 5? Probably spend a lot of time day dreaming about the good old days in high school hanging out in the 7/11 parking lot screaming "HELL YEAH!" a lot?


nononono


----------



## Wez (Dec 11, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How would you know  I was pretending if you arenʻt an expert?


Let's try again, what do you do for a living Biz?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2016)

Wez said:


> You like to talk shit and pretend to be an expert on all things, just thought you might like to back some of it up.  You on disability?


I am supposed to back up my expertise by confirming that I am or am not on disability?  I am an expert on disability though.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2016)

Wez said:


> Let's try again, what do you do for a living Biz?


I work for the taxpayers at the Department of Veteran Affairs.....Finance.lol


----------



## Wez (Dec 11, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I am an expert on disability though.


What aren't you expert on?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2016)

Wez said:


> What aren't you expert on?


Pretty much everything else.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Pretty much everything else.


Do you think I was lying when I said I was short TSLA stock?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> Do you think I was lying when I said I was short TSLA stock?


No.  Why did you short it?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

https://fee.org/articles/how-to-get-progressive-students-to-understand-the-minimum-wage/

Sidney and Beatrice Webb (1897 [1920], p. 785) put it plainly: With regard to certain sections of the population [the "unemployable"], this unemployment is not a mark of social disease, but actually of social health." "[O]f all ways of dealing with these unfortunate parasites," Sidney Webb (1912, p. 992) said in the Journal of Political Economy, "the most ruinous to the community is to allow them to unrestrainedly compete as wage earners.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  Why did you short it?


That's funny, it sounded like you didn't think I was.

I think Musk is a great value to our Country and economy, but that doesn't mean his stock is a great value.  With Trump's election and cabinet selections and Tesla having just absorbed SolarCity, I think TSLA could get cut in half, easy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> That's funny, it sounded like you didn't think I was.
> 
> I think Musk is a great value to our Country and economy, but that doesn't mean his stock is a great value.  With Trump's election and cabinet selections and Tesla having just absorbed SolarCity, I think TSLA could get cut in half, easy.


What made you think it sounded like I thought you were lying.  If you understand Jenga I give you a 50-50 chance like everyone else.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What made you think it sounded like I thought you were lying.  If you understand Jenga I give you a 50-50 chance like everyone else.


Gee, maybe it was your response to me saying I was short TSLA, "No you're not"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> That's funny, it sounded like you didn't think I was.
> 
> I think Musk is a great value to our Country and economy, but that doesn't mean his stock is a great value.  With Trump's election and cabinet selections and Tesla having just absorbed SolarCity, I think TSLA could get cut in half, easy.


Have you looked at their balance sheets?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> Gee, maybe it was your response to me saying I was short TSLA, "No you're not"


Oh that.  Maybe you are lying.  Anybody who thinks TESLA is good value for our country and then shorts their stock is a little conflicted donʻt you think?  I get it though.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh that.  Maybe you are lying.  Anybody who thinks TESLA is good value for our country and then shorts their stock is a little conflicted donʻt you think?  I get it though.


Not conflicted at all.  A major new electric car company, pushing the technology envelope, creating a new industry (past attempts have been weak) and purchasing option for the public, we need more of that kind of thing.  Does that mean the stock will always go up, no.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> Not conflicted at all.  A major new electric car company, pushing the technology envelope, creating a new industry (past attempts have been weak) and purchasing option for the public, we need more of that kind of thing.  Does that mean the stock will always go up, no.


I donʻt care about the stock price as much as I care about the underlying assets and their financial structure.  You are conflicted in your actions.  If not, you would be long on TSLA instead given your "good value" assessment.  Glad to hear youʻre thinking in terms of risk pools and thus hedging.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You are conflicted in your actions.


You think that, for your own Biz reasons.  Respecting an entrepreneur's contribution to our society has nothing to do with thinking a stock is a good value.  I'm a long term bull on Musk, short term bear on TSLA.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> You think that, for your own Biz reasons.  Respecting an entrepreneur's contribution to our society has nothing to do with thinking a stock is a good value.  I'm a long term bull on Musk, short term bear on TSLA.


Right.  So you hedge to mitigate short term risk while your bull gets fat from subsidies.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Right.  So you hedge to mitigate short term risk while your bull gets fat from subsidies.


Nobody is fatter than when dining at the table of fossil fuel subsidies... Incentivizing people to develop and purchase cleaner forms of energy is fine with me.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> Nobody is fatter than when dining at the table of fossil fuel subsidies... Incentivizing people to develop and purchase cleaner forms of energy is fine with me.


Tesla the newest fat boy.


----------



## Wez (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Tesla the newest fat boy.


Nothing stopping others from taking advantage of incentives.  You're just a hater...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> Nothing stopping others from taking advantage of incentives.  You're just a hater...


False on both accounts.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 12, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Tesla the newest fat boy.


I heard now is the time to invest in brick and mortar, any suggestions Bruddah?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

espola said:


> Coocoo.
> 
> But I repeat myself.


Another example of you not making the connection.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2016)

Wez said:


> ... Incentivizing people to develop and purchase cleaner forms of energy is fine with me.


Right subsidies are not incentives.  They are mandated without your position.  If we had more people like you around, Musk wouldn't need subsidies.  You retail finance guys could lend Musk the 4 billion dollars yourselves.  It's called skin the game.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Right subsidies are not incentives.  They are mandated without your position.  If we had more people like you around, Musk wouldn't need subsidies.  You retail finance guys could lend Musk the 4 billion dollars yourselves.  It's called skin the game.


Musk had skin in the game when he co-founded Paypal, he still has skin in the game.  There is nothing wrong with what Musk is doing, we need more like him.  You complain about subsidies that Musk takes advantage of but say nothing of the various subsidies found in the fossil fuel industry.  You act as if you speak only in terms of economics, but your only concern is with the political left, stop pretending otherwise.  Liberals are not the demons you constantly try to paint them as.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Musk had skin in the game when he co-founded Paypal, he still has skin in the game.  There is nothing wrong with what Musk is doing, we need more like him.  You complain about subsidies that Musk takes advantage of but say nothing of the various subsidies found in the fossil fuel industry.  You act as if you speak only in terms of economics, but your only concern is with the political left, stop pretending otherwise.  Liberals are not the demons you constantly try to paint them as.


Subsidies to fossil fuel make alternative energy possible.  Without it, alt energy would exist only when the Sun shines or the wind blows.  If I speak only of economics and the political left happens to advocate unsound economic policies as does the political right then so be it.  If you think Teslaʻs ideas are so good then why canʻt they operate without subsidies?  Liberals or Conservatives shouldnʻt be judged by their policies but rather their policy outcomes.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If you think Teslaʻs ideas are so good then why canʻt they operate without subsidies?


Did you forget the part where I was short TSLA?  "If" we're going to use subsidies to help American industry, TSLA is a better alternative than others, imao.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If I speak only of economics and the political left happens to advocate unsound economic policies as does the political right then so be it.


Uh?  If you only point out ideas you dislike from Democrats, but are silent on the same mistakes made by Republicans, than you are not all about the economics, you are just another partisan hack.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Uh?  If you only point out ideas you dislike from Democrats, but are silent on the same mistakes made by Republicans, than you are not all about the economics, you are just another partisan hack.


Didnʻt you Bravo! My GOP Hawaii Rail project?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Did you forget the part where I was short TSLA?  "If" we're going to use subsidies to help American industry, TSLA is a better alternative than others, imao.


why are you short if the government is long via tax payer subsidies?


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> why are you short if the government is long via tax payer subsidies?


Do we need to go over it again?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Do we need to go over it again?


Yes.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.


You can search the forums for my last rationale, which you seemed to agree with, so what are you digging for here?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> You can search the forums for my last rationale, which you seemed to agree with, so what are you digging for here?


Just confirming that youʻre not as big a Musk or subsidy fan.  Cool.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Just confirming that youʻre not as big a Musk or subsidy fan.  Cool.


I'm a huge Musk fan, not the stock.  Anyone who starts a successful space company and wants to colonize Mars, is ok in my book.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> I'm a huge Musk fan, not the stock.  Anyone who starts a successful space company and wants to colonize Mars, is ok in my book.


Me too.  Maybe he, Branson, Cuban and some other 1%ʻers can foot the bill.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Me too.  Maybe he, Branson, Cuban and some other 1%ʻers can foot the bill.


Again, you focus on the wrong subsidies and SpaceX isn't being subsidized.  They competed and won NASA contracts.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Again, you focus on the wrong subsidies and SpaceX isn't being subsidized.  They competed and won NASA contracts.


Space X would not exist without Tesla.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Space X would not exist without Tesla.


SpaceX pre-dates Tesla.


----------



## espola (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Space X would not exist without Tesla.


Taking a cue from Aff-Bear, when you have nothing cogent to post, you just make something up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> SpaceX pre-dates Tesla.


Well now we know why Tesla gets subsidy preference.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

espola said:


> Taking a cue from Aff-Bear, when you have nothing cogent to post, you just make something up.


Yes you do.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Well now we know why Tesla gets subsidy preference.


You're reaching.  Almost $500B annually on fossil fuel subsidies and you have a problem with an electric car company....

How politicians can get this topic so wrong always amazes me.  Here's a perfect example:

http://www.ibtimes.com/us-fossil-fuel-subsidies-increase-dramatically-despite-climate-change-pledge-2180918

_"The G20 nations -- accounting for nearly 85 percent of the global GDP -- are spending approximately $452 billion a year in fossil fuel subsidies, *effectively undermining their own policies on climate change*, a new report found."_


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Again, you focus on the wrong subsidies and SpaceX isn't being subsidized.  They competed and won NASA contracts.




*Elon Musk's growing empire is fueled by $4.9 billion in government subsidies *



By Jerry Hisrch
May 30, 2015 8:00 AM

Los Angeles entrepreneur Elon Musk has built a multibillion-dollar fortune running companies that make electric cars, sell solar panels and launch rockets into space.

And he's built those companies with the help of billions in government subsidies.

Tesla Motors Inc., SolarCity Corp. and Space Exploration Technologies Corp., known as SpaceX, together have benefited from an estimated $4.9 billion in government support, according to data compiled by The Times. The figure underscores a common theme running through his emerging empire: a public-private financing model underpinning long-shot start-ups.

"He definitely goes where there is government money," said Dan Dolev, an analyst at Jefferies Equity Research. "That's a great strategy, but the government will cut you off one day."

The figure compiled by The Times comprises a variety of government incentives, including grants, tax breaks, factory construction, discounted loans and environmental credits that Tesla can sell. It also includes tax credits and rebates to buyers of solar panels and electric cars.



The electric automaker Tesla has a side business. It's called environmental credits.

A looming question is whether the companies are moving toward self-sufficiency — as Dolev believes — and whether they can slash development costs before the public largesse ends.

Tesla and SolarCity continue to report net losses after a decade in business, but the stocks of both companies have soared on their potential; Musk's stake in the firms alone is worth about $10 billion. (SpaceX, a private company, does not publicly report financial performance.)

Musk and his companies' investors enjoy most of the financial upside of the government support, while taxpayers shoulder the cost.

The payoff for the public would come in the form of major pollution reductions, but only if solar panels and electric cars break through as viable mass-market products. For now, both remain niche products for mostly well-heeled customers.

Musk declined repeated requests for an interview through Tesla spokespeople, and officials at all three companies declined to comment.

The subsidies have generally been disclosed in public records and company filings. But the full scope of the public assistance hasn't been tallied because it has been granted over time from different levels of government.

New York state is spending $750 million to build a solar panel factory in Buffalo for SolarCity. The San Mateo, Calif.-based company will lease the plant for $1 a year. It will not pay property taxes for a decade, which would otherwise total an estimated $260 million.

The federal government also provides grants or tax credits to cover 30% of the cost of solar installations. SolarCity reported receiving $497.5 million in direct grants from the Treasury Department.

That figure, however, doesn't capture the full value of the government's support.

Since 2006, SolarCity has installed systems for 217,595 customers, according to a corporate filing. If each paid the current average price for a residential system — about $23,000, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists — the cost to the government would total about $1.5 billion, which would include the Treasury grants paid to SolarCity.

Nevada has agreed to provide Tesla with $1.3 billion in incentives to help build a massive battery factory near Reno.

The Palo Alto company has also collected more than $517 million from competing automakers by selling environmental credits. In a regulatory system pioneered by California and adopted by nine other states, automakers must buy the credits if they fail to sell enough zero-emissions cars to meet mandates. The tally also includes some federal environmental credits.

On a smaller scale, SpaceX, Musk's rocket company, cut a deal for about $20 million in economic development subsidies from Texas to construct a launch facility there. (Separate from incentives, SpaceX has won more than $5.5 billion in government contracts from NASA and the U.S. Air Force.)

Subsidies are handed out in all kinds of industries, with U.S. corporations collecting tens of billions of dollars each year, according to Good Jobs First, a nonprofit that tracks government subsidies. And the incentives for solar panels and electric cars are available to all companies that sell them.

Musk and his investors have also put large sums of private capital into the companies.

But public subsidies for Musk's companies stand out both for the amount, relative to the size of the companies, and for their dependence on them.

"Government support is a theme of all three of these companies, and without it none of them would be around," said Mark Spiegel, a hedge fund manager for Stanphyl Capital Partners who is shorting Tesla's stock, a bet that pays off if Tesla shares fall.

Tesla stock has risen 157%, to $250.80 as of Friday's close, over the last two years.

Musk has proved so adept at landing incentives that states now compete to give him money, said Ashlee Vance, author of "Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future," a recently published biography.

"As his star has risen, every state wants a piece of Elon Musk," Vance said.

Before his current ventures, he made a substantial sum from EBay Inc.'s $1.5-billion purchase of PayPal, the electronic payment system in which Musk held an 11% stake.

Soon after, he founded SpaceX in 2002 with money from that sale, and he made major investments and took leadership posts at Tesla and Solar City.

Musk is now the chief executive of both Tesla and SpaceX and the chairman of SolarCity, and holds big stakes in all three, including 27% of Tesla and 23% of SolarCity, according to recent regulatory filings. The ventures employ about 23,000 people nationwide, and they operate or are building factories and facilities in California, Michigan, New York, Nevada and Texas.


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2016)

*Tense talks*

The $1.3 billion in benefits for Tesla's Nevada battery factory resulted from a year of hardball negotiations.

Late in 2013, Tesla summoned economic development officials from seven states to its auto factory in Fremont, Calif. After a tour, they gathered in a conference room, where Tesla executives explained their plan to build the biggest lithium-ion battery factory in the world — then asked the states to bid for the project.

Nevada at first offered its standard package of incentives, in this case worth $600 million to $700 million, said Steve Hill, Nevada's executive director of the Governor's Office of Economic Development.

Tesla negotiators wanted far more. The automaker at first sought a $500-million upfront payment, among other enticements, Hill said. Nevada pushed back, in sometimes tense talks punctuated by raised voices.


"It would have amounted to Nevada writing a series of checks during the first couple of years," said Hill, calling it an unacceptable risk.

With the deal imperiled, Hill flew to Palo Alto in August to meet with Tesla's business development chief, Diarmuid O'Connell, a former State Department official who is the automaker's lead negotiator.

They shored up the deal with an agreement to give Tesla $195 million in transferable tax credits, which the automaker could sell for upfront cash. To make room in its budget, Nevada reduced incentives for filming in the state and killed a tax break for insurance companies.

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval and Musk sealed the agreement in a Labor Day phone conversation. Hill said it was worth it, pointing to the 6,000 jobs he expects the factory to eventually create.

The state commissioned an analysis estimating the economic impact from the project at $100 billion over two decades, but some economists called that figure deeply flawed. It counted every Tesla employee as if they would otherwise have been unemployed, for instance, and it made no allowance for increased government spending to serve the influx of thousands of local residents.

*A $750-million factory*

Musk has similar success with getting subsidies for a SolarCity plant in Buffalo, N.Y. The company currently buys many of its solar panels from China, but it will soon become its own supplier with a new and heavily subsidized factory.

An affiliate of New York's College of Nanoscale Science and Engineering in Albany will spend $750 million to build a solar panel factory on state land. SolarCity estimated in a corporate filing that it will spend an additional $150 million to get the factory operating.

When finished in 2017, the 1.2-million-square-foot facility will be the largest solar panel factory in the Western Hemisphere. New York officials see the subsidy as a worthy investment because they expect that it will create 3,000 jobs. The plant will replace a long-closed steel factory.

"The SolarCity facility will bring extensive benefits and value to this formerly dormant brownfield that provided zero benefit to the city and region," said Peter Cutler, spokesman for Empire State Development, New York's economic development agency.

SpaceX, though it depends far more on government contracts than subsidies, received an incentive package in Texas for a commercial rocket launch facility. The state put up more than $15 million in subsidies and infrastructure spending to help SpaceX build a launch pad in rural Cameron County at the southern tip of Texas. Local governments contributed an additional $5 million.

Included in the local subsidies is a 15-year property tax break from the local school district worth $3.1 million to SpaceX. Officials say the development still will bring in about $5 million more over that period than the local school district otherwise would have collected.

"That's $5 million more than we have ever seen from that property," said Dr. Lisa Garcia, superintendent of the Point Isabel Independent School District. "It is remote.... It is just sand dunes."

*Crucial aid*

The public money for Tesla and SolarCity factories is crucial to both companies' efforts to lower development and manufacturing costs.

The task is made more urgent by the impending expiration of some of their biggest subsidies. The federal government's 30% tax credit for solar installations gets slashed to 10% in 2017 for commercial customers and ends completely for homeowners.

Tesla buyers also get a $7,500 federal income tax credit and a $2,500 rebate from the state of California. The federal government has capped the $7,500 credit at a total of 200,000 vehicles per manufacturer; Tesla is about a quarter of the way to that limit. In all, Tesla buyers have qualified for an estimated $284 million in federal tax incentives and collected more than $38 million in California rebates.

California legislators recently passed a law, which has not yet taken effect, calling for income limits on electric car buyers seeking the state's $2,500 subsidy. Tesla owners have an average household income of about $320,000, according to Strategic Visions, an auto industry research firm.

Competition could also eat into Tesla's public support. If major automakers build more zero-emission cars, they won't have to buy as many government-awarded environmental credits from Tesla.

In the big picture, the government supports electric cars and solar panels in the hope of promoting widespread adoption and, ultimately, slashing carbon emissions. In the early days at Tesla — when the company first produced an expensive electric sports car, which it no longer sells — Musk promised more rapid development of electric cars for the masses.

In a 2008 blog post, Musk laid out a plan: After the sports car, Tesla would produce a sedan costing "half the $89k price point of the Tesla Roadster and the third model will be even more affordable."

In fact, the second model now typically sells for $100,000, and the much-delayed third model, the Model X sport utility, is expected to sell for a similar price. Timing on a less expensive model — maybe $35,000 or $40,000, after subsidies — remains uncertain.

"Some may question whether this actually does any good for the world," Musk wrote in 2008. "Are we really in need of another high-performance sports car? Will it actually make a difference to global carbon emissions? Well, the answers are no and not much.... When someone buys the Tesla Roadster sports car, they are actually helping to pay for the development of the low-cost family car."

*Next: Battery subsidies*

Now Musk is moving into a new industry: energy storage. Last month, he starred in a typically dramatic announcement of Tesla Energy-branded batteries for homes and businesses. On a concert-like stage, backed by pulsating music, Musk declared that the batteries would someday render the world's energy grid obsolete.

"We are talking about trying to change the fundamental energy infrastructure of the world," he said.

Musk laid out a vision of affordable clean energy in the remote villages of underdeveloped countries and homeowners in industrial nations severing themselves from utility grids. The Nevada factory will churn out the batteries alongside those for Tesla cars.

What he didn't say: Tesla has already secured a commitment of $126 million in California subsidies to companies developing energy storage technology.


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

...and not one word about almost $500B in fossil fuel subsidies, hypocrites!


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> ...and not one word about almost $500B in fossil fuel subsidies, hypocrites!



*" Your " LA Times......*


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

nononono said:


> *" Your " LA Times......*


Hypocrite!


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> Hypocrite!


*Really.......Please explain.*


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

nononono said:


> *Really.......Please explain.*


You complain about subsidies to Tesla but are silent on the mountain of subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> ...and not one word about almost $500B in fossil fuel subsidies, hypocrites!


Why?  Without fossil fuels, all other industries would not exist .


----------



## Wez (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why?  Without fossil fuels, all other industries would not exist .


So what?  I'm not bashing fossil fuels, I'm just suggesting that if you're going to bash Tesla for subsidies, you should bash all companies that receive them.  You are the one that seems to hate them (subsidies)...


----------



## espola (Dec 13, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why?  Without fossil fuels, all other industries would not exist .


You are positioning the result as if it were the cause.  Without fossil fuels, all industries would be powered by renewable energy.  Before the widespread acceptance of cheap fossil fuels (coal, then oil), industries were powered by wood, water, wind and animals.  We have improved that spectrum to include solar and nuclear.


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2016)

Wez said:


> You complain about subsidies to Tesla but are silent on the mountain of subsidies to the fossil fuel industry.


*Were you and Biz talking about Fossil Fuels and their subsidies ?????*

*Nooooo.......*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

espola said:


> Without fossil fuels, all industries would be powered by renewable energy.  Before the widespread acceptance of cheap fossil fuels (coal, then oil), industries were powered by wood, water, wind and animals.


Which industries "were powered by wood, water, wind and animals"?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

espola said:


> You are positioning the result as if it were the cause.


Not my intent.  Just stating the obvious.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> So what?  I'm not bashing fossil fuels, I'm just suggesting that if you're going to bash Tesla for subsidies, you should bash all companies that receive them.  You are the one that seems to hate them (subsidies)...


I am bashing all of them.  But they all, including Alt Energy (an invention of the Alt Right.....right?), rely on one industry.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I am bashing all of them.  But they all, including Alt Energy (an invention of the Alt Right.....right?), rely on one industry.


We also used to rely on steam and animals before that, so what?  You continue to be more political than economic.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> We also *used to rely* on steam and animals before that, so what?  You continue to be more political than economic.


Again, I don't make policy.  Has steam and animals become unreliable?


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Has steam and animals become unreliable?


The burning of fossil fuels is dirty and possibly dangerous to our environment.  We should prioritize the discovery of cleaner more efficient sources of power, like Fusion.  Protecting fossil fuel industry profits through the promotion of junk Science and denial is foolish.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Protecting fossil fuel industry profits through the promotion of junk Science and denial is foolish.


Why do you do it than?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> The burning of fossil fuels is dirty and possibly dangerous to our environment.


Why do you do it than?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> We should prioritize the discovery of cleaner more efficient sources of power, like Fusion.


Okay.  What would you suggest we do during "Discovery"?


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Okay.  What would you suggest we do during "Discovery"?


Listen to Scientists, form policy based on educated evaluations and reasonable assumptions going forward.  Not deny that AGW is a possibility and that it could be harmful.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why do you do it than?


Why do we eat bad foods and drink alcohol?  It's part of the world we live in.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Listen to Scientists, form policy based on educated evaluations and reasonable assumptions going forward.  Not deny that AGW is a possibility and that it could be harmful.


In the mean time what NEW policy would you like to implement that doesn't deny others access to fossil fuels?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Why do we eat bad foods and drink alcohol?  It's part of the world we live in.


Yes, and you partake of both while enjoying a rising standard of living that includes an increase in life expectancy.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> In the mean time what NEW policy would you like to implement that doesn't deny others access to fossil fuels?


Discontinue all fossil fuel subsidies and cut the DoD budget by $125B and put that money to work in Fusion research and Space Exploration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/pentagon-buries-evidence-of-125-billion-in-bureaucratic-waste/2016/12/05/e0668c76-9af6-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html?utm_term=.65704a7c013d


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Discontinue all fossil fuel subsidies and cut the DoD budget by $125B and put that money to work in Fusion research and Space Exploration.
> 
> https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/pentagon-buries-evidence-of-125-billion-in-bureaucratic-waste/2016/12/05/e0668c76-9af6-11e6-a0ed-ab0774c1eaa5_story.html?utm_term=.65704a7c013d


Iʻve seen, first hand, government waste in action for nearly 30 years.  Iʻd say that billions more could be cut from all government agencies.  We are an administrative state and I am not surprised by the cost.  Cutting all subsidies to fossil fuels cuts all subsidies, indirectly, to ALL industries as well.  But please go beyond your proposal to address short and long term  outcomes.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But please go beyond your proposal to address short and long term  outcomes.


Not my field of expertise


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Not my field of expertise


You going to let that stop you from opining?  Iʻm quite sure your opinion wonʻt affect current policy for better or worse.  How ʻbout it?


----------



## espola (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Which industries "were powered by wood, water, wind and animals"?


Before the  widespread use of fossil fuels, all of them.


----------



## espola (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Again, I don't make policy.  Has steam and animals become unreliable?


Steam powered by wood couldn't compete with cheap coal.  Oil became even cheaper (and more convenient) in most applications, especially mobile ones.  Nuclear had great promise, but is currently suffering from engineering and political fumbles that negate many of its technical advantages over fossil fuels.


----------



## espola (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> The burning of fossil fuels is dirty and possibly dangerous to our environment.  We should prioritize the discovery of cleaner more efficient sources of power, like Fusion.  Protecting fossil fuel industry profits through the promotion of junk Science and denial is foolish.


The Germans have a stellarator fusion reactor (Wendelstein 7-x) that is designed to run at better than break-even energy.  They are taking baby steps with it to assure that it will hold a hydrogen/helium plasma long enough to extract usable energy.  The leading design for years was toroidal, such as tokomaks, in which the magnetic field confining the hot plasma was bent around in a circle to complete the confinement structure.  It was difficult to keep the plasma  from impacting the inner walls of the torus because plasma currents traveled a shorter distance closer to the center than on the outside.  The stellarator evens out the paths with a figure-eight twist, kind of in the shape of a toy train layout with a flyover. 

A totally different tack is the use of small devises called Farnsworth fusors, originally developed in the research labs of a company making TV tubes.  Many home hobbyists have made them out of old B&W TV tubes and simple high-voltage power supplies.  As with all fusion reactors developed so far, the problem is getting more usable energy out than is used to run them.  So far their only practical use seems to be as neutron sources.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You going to let that stop you from opining?  Iʻm quite sure your opinion wonʻt affect current policy for better or worse.  How ʻbout it?


Short term:
Conservative outrage, reduced fossil fuel profits and an increase in alternative energy jobs as they become more competitive, loss of DoD jobs offset by gains in Fusion research and space exploration sectors.

Long term:
Fossil fuels usage would be a smaller percentage of our energy needs.  The long term benefits of actually creating useable Fusion would change humankind in dramatic ways.  Jobs lost in the energy sector would be more than made up for by new industries and technologies that would allow us to finally reach for the stars.  Ideally we would do that worldwide instead of fighting over religions and natural resources.


----------



## espola (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Short term:
> Conservative outrage, reduced fossil fuel profits and an increase in alternative energy jobs as they become more competitive, loss of DoD jobs offset by gains in Fusion research and space exploration sectors.
> 
> Long term:
> Fossil fuels usage would be a smaller percentage of our energy needs.  The long term benefits of actually creating useable Fusion would change humankind in dramatic ways.  Jobs lost in the energy sector would be more than made up for by new industries and technologies that would allow us to finally reach for the stars.  Ideally we would do that worldwide instead of fighting over religions and natural resources.


According to Cal ISO's charts, yesterday the combination of renewables, nuclear and hydro power sources powered almost 50% of the system load late in the afternoon.  Over the whole day, those sources provided about 15%. 

http://content.caiso.com/green/renewrpt/DailyRenewablesWatch.pdf

Where I grew up in Northern New England, hydro power was so well established that the region exported electric power.  Two of the towns I lived in had municipal hydro-power departments that produced all the electricity needed; another got its power from a private company whose closest dam was just outside the town line.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

espola said:


> Before the  widespread use of fossil fuels, all of them.


Top 3?


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> Why do we eat bad foods and drink alcohol?  It's part of the world we live in.


We?
We don't all drink bad food.
We don't all drink alcohol.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 14, 2016)

Lion Eyes said:


> We?
> We don't all drink bad food.
> We don't all drink alcohol.


That would be eat bad food...I gotta stop drinkin'.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Lion Eyes said:


> We?
> We don't all drink bad food.
> We don't all drink alcohol.


You only eating healthy food and not drinking alcohol would explain so much....


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2016)

Wez said:


> You only eating healthy food and not drinking alcohol would explain so much....



*Why would you say that......??*


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Dec 14, 2016)

espola said:


> According to Cal ISO's charts, yesterday the combination of renewables, nuclear and hydro power sources powered almost 50% of the system load late in the afternoon.  Over the whole day, those sources provided about 15%.
> 
> http://content.caiso.com/green/renewrpt/DailyRenewablesWatch.pdf
> 
> Where I grew up in Northern New England, hydro power was so well established that the region exported electric power.  Two of the towns I lived in had municipal hydro-power departments that produced all the electricity needed; another got its power from a private company whose closest dam was just outside the town line.


I was working with a guy from new england the other day.
He said he left to get away from the shitty weather and  all the self important assholes.


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> all the self important assholes.


Lol, I'm sure Lion will be here to give you a crop duster comment any second...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes, and you partake of both while enjoying a rising standard of living that includes an increase in life expectancy.


Not in America.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/health/us-life-expectancy-down/


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 14, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> I was working with a guy from new england the other day.
> He said he left to get away from the shitty weather and  all the self important assholes.


. . . and he came all that way to end up with "THE" most self important . . . well, you know.


----------



## espola (Dec 14, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Top 3?


From colonial times until 1800 or so, most mills took advantage of falling water to cut timber, grind grain to flour, grind and polish stone, and run simple industrial processes like extracting starch from grains and vegetables.  Towns grew up from New England to Georgia on the fall line, where upland rivers descended to the coastal plain with enough force to turn waterwheels.  Some rivers were highly developed after textile spinning machines were invented, such as the Merrimack River that provided the power for the big mill towns of Lowell, Mass and Manchester, NH.  The Amoskeag Falls in Manchester were high enough and powerful enough that two ranks of factories used water directed into canals above the falls, the water coming out of the upper rank directed to the mills on the lower rank, each paying the according to the amount of water they used.

As the iron industry grew, smelting furnaces were powered by wood and charcoal.  Early steam engines, for steamboats, railroad engines, and stationary factory power where water power was not available, were powered by the wood that was everywhere, an advantage over England and Continental Europe where wood became so scarce that laws restricted the charcoal makers.  When coal was first introduced to replace wood powering steam engines, they had to be redesigned to handle the hotter fires and increased steam pressure.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Not in America.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/health/us-life-expectancy-down/


Snapshot according to your article with 8 of the 10 top causes of death trending down....in America


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2016)

Wez said:


> Lol, I'm sure Lion will be here to give you a crop duster comment any second...


Bernie didn't make the comment, he was talkin about a guy from New England


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Not in America.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/08/health/us-life-expectancy-down/


from the article :
"One year does not form a trend," said Dr. Jiaquan Xu, an epidemiologist with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 15, 2016)

Lion Eyes said:


> from the article :
> "One year does not form a trend," said Dr. Jiaquan Xu, an epidemiologist with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics.


Talk about cherry picking something without context.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Talk about cherry picking


Thatʻs what your article did.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Dec 15, 2016)

Lion Eyes said:


> Bernie didn't make the comment, he was talkin about a guy from New England


True.
The guy says new england is full of assholes.
Cant say Im surprised.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Dec 15, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and he came all that way to end up with "THE" most self important . . . well, you know.


Thanks rat.


----------



## Wez (Dec 15, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> The guy says new england is full of assholes.
> Cant say Im surprised.


Arrogant Elitist.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2016)

Wez said:


> Arrogant Elitist.


Not everyone can have your mirror.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Dec 15, 2016)

Wez said:


> Arrogant Elitist.


Yeah, blue collar elitist pig.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Talk about cherry picking something without context.


You know all about cherry picking...
Apparently you didn't entirely read or comprehend the article. The sky is not falling.

"One year does not form a trend," said Dr. Jiaquan Xu, an epidemiologist with the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. "We need more data. If you look back to 1993, it decreased but hasn't decreased again (until now). Hopefully, that's what we're seeing here."
Xu, the report's lead author, said preliminary data from the second quarter of this year show further declines in eight of the top 10 causes of death, compared with the first quarter of 2016. He declined to recommend specific policy changes but said "everybody should do their part" to reverse this downturn.
The biggest takeaway: Heart disease and cancer are still far and away the top killers of both men and women. The good news is that there are three things you can do to drastically reduce your risk of developing both: eat right, exercise and don't smoke.
It sounds like simple advice, but it's easier said than done. Follow it, and you may exceed expectations when it comes to your projected lifespan.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2016)

Bernie Sanders said:


> True.
> The guy says new england is full of assholes.
> Cant say Im surprised.


Sounds like Boston, or anyplace in Connecticut except Groton and New London.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2016)

Wez said:


> Arrogant Elitist.


Probably a Democrat...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

*Six Things to Consider About Inflation*

As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”

The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”

To address this conundrum, there are _six related factors_ that are noteworthy:

https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

*Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.

*Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.

*Blowing Bubbles*
*Number Three:* newly created fiat money must go _somewhere_ — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. *So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.*

*Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.

*Number Five:* In the same vein, *you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.”* This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)

*Number Six:* the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided *suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, *or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

This thread was created to show how clueless politicians really are about the economy.

*Obama Compares Obamacare to Smartphone That Was Recalled for Catching on Fire*

*It’s an apt metaphor for the health law—but not in the way the president thinks*

*https://reason.com/blog/2016/10/21/obama-compares-obamacare-to-smartphone-t*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function. Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird without wings. Free market in the purest sense cannot exist without government enforcement. For example, freedom of contract is nothing more than an abstract concept without government enforcement through its court system. Practically speaking, you'll find the purer form of free market in China, Brasil, India and a few other emerging economies. If you speak to any businessman who's done transactions in these jurisdictions, the overwhelming majority of them would rather do a transaction in the US. As a matter of fact, they'd rather sell in the US at lower prices in the US. Aside from our infra structure, they have greater confidence in our legal system that spell out each party's rights and obligations. Such confidence arises precisely because UCC has been universally adopted in the US. That is government "intervention" you can call it, but it's precisely such government "intervention" that truly makes the market stable and free.
> 
> There're economists who argue otherwise, but they're on the fringe. They have an antiquated view of the market. Mainstream economists accept that there has to be government action to ensure a free market. The issue is no longer whether, but how much.


Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function.


Money is not government issued.  The U.S. government sells Treasury Bonds to the Federal Reserve in exchange for Federal Reserve Notes.  The aforementioned easily verifiable by the Feds balance sheet.

https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/quarterly_balance_sheet_developments_report_201611.pdf


----------



## espola (Dec 17, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Money is not government issued.  The U.S. government sells Treasury Bonds to the Federal Reserve in exchange for Federal Reserve Notes.  The aforementioned easily verifiable by the Feds balance sheet.
> 
> https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/files/quarterly_balance_sheet_developments_report_201611.pdf


The US Treasury and Federal Reserve are not government institutions?  You should write and tell them.  I don't think they know that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

espola said:


> The US Treasury and Federal Reserve are not government institutions?  You should write and tell them.  I don't think they know that.


One is, one is not.  They both know who they are.  Hence the balance sheet.  But please feel free to write to them and explain the Feds balance sheet to them.


----------



## espola (Dec 17, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> One is, one is not.  They both know who they are.  Hence the balance sheet.  But please feel free to write to them and explain the Feds balance sheet to them.


Both are.  You bring this crackpot theory up every few months, and you are wrong every time.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

espola said:


> Both are.  You bring this crackpot theory up every few months, and you are wrong every time.


You're too old to not know the difference and yet you are wrong every time.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 17, 2016)

The Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., is an agency of the federal government. The Board--appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate--provides general guidance for the Federal Reserve System and oversees the 12 Reserve Banks. Board reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress but, unlike many other public agencies, it is not funded by congressional appropriations. In addition, though the Congress sets the goals for monetary policy, decisions of the Board--and the Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals *do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.*


----------



## espola (Dec 17, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., is an agency of the federal government. The Board--appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate--provides general guidance for the Federal Reserve System and oversees the 12 Reserve Banks. Board reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress but, unlike many other public agencies, it is not funded by congressional appropriations. In addition, though the Congress sets the goals for monetary policy, decisions of the Board--and the Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals *do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.*


The Federal Reserve was established by Congress.  The members of its board are appointed by the President with approval of Congress.  Many of its functions overlap with other government bodies, such as the Treasury.  The only way it could be eliminated is by an act of Congress and approval of the President.

Congress was wise when it established the Fed to make it as independent as possible from political influence by Congress and the President.  Its Governors are appointed for terms of 14 years and cannot be removed except "for cause", and none ever has been.  The Fed also funds itself by  charging fees to its banking customers, returning its surplus every year to the Treasury, so it can't be blackmailed by threats to cut its funding.  Don't confuse that independence with its existence as part of the US Government.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2016)

espola said:


> The Federal Reserve was established by Congress.  The members of its board are appointed by the President with approval of Congress.  Many of its functions overlap with other government bodies, such as the Treasury.  The only way it could be eliminated is by an act of Congress and approval of the President.
> 
> Congress was wise when it established the Fed to make it as independent as possible from political influence by Congress and the President.  Its Governors are appointed for terms of 14 years and cannot be removed except "for cause", and none ever has been.  The Fed also funds itself by  charging fees to its banking customers, returning its surplus every year to the Treasury, so it can't be blackmailed by threats to cut its funding.  Don't confuse that independence with its existence as part of the US Government.


Which significant functions of the Fed overlap with what the Treasury does or does not do.  And why would Congress eliminate their lender of last resort?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2016)

espola said:


> Don't confuse that independence with its existence as part of the US Government.


Every financial crisis that the U.S. economy has gone through has been caused by an increase in the money supply by the Fed.  The Fed purchases Government Bonds with the new money/federal reserve notes which drives down interest rates (the price of money).  Bonds become an asset on the Feds Balance sheet and the money/federal reserve notes balance it all out as a liability.  Not confused about the Feds monopoly on money.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 18, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Every financial crisis that the U.S. economy has gone through has been caused by an increase in the money supply by the Fed.  The Fed purchases Government Bonds with the new money/federal reserve notes which drives down interest rates (the price of money).  Bonds become an asset on the Feds Balance sheet and the money/federal reserve notes balance it all out as a liability.  Not confused about the Feds monopoly on money.


"yes, yes . . . the Bilderburgs . . . the Rothschilds . . . NWO . . . alien wars underground . . . FALSE FLAG! FALSE FLAG! buy gold! BUY GOLD!" Alex Jones or Izzy or both?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "yes, yes . . . the Bilderburgs . . . the Rothschilds . . . NWO . . . alien wars underground . . . FALSE FLAG! FALSE FLAG! buy gold! BUY GOLD!" Alex Jones or Izzy or both?


Sheesh!!  Not only do you watch more Fox channel then anybody else but you're in to the conspiracy theories too!!


----------



## espola (Dec 18, 2016)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "yes, yes . . . the Bilderburgs . . . the Rothschilds . . . NWO . . . alien wars underground . . . FALSE FLAG! FALSE FLAG! buy gold! BUY GOLD!" Alex Jones or Izzy or both?


I wish I could remember the name of that guy on the 3AM infomercials who was screamingly convinced that the Fed was an instrument of the Devil, or foreign powers, or secret space aliens, or something he couldn't really tell us unless we bought his tapes or DVDs.  I thought his head was going to explode right on camera.  I'm sure Izzy bought all 7 sets.


----------



## Wez (Dec 18, 2016)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Every financial crisis that the U.S. economy has gone through has been caused by an increase in the money supply by the Fed.


We know you think that.  The world isn't that simple.  Sometimes crisis are caused by plain old fashioned greed and speculation.


----------



## nononono (Dec 18, 2016)

espola said:


> I wish I could remember the name of that guy on the 3AM infomercials who was screamingly convinced that the Fed was an instrument of the Devil, or foreign powers, or secret space aliens, or something he couldn't really tell us unless we bought his tapes or DVDs.  I thought his head was going to explode right on camera.  I'm sure Izzy bought all 7 sets.


*Why were you up at 3:00 am in the first place ???*
*And secondly, why would you turn on " That " channel at 3:00 am ???*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2016)

espola said:


> *I wish I could remember the name of that guy on the 3AM infomercials *who was screamingly convinced that the Fed was an instrument of the Devil, or foreign powers, or secret space aliens, or something he couldn't really tell us unless we bought his tapes or DVDs.  I thought his head was going to explode right on camera.  I'm sure Izzy bought all 7 sets.


Your memory, by your own admission, seems to be deteriorating more  and more in the past year.  You've admitted not being able to make connections as well as posting anonymous Donald Trump supporters.  I dare not ask what year the DVD or tape set was available.  I could probably you tube it if you could remember the guys name.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2016)

Wez said:


> We know you think that.  The world isn't that simple.  Sometimes crisis are caused by plain old fashioned greed and speculation.


It's always caused by greed and speculation and the revolving door between the Fed and Treasury.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 7, 2017)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 7, 2017)

*Six Things to Consider About Inflation*

As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”

The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”

To address this conundrum, there are _six related factors_ that are noteworthy:


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 7, 2017)

*Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.

*Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.

*Blowing Bubbles*
*Number Three:* newly created fiat money must go _somewhere_ — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. *So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.*

*Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.

*Number Five:* In the same vein, *you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.”* This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)

*Number Six:* the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided *suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, *or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 8, 2017)

*He Was a Middle-School Loan Shark*

It came out in passing last night, in discussions with a smart 17-year old, that he got in deep trouble in middle school. He was accused of loan sharking, and forced to do detention.

See if you think there is anything wrong with what he did. 

They condemn what they do not understand.The middle school cafeteria had candy machines. Every candy cost a dollar. My friend carried extra ones with him. He would buy candy, and immediately people would ask if he could loan them money. He did. More and more people asked. He continued to loan people money and only some would pay him back. His charity was losing him money.

So he had an idea. He would loan anyone a dollar. However, the next day they had to pay him two dollars. This was great because it weeded out people who were not serious about their candy needs, and got rid of those who had no intention of paying him back. His idea helped to ration his scarce resources. It had the additional advantage of making him some money, which incentivized him to make funds available. 

Everyone was happy. He made money. They got their candy. Most everyone paid him back. If he began the week with $5, he ended the week with $10. This was nice. No one was hurt.......

https://fee.org/articles/he-was-a-middle-school-loan-shark/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 8, 2017)

*Lower Costs, Not Regulations, Will Save the Environment*

Want to save the spotted owl? Using a crowdfunding platform, you could contribute to compensating the owner of the woodland who won’t be able to harvest lumber.

Unfortunately, while many transaction costs are trending down, some are veering up. That’s often because of regulation. Payment regulations could make apps like Venmo too expensive to use. Occupational licensing regulations could make trading your skills illegal unless you gain licenses requiring thousands of hours of study – and costing hundreds of dollars. Environmental regulations crowd out the possibility of running a crowdfunding campaign to save the spotted owl (the money goes instead to environmental pressure groups who simply lobby for more regulation).

That’s a problem because all that regulation is getting in the way of yet more wealth creation. It’s no coincidence that the much-ballyhooed income stagnation in America began at about the same time as regulation started to take off. Technology has kept us a few steps in front of some of the regulation, but we’d still benefit from much of that $1.9 trillion annual burden being lifted.
*

https://fee.org/articles/lower-costs-not-regulations-will-save-the-environment/?utm_source=ribbon*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2017)

*The Problem with Trade Restrictions in One Chart*

*https://fee.org/articles/the-problem-with-trade-restrictions-in-one-chart/*

We often picture some companies producing for export but using as inputs almost entirely domestically produced items. Wrong!


----------



## espola (Jan 10, 2017)

https://brilliant.org/explorations/math-quantitative-finance/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=dr_34&utm_content=markov


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 10, 2017)

espola said:


> https://brilliant.org/explorations/math-quantitative-finance/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=dr_34&utm_content=markov


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 10, 2017)

espola said:


> https://brilliant.org/explorations/math-quantitative-finance/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=dr_34&utm_content=markov


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 10, 2017)

espola said:


> https://brilliant.org/explorations/math-quantitative-finance/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=dr_34&utm_content=markov


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 10, 2017)

espola said:


> https://brilliant.org/explorations/math-quantitative-finance/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=dr_34&utm_content=markov


----------



## Wez (Jan 11, 2017)




----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 11, 2017)

Wez said:


>


You don't need to tell us about the failed Big business killer, Obamas presidency, but thank you.
You are truly a dope.


----------



## nononono (Jan 11, 2017)

*Donald Trump is a successful Businessman....*

*Barry Soetoro is a failed Community Organizer.....*


----------



## espola (Jan 11, 2017)

Wez said:


>


All those stores have websites where they sell almost everything the store sells and will deliver right to your home.  So they're learning.


----------



## Wez (Jan 11, 2017)

espola said:


> All those stores have websites where they sell almost everything the store sells and will deliver right to your home.  So they're learning.


Not helping them...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 11, 2017)

espola said:


> All those stores have websites where they sell almost everything the store sells and will deliver right to your home.  So they're learning.


Those websites obviously not generating traffic worth mentioning.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

*How Roman Central Planners Destroyed Their Economy*

*https://fee.org/articles/how-roman-central-planners-destroyed-their-economy/*


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *How Roman Central Planners Destroyed Their Economy*
> 
> *https://fee.org/articles/how-roman-central-planners-destroyed-their-economy/*


"Some of these laws were reasonable and consistent with an economy of contract and commerce; *others prescribed gruesome punishments and assigned cruel powers and privileges given to some.*"

Sounds like what we may see the next 4 years...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> "Some of these laws were reasonable and consistent with an economy of contract and commerce; *others prescribed gruesome punishments and assigned cruel powers and privileges given to some.*"
> 
> Sounds like what we may see the next 4 years...


You thinking more QE?


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

It was a joke, cuz a liar, thief and con man is taking office, surrounded by the richest Cabinet and Advisory team ever.  Us Proletariat have no chance...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

https://www.policyed.org/intellections/socialisms-empty-promises/video?utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=stripes&utm_content=12032016


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> It was a joke, cuz a liar, thief and con man is taking office, surrounded by the richest Cabinet and Advisory team ever


Good.  They shouldn't need anything from us then


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> It was a joke, cuz a liar, thief and con man is taking office, surrounded by the richest Cabinet and Advisory team ever.  Us Proletariat have no chance...


Draining the swamp of the beholdened.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Good.  They shouldn't need anything from us then


How naive, they take from us regardless of "need"...


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Draining the swamp of the beholdened.


How is filling the swamp with half a dozen Goldmanites draining anything?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> How naive, they take from us regardless of "need"...


Now that's naive.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now that's naive.


Oh?  Please explain


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> How is filling the swamp with half a dozen Goldmanites draining anything?


out with the old in with the new.  It got drained alright.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> out with the old in with the new.  It got drained alright.


I see, you prefer your thieves dressed in red rather than blue.  That makes it easier to stomach when they're cutting your purse...


----------



## espola (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ... beholdened.


How do you say that in Hawaiian?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> Oh?  Please explain


They don't take regardless of need.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> They don't take regardless of need.


Who doesn't?  Rich people in power?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> I see, you prefer your thieves dressed in red rather than blue.  That makes it easier to stomach when they're cutting your purse...


Nothing like a monopoly on money and fractional reserve banking via 3 rounds of QE to drain your purse.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> Who doesn't?  Rich people in power?


Yes.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nothing like a monopoly on money and fractional reserve banking via 3 rounds of QE to drain your purse.


My purse has never been fatter...


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.


Wow, what a happy little fairy tale to help you sleep at night.  Yes, Biz, rich people never want more...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

espola said:


> How do you say that in Hawaiian?


Kapakahi


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> Wow, what a happy little fairy tale to help you sleep at night.  Yes, Biz, rich people never want more...


They don't take regardless of need.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> My purse has never been fatter...


Keep feeding it....and don't let it shit.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> They don't take regardless of need.


Whatever gets you through the day...


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Keep feeding it.


Isn't yours?  Has your personal wealth suffered over the last 8 years?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> Isn't yours?  Has your personal wealth suffered over the last 8 years?


Yes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> Whatever gets you through the day...


Thank you.  You as well.


----------



## Wez (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.


How so?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> How so?


Too Long and complicated to explain.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Too Long and complicated to explain.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 14, 2017)

The ACA expands access to care by particular groups of individuals and for particular medical services. But the act does little to expand the supply of healthcare resources or, despite lip service in that direction, to improve the efficiency of delivery. --R. Graboyes


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 14, 2017)

*The Hyperdrive to Serfdom*

Totalitarian governments rarely form in a day. Rather, they’re merely the end result of a long process, what F.A. Hayek called “The Road to Serfdom.” According to Hayek, Leviathan grows as strongmen gradually accumulate power through manipulating the normal political process. They seize strength on the backs of crisis, sow discord and chaos, and slowly rise to the top, all the while eroding liberties. 

One of the best modern illustrations of this process comes through the _Star Wars_ saga. The ultimate villain of the series, Emperor Palpatine, spends years manipulating the Galactic Senate, with the ultimate quest of controlling it and the Galactic Republic, to be replaced by an Empire with himself at the head. 

This seemingly odd plot for a blockbuster film was carefully chosen. George Lucas, largely inspired by the turbulent politics of the 1970s, said the situation “...got me to thinking historically about how do democracies get turned into dictatorships? Because the democracies aren't overthrown; they're given away."

https://fee.org/articles/the-hyperdrive-to-serfdom/?utm_medium=popular_widget


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 14, 2017)

*Lucas was, perhaps inadvertently, coloring his films in Hayekian paint. Hayek, in The Road to Serfdom, writes “...it is the general demand for quick and determined government action that is the dominating element in the situation, dissatisfaction with the slow and cumbersome course of democratic procedure which makes action for action’s sake the goal.” *

In _Attack of the Clones_, Palpatine takes advantage of another crisis to expand his “emergency” powers. Urged on by a Senate eager for quick action, he proclaims, *“It is with great reluctance that I have agreed to this calling. I love democracy. I love the Republic. Once this crisis has abated, I will lay down the powers you have given me!” *

*An urgent appeal for action, any action, tends to lead to less liberty and a greater exercise of oppressive state power. Of course, proponents claim the changes are temporary, but there’s always another crisis that warrants further and continued intervention.*

*Over the course of thirteen years of this process, Palpatine successfully anoints himself Emperor* during the events of _The Revenge of the Sith_. In the packed Galactic Senate chamber, *he declares the end of the Republic, saying, "In order to ensure our security and continuing stability, the Republic will be reorganized into the first Galactic Empire, for a safe and secure society which I assure you will last for ten thousand years."*

As he finishes his proclamation, the Senate erupts in cheers. Padme Amidala, a disappointed Senator, bitterly remarks *"This is how liberty dies.* With thunderous applause." Serfdom came to the galaxy gradually, in the guise of safety and stability, and was accepted with open arms. *The Republic, as George Lucas puts it, was given away.

https://fee.org/articles/the-hyperdrive-to-serfdom/?utm_medium=popular_widget*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2017)

Budget Politics

"Back in my teaching days, many years ago, one of the things I liked to ask the class to consider was this, imagine a government agency with only two task.  One, building statues of Benedict Arnold and two providing life saving medications to children.  If this agency's budget were cut what would it do?  The answer of course is that it would cut back on the medications for children.  Why?  Because that is what is most likely to get the budget restored.  If they cut back on building statues of  Benedict Arnold, people might ask why they were building statues of Benedict Arnold in the first place.-- Thomas Sowell.  Who else?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2017)




----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 16, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


Nice, the most amazing place I have ever been to.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2017)

… is from page 451 and page 828 of the 3rd edition (1972) of what is correctly regarded by many to be the greatest economics textbook ever written, University Economics by Armen Alchian and William Allen; the first part of the quotation is Question #30 at the end of Chapter 22; the second part of the quotation is from the answer given, at the back of the book, to the question (link added):
_
*“If an enterprise cannot survive except by paying wages 75 cents or $1 an hour, I am perfectly willing for it to go out of business.  I do not believe that such an enterprise is worth saving at that price.  It does more harm than good, socially and economically.  It is not an asset; it is a liability.  So if this kind of business is killed by a minimum wage of $1.25, I for one will not be sorry.”  (George Meany, Hearings before Subcommittee on Labor Standards, 86th Congress, 2nd Session, 1960, p. 36 of Part 1 of printed hearings.)*

_
a. How does this statement differ from one that says, “Any person who cannot produce a product worth at least $1.25 an hour should not be allowed to work as an employee?”

…

a. Doesn’t differ except in degree to which it reveals implication of what is said.
_
_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2017)

*There’s nothing awesomely ingenious about supply and demand analysis in economics.  Not even close.  This analysis is a very simple – indeed, rather plain – depiction of what our common sense tells us about human action.  But it has megaton explanatory power when used wisely and skillfully.  Supply and demand analysis is not kindergarten stuff,* to be certain, but any decently attentive 14-year-old girl or boy can grasp its main features if these are explained by a competent and caring teacher.  And if that girl or boy ponders, soberly, supply and demand analysis for a few years, by the time she or he is old enough to legally buy alcohol in the United States, she or he will know about (I estimate) 60 to 65 percent of all that is worthwhile knowing in economic theory – or, at least, 60 to 65 percent of all that is worthwhile to know of economic theory for the purpose of enabling her or him to critically and sensibly assess the merits of the vast majority of real-world economic policies, both actual and proposed.

*That young woman or man will know to ask, unceasingly, critical questions: Why this? Why not that? Why is that relevant? Why is this irrelevant? Where did this go? Where will that go? Where did this come from? Where will that come from? Who pays? Who benefits? Who says? According to whose judgment? How many? How much? How plausible? Which person? Which group? What else is likely to happen? (and above all, always, without fail) “As compared to what?“---Alchain*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2017)

*My Favorite Description To Date of the Problems and Appeal of Trump*

January 13, 2017, 8:59 am 

Scott Alexander has a great article on the problems with Trump's approach to economics.  I want to begin, though, with an analogy he uses at the end because it is the best single framework I have seen about understanding Trump's appeal:

Suppose you’re a hypercompetent billionaire in a decaying city, and you want to do something about the crime problem. What’s your best option? Maybe you could to donate money to law-enforcement, or after-school programs for at-risk teens, or urban renewal. Or you could urge your company full of engineering geniuses to invent new police tactics and better security systems. Or you could use your influence as a beloved celebrity to petition the government to pass laws which improve efficiency of the justice system.

Bruce Wayne decided to dress up in a bat costume and personally punch criminals. _And we love him for it._

I worry that Trump’s plan for his administration is to dress up in a President costume and personally punch people we don’t like, while leaving policy to rot. And I worry it’s going to work.

Basically, Trump is acting like a small state governor, focusing his economic efforts on getting the Apple factory to come to town

So based on these two strategies, we are in for four years of sham Trump victories which look really convincing on a first glance. Every couple of weeks, until it gets boring, another company is going to say Trump convinced them to keep jobs in the United States. The total number of jobs saved this way will never be more than a tiny fraction of the jobs that could be saved by (eg) good economic policy, but nobody knows anything about economic policy and Trump will make sure everybody hears about Ford keeping jobs in the US. Every one of these victories will actively make the world worse, in the sense that these big companies will get taxpayer subsidies or favors they can call in later to distort government priorities, but nobody’s going to notice these either.

It seems appropriate to end this with a bit of Bastiat:

In the economic sphere an act, a habit, an institution, a law produces not only one effect, but a series of effects. Of these effects, the first alone is immediate; it appears simultaneously with its cause; it is seen. The other effects emerge only subsequently; they are not seen; we are fortunate if we foresee them.

There is only one difference between a bad economist and a good one: the bad economist confines himself to the visible effect; the good economist takes into account both the effect that can be seen and those effects that must be foreseen.

Yet this difference is tremendous; for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favorable, the later consequences are disastrous, and vice versa. Whence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good that will be followed by a great evil to come, while the good economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2017)

*Trump Silver Lining: Liberals Are Now Defending Trade Deficits*

December 21, 2016, 9:00 am 

Thanks to Trump,* it appears that some of the Left have discovered economic reality and are defending trade and suddenly seem less unsettled by trade deficits*.  Here is Kevin Drum with one in a series trying to downplay panic over trade deficits, in this case with Mexico.    Here are some of my recent thoughts on the trade deficit.

International trade is such an obvious benefit to the country that it is simply incredible that we are, hundreds of years after Adam Smith and Ricardo and Bastiat, still trying to explain and defend it against ignorance.  It's like we have to constantly battle recurrences of the phlogiston theory of combustion.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2017)

*Good God -- California Unfunded Pension Liabilities Estimated at Over $92,000 per State Household*
December 4, 2016, 11:58 am 






via here.

*All that money you thought you were saving for retirement -- it may be you were really saving it for your friendly neighborhood DMV worker's retirement*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 20, 2017)

*Which State is the Biggest Moocher of Them All?*

*https://fee.org/articles/which-state-is-the-biggest-moocher-of-them-all/*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 21, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Which State is the Biggest Moocher of Them All?*
> 
> *https://fee.org/articles/which-state-is-the-biggest-moocher-of-them-all/*


They are poor states with small tax bases, no one really wants to live down there.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 21, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> They are poor states with small tax bases, no one really wants to live down there.


http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-04-26-new-york-government-aid.htm

New Yorkers lead pack in government benefits


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 21, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/which-states-did-americans-leave-in-2016/

Which States did Americans leave in 2016?

Interesting map


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 21, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/*thank-goodness-for-tax-havens*/

The world’s most important jurisdiction for corporate tax planning is Delaware and it didn’t even appear on the list. Why? I have no idea.

But I can tell you that there is a single building in Delaware that is home to 285,000 companies according to a report in the _New York Times_.

1209 North Orange Street… It’s a humdrum office building, a low-slung affair with a faded awning and a view of a parking garage. Hardly worth a second glance. If a first one. But behind its doors is one of the most remarkable corporate collections in the world: 1209 North Orange, you see, is the legal address of no fewer than 285,000 separate businesses. Its occupants, on paper, include giants like American Airlines, Apple, Bank of America, Berkshire Hathaway, Cargill, Coca-Cola, Ford, General Electric, Google, JPMorgan Chase, and Wal-Mart. These companies do business across the nation and around the world. Here at 1209 North Orange, they simply have a dropbox. …Big corporations, small-time businesses, rogues, scoundrels and worse — all have turned up at Delaware addresses in hopes of minimizing taxes, skirting regulations, plying friendly courts or, when needed, covering their tracks. …It’s easy to set up shell companies here, no questions asked.

Most leftists get upset about Delaware, just like they get upset about BVI and the Cayman Islands.

But Oxfam’s people are either spectacularly clueless or they made some sort of bizarre political calculation to give America a free pass.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 21, 2017)

*Greek Taxes Are So High That People Are Turning down Inheritances*

The OECD data shows that the burden of government spending is now 53.1 percent of economic output. And the latest data from _Economic Freedom of the World_ shows that Greece’s score has dropped to 6.93 (dropping the country to #86 in the rankings).

In other words, Greece suffered a crisis caused by too much government and too much statism and the politicians (along with outside “experts”) decided that the solution was to….drum roll, please…increase the relative size and scope of government.

https://fee.org/articles/greek-taxes-are-so-high-that-people-are-turning-down-inheritances/?utm_medium=popular_widget


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2017)

Jeff Jacoby correctly and rightly slams Trump’s economically lunatic scheme to “Make America Great Again” with protectionism.  A slice:

Not even Trump claims there is anything unpatriotic about selling American-made products _to_ Mexico or China. So how can it be unpatriotic to buy products _from_ Mexico or China? Trade is by definition a two-way proposition: Stifle imports and you stifle exports. The only way foreigners can acquire the dollars they need to purchase American goods and services is for Americans to buy _their_ goods and services. The more we trade, the more we gain.

(To understand Trump’s ‘economics’ you need to understand only that he and his horde are mercantilists of the most simplistic, ignorant, and cartoonish sort.  Eleven-year-old children of ordinary intelligence have more economic understanding than this idiot president.  There is nothing subtle or nuanced or deep in Trump’s “thoughts”; he sees only that which is immediately in front of his nose, and even at that close range his vision is often distorted.  If he believes even a quarter of what he says about trade, he’s a complete moron – a moron made dangerous by the power at his command and by the cheering of his deluded followers.)


----------



## Wez (Jan 25, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Jeff Jacoby correctly and rightly slams Trump’s economically lunatic scheme to “Make America Great Again” with protectionism.  A slice:
> 
> Not even Trump claims there is anything unpatriotic about selling American-made products _to_ Mexico or China. So how can it be unpatriotic to buy products _from_ Mexico or China? Trade is by definition a two-way proposition: Stifle imports and you stifle exports. The only way foreigners can acquire the dollars they need to purchase American goods and services is for Americans to buy _their_ goods and services. The more we trade, the more we gain.
> 
> (To understand Trump’s ‘economics’ you need to understand only that he and his horde are mercantilists of the most simplistic, ignorant, and cartoonish sort.  Eleven-year-old children of ordinary intelligence have more economic understanding than this idiot president.  There is nothing subtle or nuanced or deep in Trump’s “thoughts”; he sees only that which is immediately in front of his nose, and even at that close range his vision is often distorted.  If he believes even a quarter of what he says about trade, he’s a complete moron – a moron made dangerous by the power at his command and by the cheering of his deluded followers.)


My God Biz, do my eyes deceive me????  A critical post about Trump....it can't be.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> My God Biz, do my eyes deceive me????  A critical post about Trump....it can't be.


You can't be this dumb, he has never been committed to or in love with Trump, he is just happy Hrc didn't make it.
Anyway, that is my take.


----------



## nononono (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> It was a joke, cuz a liar, thief and con man is taking office, surrounded by the richest Cabinet and Advisory team ever.  Us Proletariat have no chance...



*That's true ....so sit around and bitch about it like a good peasant. *
*Just don't let Trumps guards catch you or it's off to the blocks for awhile.*


----------



## nononono (Jan 25, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You can't be this dumb, he has never been committed to or in love with Trump, he is just happy Hrc didn't make it.
> Anyway, that is my take.


*And I second that.....*

*Weezy has no idea how bad it would have been under the thumb of HRC the Wicked one.*


----------



## Wez (Jan 25, 2017)

nononono said:


> *That's true ....so sit around and bitch about it like a good peasant.*


You got anything of value to offer here beyond just calling people names and crying like a cunt all day long?


----------



## nononono (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> You got anything of value to offer here beyond just calling people names and crying like a cunt all day long?


*Oh I've gotta lot for you......*

*I haven't even started yet.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> You got anything of value to offer here beyond just calling people names and crying like a cunt all day long?


I have got to give it to you in regards to entertainment value.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> My God Biz, do my eyes deceive me????  A critical post about Trump....it can't be.


No it's critical of protectionism and cronyism like we found in the previous administration.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> My God Biz, do my eyes deceive me????  A critical post about Trump....it can't be.


It's not your eyes that deceive you.  You're lazy and missed the other 18 post.  And that's just since October.  At least Andy was MIA.  You were too busy wallowing in defeat to accept any post on Trump, good or bad.


----------



## Wez (Jan 25, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No it's critical of protectionism and cronyism like we found in the previous administration.


My guess is you'll see it in every admin.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 25, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2011-04-26-new-york-government-aid.htm
> 
> New Yorkers lead pack in government benefits


They pay waaaaaaaaaaay more than they get back, wake up to "actual facts".


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> You got anything of value to offer here beyond just calling people names and crying like a cunt all day long?


You must be talking to lil 'joe, so, no comment on the rude language. I'm pretty sure he's saying waaaaaaaay worse.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> My guess is you'll see it in every admin.


"seeing" is in the eyes of the beholder.


----------



## Wez (Jan 25, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You must be talking to lil 'joe, so, no comment on the rude language. I'm pretty sure he's saying waaaaaaaay worse.


It was to nono and yes, they all say the same, just in their own special ways.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> It was to nono and yes, they all say the same, just in their own special ways.


. . . and nono use to claim to be such the straight laced, business minded, serious Christian soldier . . . doesn't sound like he is adhering to his previously stated principles?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and nono use to claim to be such the straight laced, business minded, serious Christian soldier . . . doesn't sound like he is adhering to his previously stated principles?


Husker is all talk, must be a party thing. 
Liar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "seeing" is in the eyes of the beholder.


Understanding what you see, not so much.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 25, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Understanding what you see, not so much.


Agreed.


----------



## Wez (Jan 25, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and nono use to claim to be such the straight laced, business minded, *serious Christian* soldier . . . doesn't sound like he is adhering to his previously stated principles?


I find many people who view themselves to be this, are the least like Jesus.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> I find many people who view themselves to be this, are the least like Jesus.


How would you know?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2017)

Wez said:


> I find many people who view themselves to be this, are the least like Jesus.


You mean the lamb holding Jesus who never pissed anybody off or never argued with anyone or never called people names and never challenged the so called experts with harsh rebukes and ad hominem attacks and unyielding convictions?  Sounds like you don't know how badly Jesus pissed people off with his verbal attacks.  Anonymity was not an option.  The cross was his only option.


----------



## Wez (Jan 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sounds like you don't know how badly Jesus pissed people off


I'm not talking about his rebelliousness against slavers and oppressors, I'm talking about his compassion.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 26, 2017)

Wez said:


> I'm not talking about his rebelliousness against slavers and oppressors, I'm talking about his compassion.


For example?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 26, 2017)

Wez said:


> I find many people who view themselves to be this, are the least like Jesus.


I find those that need, cling to and try to sell their religious fervor are those that need it most.


----------



## Wez (Jan 26, 2017)

Time for a comedy break!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I find those that need, cling to and try to sell their religious fervor are those that need it most.


Thatʻs true.  Love, compassion, perseverance, wisdom, humility, drive, passion, vision, leadership, loyalty, discernment, intelligence, etc.  Good list of needs indeed.


----------



## Wez (Jan 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Thatʻs true.  *Love, compassion, wisdom, humility, leadership, intelligence*, etc.  Good list of needs indeed.


Too bad the vocal "Christians" here lack the above, lolz!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 26, 2017)

Wez said:


> Time for a comedy break!


That was funny. Tells us he thinks a heck of alot about God and the bible and death when heʻs not on the stage and thats good!  God has dealt with much worse and isnʻt forcing him to buy whatever you think is being sold.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 26, 2017)

Wez said:


> Too bad the vocal "Christians" here lack the above, lolz!


Thatʻs true for all of us.  Braddah included.....not as much as the rest of you tho'.  Lol


----------



## Wez (Jan 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> God has dealt with much worse and isnʻt forcing him to buy whatever you think is being sold.


Are you a wet blanket 24/7?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 26, 2017)

Wez said:


> Are you a wet blanket 24/7?


What are you selling now?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Thatʻs true.  Love, compassion, perseverance, wisdom, humility, drive, passion, vision, leadership, loyalty, discernment, intelligence, etc.  Good list of needs indeed.


You once again miss the point, business as usual.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You once again miss the point, business as usual.


Yup, I agree with you, you disagree with my agreeing with you and you're left wondering why I agreed with what you believe in because you had no idea I would agree with your beliefs.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yup, I agree with you, you disagree with my agreeing with you and you're left wondering why I agreed with what you believe in because you had no idea I would agree with your beliefs.


Nice try, the point was that some of the most tortured souls I have ever know went between sin and church going bible thumping, then back again. Addictive personalities, extremists and some just trying to mask their true intent.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jan 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Nice try, the point was that some of the most tortured souls I have ever know went between sin and church going bible thumping, then back again. Addictive personalities, extremists and some just trying to mask their true intent.


Wez used to be a bible thumper?
Yikes!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 27, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Wez used to be a bible thumper?
> Yikes!


Wrong book though.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jan 27, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Wrong book though.


Now THAT was hilarious.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 27, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Now THAT was hilarious.


I am just trying to keep up with you and Bruddah. lol


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jan 27, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am just trying to keep up with you and Bruddah. lol


Our side is winning the humor battle for sure.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 27, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Our side is winning the humor battle for sure.


Endless supply of go ernment cheese in the mean time.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jan 27, 2017)

If you cant have a sense of humor about this crap, you already lost the argument.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 27, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Our side is winning the humor battle for sure.


Hard to make jokes when your world just crumbled so unexpectedly right in front of you when you were playing the fiddle. Prozac comaitis.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Endless supply of go ernment cheese in the mean time.


Well, they better start learning to laugh at themselves or it will really be a long term. I don't think their minds are quite right.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 27, 2017)




----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 28, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Our side is winning the humor battle for sure.


It's getting harder these days to stay optimistic and keep a good sense of humor as the consequences of our own little Brexit, "protest vote" are so dire . . . I mean really, Donald fudging Trump is our president! Could it get any sillier or nonsensical? We now discuss made up stories he pushes as facts because he overheard a third hand conversation about something someone got wrong in the first place! Bernhard Langer? Really? . . . and Langer says he only met Trump once, for a moment?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's getting harder these days to stay optimistic and keep a good sense of humor as the consequences of our own little Brexit, "protest vote" are so dire . . . I mean really, Donald fudging Trump is our president! Could it get any sillier or nonsensical? We now discuss made up stories he pushes as facts because he overheard a third hand conversation about something someone got wrong in the first place! Bernhard Langer? Really? . . . and Langer says he only met Trump once, for a moment?


what happened?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 3, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 3, 2017)

*The great CEO-worker ‘pay gap’ is nothing but a union-built myth*

*https://www.aei.org/publication/the-great-ceo-worker-pay-gap-is-nothing-but-a-union-built-myth/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 3, 2017)

*About that CEO-employee pay gap*
*The average chief executive makes $178,400—about five times the average worker, not the 331-to-1 commonly cited.*

*https://www.aei.org/publication/ceo-employee-pay-gap/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 3, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


But Nance, what if the worker and the shareholder are the same person?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 3, 2017)




----------



## Bernie Sanders (Feb 3, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But Nance, what if the worker and the shareholder are the same person?


Nancy really wanted to give the little commie a thumbs up, but she was stuck behind her elitist, crony-quasi-fascistic, facade.


----------



## Wez (Feb 4, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The great CEO-worker ‘pay gap’ is nothing but a union-built myth*


The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.

You've been had dude, get over yourself.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.
> 
> You've been had dude, get over yourself.
> 
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


"Voting against ones own best interests" exemplified.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Feb 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "Voting against ones own best interests" exemplified.


Should I tell you why you believe that?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.
> 
> You've been had dude, get over yourself.
> 
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


Funny you should mention my finances.  Things just got better yesterday.  Finally, the pay off.  Time to rinse and repeat.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.
> 
> You've been had dude, get over yourself.
> 
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


Low information folks are drawn to empty words.....cliff notes for retail dudes who canʻt tell you if PMI saved the banks.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.
> 
> You've been had dude, get over yourself.
> 
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.
> 
> You've been had dude, get over yourself.
> 
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)




----------



## Wez (Feb 4, 2017)

Are these all the videos you used to "not" improve your finances over the last 8 years?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> Are these all the videos you used to "not" improve your finances over the last 8 years?


No.  But Hartmann is easily dismissed, not only for brevity, but for not saying anything of substance to refute libertarianism.  An easy hook for retail guys that can't tell you what PMI is.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

1. *Table of the Day I (above)* shows a comparison of some key statistics in 1980 and 2014 for public elementary and secondary schools in the US based on data from the National Center for Educational Statistics here. During the 34-year period between 1980-2014, the number of public school students increased by 22.6% (and by 9.25 million). Over the same period, total staff headcount increased by 50.1% (and by 2.1 million), led by an 88.1% increase in school district administrative staff and followed by a 54.1% increase in instructional staff which included a 63.1% increase in school principals and assistant principals. The total expenditures for America’s public schools more than doubled between 1980 and 2014, from less than $300 billion 1980 to more than $600 billion in 2014 (both in 2015 dollars). On a per-student basis, the cost to educate a student in US public schools increased by more than 75.5%, from $7,204 in 1980 to $12,642 in 2014. Meanwhile, reading and math test scores for 17-year old public school students have been basically flat since the 1970s.

As my AEI colleague Andrew Biggs commented on Facebook about the table above: “If you think more resources will solve our educational problems…”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

10. *Chart of the Day II (below)*. Adding to the evidence of America’s emergence as a world energy superpower in recent years, exports of US natural gas reached a new all-time record high in November of 226 billion cubic feet, according to new EIA data here. Exports of natural gas by pipeline to Canada and Mexico reached a new record high in November of 193 billion cubic feet, a 26% increase from a year earlier. LNG exports surged to 33 billion cubic feet in November, more than ten times greater than LNG exports in November 2015, reflecting the new developing American industry of exporting some of our abundance of natural gas in the form of LNG. Interestingly, Mexico has emerged as America’s No. 1 customer of LNG, buying more than 40% of the US LNG exports in November, followed by China, which was the second-largest buyer of LNG with a 22% share of November exports.

As Jeff Jacoby wrote recently (featured on CD here), “Not even Donald Trump claims there is anything unpatriotic about _selling_ American-made products _to_ Mexico or China [like LNG for example]. So how can it be unpatriotic to _buy_ products _from_ Mexico or China? Trade is by definition a two-way proposition: Stifle imports and you stifle exports. *The only way foreigners can acquire the dollars they need to purchase American goods and services [like LNG] is for Americans to buy their goods and services. The more we trade, the more we gain.”*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 5, 2017)

A self-purported "financial guy" that hasn't done well in the last 6 or so years certainly isn't someone I would seek advice from, of any kind.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A self-purported "financial guy" that hasn't done well in the last 6 or so years certainly isn't someone I would seek advice from, of any kind.


oh, now itʻs 6 years? Iʻm already doing better by your reconciling.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> oh, now itʻs 6 years? Iʻm already doing better by your reconciling.


You are the one that keeps complaining. I honestly hope you are doing better than you make it seem.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are the one that keeps complaining. I honestly hope you are doing better than you make it seem.


Donʻt mistake complaining for educating.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Donʻt mistake complaining for educating.


Is that what you think you are doing? Those who can do, those who can't teach.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Is that what you think you are doing?


Itʻs my passion


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Those who can do, those who can't teach.







Would you like to learn the proper quote?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I honestly hope you are doing better than you make it seem.


I could always be doing better.  The question is, what do I trade off so I can do "better"?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Wez said:


> The irony of the only person here to "not" have improved his finances over the last 8 years, shilling for Corporate America and looking down his nose at collective bargaining, can't be overstated.
> 
> You've been had dude, get over yourself.
> 
> http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/watch-thom-hartmanns-most-brutal-takedown-libertarianism


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)




----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I could always be doing better.  The question is, what do I trade off so I can do "better"?


So, besides asking a lot of, many silly, questions, you also like to complain, got it.


----------



## Wez (Feb 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I could always be doing better.  The question is, what do I trade off so I can do "better"?


Hire an advisor maybe? As Trump says, "what have you got to lose?"  8))


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So, besides asking *a lot of, many silly, *questions, you also like to complain, got it.


How could I miss it?!! lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 5, 2017)

Wez said:


> Hire an advisor maybe? As Trump says, "what have you got to lose?"  8))


I have.  Her name is Carmen.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 7, 2017)

Nancy Pelosi just said she can't work with Bush. Good news Nancy, you don't have to.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 7, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> Nancy Pelosi just said she can't work with Bush. Good news Nancy, you don't have to.


Watching her try to explain stakeholder theory was hilarious.  That is one dumb chick.


----------



## Wez (Feb 7, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That is one dumb chick.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 7, 2017)

How about Maxine Waters saying that Putin/Russia invaded Korea. That's news to me and probably Russia and Korea.


----------



## Wez (Feb 7, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> How about Maxine Waters saying that Putin/Russia invaded Korea. That's news to me and probably Russia and Korea.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 7, 2017)

Wez said:


>


She looked good doing it.  Maxine Waters?..... .not so much.  And both her and Pelosi got in to office.  Boxer is another BSC politician.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 7, 2017)

Wez said:


>


I'll  see your Sarah Palin and raise you a Debbie Wasserman Schultz. 

http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/quite-possibly-dumbest-statement-democrat/


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 7, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> How about Maxine Waters saying that Putin/Russia invaded Korea. That's news to me and probably Russia and Korea.


Can't make fun of her though.


----------



## Wez (Feb 7, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> I'll  see your Sarah Palin and raise you a Debbie Wasserman Schultz.
> 
> http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/quite-possibly-dumbest-statement-democrat/


I can do this all night...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 7, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> She looked good doing it.  Maxine Waters?..... .not so much.  And both her and Pelosi got in to office.  Boxer is another BSC politician.


Can someone please tell me why liberal women are so fucking ugly? Seriously.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 7, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Can someone please tell me why liberal women are so fucking ugly? Seriously.


Greta is not liberal. lol!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 7, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Greta is not liberal. lol!


Nasty, anyway you look at that crooked puss.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 7, 2017)

Wez said:


> I can do this all night...


Well I'm hoping you do. Here comes the Judd! Ashley Judd.


----------



## Wez (Feb 8, 2017)




----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 8, 2017)

Wez said:


>


https://www.google.com/amp/theantimedia.org/5-things-hillary-clinton-sanity/amp/

Here's the almost President.


----------



## Wez (Feb 8, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> https://www.google.com/amp/theantimedia.org/5-things-hillary-clinton-sanity/amp/
> 
> Here's the almost President.


From our actual President...

http://www.knowable.com/a/25-of-the-dumbest-things-donald-trump-has-ever-said-depicvers


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 8, 2017)

Wez said:


> From our actual President...
> 
> http://www.knowable.com/a/25-of-the-dumbest-things-donald-trump-has-ever-said-depicvers


I thought this was a chick thing. Now you've made it much easier.


----------



## Wez (Feb 8, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> I thought this was a chick thing. Now you've made it much easier.


Well, you had all of Hollywood to pull from, that's an unfair fight...


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 8, 2017)

Wez said:


> Well, you had all of Hollywood to pull from, that's an unfair fight...


This guy is not Hollywood... Mr Al Sharpton


----------



## Wez (Feb 8, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> This guy is not Hollywood... Mr Al Sharpton


Sharpton's racism doesn't speak for me, does Trump's racism speak for you?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Wez said:


> Sharpton's racism doesn't speak for me, does Trump's racism speak for you?


Only through you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Don’t buy the hype: Trump’s Dodd-Frank order a whole lot of nothing


http://www.aei.org/publication/dont-buy-the-hype-trumps-dodd-frank-order-a-whole-lot-of-nothing/


----------



## Wez (Feb 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Don’t buy the hype: Trump’s Dodd-Frank order a whole lot of nothing
> 
> 
> http://www.aei.org/publication/dont-buy-the-hype-trumps-dodd-frank-order-a-whole-lot-of-nothing/


Still shilling for your Corporate Masters?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Wez said:


> Still shilling for your Corporate Masters?


Aren't you....Mr. Retail Finance.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Something about a fiduciary responsibility was it?  Be careful the industry that wants to regulate itself.


----------



## Wez (Feb 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Aren't you....Mr. Retail Finance.


Says the clueless Retardarian who is struggling financially.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Wez said:


> Says the clueless Retardarian who is struggling financially.


Poor me. lol!!  Let me see If I can find somebody to blame other than myself for my current situation.  You retail finance guys aren't very helpful.


----------



## Wez (Feb 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Poor me. lol!!  Let me see If I can find somebody to blame other than myself for my current situation.  You retail finance guys aren't very helpful.


I suggest you ditch libertarianism, your broken Cult that works against The Working Man.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Wez said:


> I suggest you ditch libertarianism, your broken Cult that works against The Working Man.


Is that the fiduciary spin that you use to prop up your industry?


----------



## Wez (Feb 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Is that the fiduciary spin that you use to prop up your industry?


Funny you use the word fiduciary as if it's deragatory.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2017)

Wez said:


> Funny you use the word fiduciary as if it's deragatory.


That all depends on you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

The U.S. Government does not issue money. The Federal Reserve issues money to the Government by purchasing Government Treasury Bonds. This is no small point.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

*Interest rates are prices. *They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

*Six Things to Consider About Inflation*

As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”

The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”

To address this conundrum, there are _six related factors_ that are noteworthy:

https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

*Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.

*Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.

*Blowing Bubbles*
*Number Three:* newly created fiat money must go _somewhere_ — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. *So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.*

*Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.

*Number Five:* In the same vein, *you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.”* This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)

*Number Six:* the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided *suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, *or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

...the paper currency in your purse or wallet is a liability of the Federal Reserve, legally speaking. After all, these green pieces of paper have "Federal Reserve Note" written on them. This is an accounting fiction, of course, a throwback to the days when the notes were simply claims to actual gold or silver. It's hardly a liability to have billions of dollars in "claims" against the Federal Reserve floating around, when they are claims to nothing. (If you tried to present a $20 bill for redemption at a Federal Reserve Office, you would be able to get two $10 dollar bills, or four $5 dollar bills, but certainly no other type of asset.)--HPBRW


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

Just as a free press is necessary for a free citizenry, so too is sound money necessary for a free economy. *All other aspects of what is meant by the term "economic freedom" in conventional circles--low tax rates, mild regulation, no trade barriers -- are a moot point if the government has a printing press at its disposal.*

That is why education is the first and most important step--people need to understand the importance of sound money, and the dangers of fiat money and central banking


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2017)

Budget Politics
"Back in my teaching days, many years ago, one of the things I liked to ask the class to consider was this, imagine a government agency with only two task. One, building statues of Benedict Arnold and two providing life saving medications to children. If this agency's budget were cut what would it do? The answer of course is that it would cut back on the medications for children. Why? Because that is what is most likely to get the budget restored. If they cut back on building statues of Benedict Arnold, people might ask why they were building statues of Benedict Arnold in the first place.-- Thomas Sowell. Who else?


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 11, 2017)

Wez said:


> Sharpton's racism doesn't speak for me, does Trump's racism speak for you?


What has Trump done that's racist? Pease don't  say the temporary ban because if you do,  you feel Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter are all racist. Don't say because of his stance on illegal immigrants, because again, the previous people all had the same views. Don't say it's about homosexuals, because he is the first President to enter office supporting gay marriage.

So now go ahead and tell me about this racism..


----------



## espola (Feb 11, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> What has Trump done that's racist?


Are you really that brainwashed?

Or just stupid?


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 11, 2017)

espola said:


> Are you really that brainwashed?
> 
> Or just stupid?


Are you?


----------



## Torros (Feb 11, 2017)

espola said:


> Are you really that brainwashed?
> 
> Or just stupid?


Apparently you are.


----------



## Daniel Miller (Feb 11, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> What has Trump done that's racist? Pease don't  say the temporary ban because if you do,  you feel Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter are all racist. Don't say because of his stance on illegal immigrants, because again, the previous people all had the same views. Don't say it's about homosexuals, because he is the first President to enter office supporting gay marriage.
> 
> So now go ahead and tell me about this racism..


How about refusing to rent to "coloreds" and having been sued twice by the Dept. of Justice for his racist rental policies.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2017)

Daniel Miller said:


> How about refusing to rent to "coloreds" and having been sued twice by the Dept. of Justice for his racist rental policies.


What was the outcome? Please hurry, I need to get back to the NAACP image awards.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2017)

espola said:


> Are you really that brainwashed?
> 
> Or just stupid?


I sure haven't seen any issues.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Feb 11, 2017)

I never heard anyone ever call Trump a racist until he started to make a real run at the Presidency.
"Not even a smidgen."


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> I never heard anyone ever call Trump a racist until he started to make a real run at the Presidency.
> "Not even a smidgen."


That card has been played out. They hear what they want to hear and make up the rest.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2017)

espola said:


> Are you really that brainwashed?
> 
> Or just stupid?


I have an idea how stupid you must be to believe the shit you're trying to sell.


----------



## espola (Feb 11, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> I never heard anyone ever call Trump a racist until he started to make a real run at the Presidency.
> "Not even a smidgen."


No one noticed until he said "They're rapists" about 10 minutes into his campaign.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 11, 2017)

Daniel Miller said:


> How about refusing to rent to "coloreds" and having been sued twice by the Dept. of Justice for his racist rental policies.


Hmmm. What is the race of the homeless woman who lives in Trump towers for free again? I know, you have to be so confused.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 11, 2017)

espola said:


> No one noticed until he said "They're rapists" about 10 minutes into his campaign.


For acting so smart sometimes you sure are dumb.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 11, 2017)

Torros said:


> Apparently you are.


Espola is a very intelligent man.  Just ask him.  He'll tell you without telling you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 11, 2017)

Daniel Miller said:


> How about refusing to rent to "coloreds" and having been sued twice by the Dept. of Justice for his racist rental policies.


Fake news.


----------



## Wez (Feb 12, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> What has Trump done that's racist? Pease don't  say the temporary ban because if you do,  you feel Obama, Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton and Jimmy Carter are all racist. Don't say because of his stance on illegal immigrants, because again, the previous people all had the same views. Don't say it's about homosexuals, because he is the first President to enter office supporting gay marriage.
> 
> So now go ahead and tell me about this racism..


Haven't read my signature lately?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

"If there were no debts in our money system, there wouldnʻt be any money"-- Mariner Eccles, Governor of the Federal Reserve System in 1941


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

If all the Bank loans were paid, no one could have a bank deposit, and there would not be a dollar of coin or currency in circulation.--Robert Hemphill, Credit Manager of the Federal Reserve bank in Atlanta, 1936


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

the paper currency in your purse or wallet is a liability of the Federal Reserve, legally speaking. After all, these green pieces of paper have "Federal Reserve Note" written on them. This is an accounting fiction, of course, a throwback to the days when the notes were simply claims to actual gold or silver. It's hardly a liability to have billions of dollars in "claims" against the Federal Reserve floating around, when they are claims to nothing. (If you tried to present a $20 bill for redemption at a Federal Reserve Office, you would be able to get two $10 dollar bills, or four $5 dollar bills, but certainly no other type of asset.)--HPBRW


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?


Yes


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

espola said:


> Since when?


Since they established the definition of asset


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> I'm just curious if you have a full understanding of currencies and complex banking.


There is no such thing as complex banking.....unless you're in retail finance.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> We know your opinion on fiat money and fractional reserve banking, can you show us both the advatages and disadvantages?


If you know my opinion on fiat money and fractional reserve banking, why would you need an advantage and disadvantage explanation?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> I'm not arguing one way or another, I don't pretend to know what is the best way to run our multi-trillion dollar economy.  I'm assuming the Gold standard was dropped for good reason...


Why are you assuming that?


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Feb 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> Haven't read my signature lately?


Garbage.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2017)

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/08/why-jobs-go-unfilled-even-in-times-of-high-unemployment/278801/

*Why Jobs Go Unfilled Even in Times of High Unemployment*
Companies say too many applicants just don't have the right skills. Partnerships between employers and community colleges are looking to fix that.


Too late CC's.  New Sheriff in town.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/spending-restraint-is-unleashing-the-british-economy/

*Spending Restraint is Unleashing the British Economy...........*   BREXIT

Some of you might be thinking, who gives a crap about the brits?  Europe represents about 20% of U.S. exports.  If the Brits aren't doing well, neither will Europe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2017)

*I’ll Never Sneer at Budweiser Again*

*https://fee.org/articles/i-ll-never-sneer-at-budweiser-again/*

*Beer and Snobbery Don’t Mix*

I trace my transition to rationality from that moment. Serendipitously, a friend showed up the next night with a beer for me. It was a Budweiser. I quickly explained my principle on that matter and rejected it. But he was persistent. 

“Give it a try. It only has 140 calories, it is low in alcohol so it doesn’t drag you down, and it has a pretty good flavor.” 

Here was the classic "green eggs and ham" moment: a credible source telling me that something is true that I thought I knew was false. 

I’m nice and didn’t want to hurt his feelings. So I cracked it open and poured it into a glass (of course). It had a pretty look and a nice head. I lifted it to my lips and drank. Wow. It was cold and refreshing. Then I realized something: it was actually delicious. 

It took me a few minutes to adapt. I could feel what was happening. My whole sense of how the world works was falling apart. I had been wrong – desperately wrong, fundamentally wrong – for as long as I can remember. 

A lifetime of turning up my nose while walking past the mainstream beer section at the convenience store was now in question. *Then I realized my mistake. Beer shouldn’t be a rarified and hard thing. It shouldn’t have class implications. It need not be treated as some exclusionist prop to shore up some fanciful social hierarchy. It is a drink for everyone, every day. It is part of life, not some exceptionalized experience.*

*Down with Snobbery*

Why does this keep happening to me? I keep having to learn that the market is wise. There is a reason for the place of this beer in our culture. I used to be a snob about pop music. I was wrong. I was a snob about thrift stores. I was wrong. I was a snob about wine. I was wrong. As it turns out, I was wrong about beer too. Another principle bites the dust.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2017)

*"Unforgiven" Explores Guns, Government, and Non-Aggression*

*https://fee.org/articles/unforgiven-explores-guns-government-and-non-aggression/*

The inability of the disarmed population of Big Whiskey to use violence when necessary is deceptively key to the plot. If history has anything to teach us, it is that when things become illegal, they become profitable. Had the town been armed, the prostitutes have had much cheaper and faster alternatives to pursue the justice they felt they had been denied. It's also likely that the attack would never have occurred in the first place. The brothel owner, the citizens of Big Whiskey, and especially the prostitutes themselves all have strong incentives to prevent such attacks. Were it not for the town's ban on guns, they would have had much more effective means to do so.

When another character, English Bob is forcibly disarmed by Little Bill and his goons, he remarks that without his weapon, he would be at the mercy of his enemies. Given the amount of power that Little Bill has acquired as a result of banning firearms, *one has to wonder whether that vulnerability and the consequent need for a strong protector is a feature, rather than a bug, of weapons bans.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 18, 2017)

Newly published data from the U.S. Treasury shows that the federal government has amassed $84.3 trillion in debts, liabilities, and unfunded Social Security and Medicare obligations. *This amounts to $670,000 for every household in the U.S., a fiscal burden that equals 93% of the nation’s private wealth, including the combined value of every American’s assets in real estate, corporate stocks, small businesses, bonds, savings accounts, cash, and personal goods like automobiles and furniture.*

Federal law requires the U.S. Treasury and White House to produce an annual report on the “overall financial position” of the federal government. The law also requires the Government Accountability Office to audit this data, which is then published in the Financial Report of the United States Government.

Despite the important and shocking nature of this report, a search of Google News shows no results for it, even though it has been almost a week since it was published.

https://fee.org/articles/federal-shortfall-equals-670k-per-household/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2017)

An important purpose of the Financial Report is to help citizens understand current fiscal policy and the importance and magnitude of policy reforms necessary to make it sustainable. A sustainable policy is one where the debt-to-GDP ratio is stable or declining over the long term.

To determine if current fiscal policies are sustainable, the projections of the deficit and debt discussed here assume current policy (i.e., current law, with certain adjustments, such as extension of expiring policies that are expected to continue)28 will continue indefinitely and draw out the implications for the growth of debt held by the public as a share of GDP. The projections are therefore neither forecasts nor predictions. As policy changes are enacted, actual financial outcomes will be different than those projected.

The projections in this Financial Report indicate that current policy is not sustainable. As discussed below, if current policy is left unchanged, the debt-to-GDP ratio is projected to fall about 6 percentage points by 2024 before commencing a steady rise to 252 percent in 2091 and is projected to rise continuously thereafter. Preventing the debt-to-GDP ratio from rising over the next 75 years is estimated to require some combination of spending reductions and revenue increases that amount to 1.6 percent of GDP over the period. *While this estimate of the “75-year fiscal gap” is highly uncertain, it is nevertheless nearly certain that current fiscal policies cannot be sustained indefinitely. *

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/finrep/fr/16frusg/01112017FR_(Final).pdf


So you snowflakes know that when Trump cuts funding to PP, FHA for Mortgage Insurance, freezes all federal hiring, etc., it's because "*current fiscal policies cannot be sustained indefinitely. "*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2017)

*Make the Bouquet... Or Else!*

To see how little is left of one of our most important rights, the freedom of association, look no further than to today’s unanimous decision by the Washington State Supreme Court upholding a lower court’s ruling that *florist Baronelle Stutzman was guilty of violating the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD) when she declined, on religious grounds, to provide floral arrangements for one of her regular customer’s same-sex wedding. The lower court had found Stutzman personally liable and had awarded the plaintiffs permanent injunctive relief, actual monetary damages, attorneys’ fees, and costs.*

*This breathtaking part of the Supreme Court’s conclusion is worth quoting in full:

We also hold that the WLAD may be enforced against Stutzman because it does not infringe any constitutional protection. As applied in this case, the WLAD does not compel speech or association. And assuming that it substantially burdens Stutzman’s religious free exercise, the WLAD does not violate her right to religious free exercise under either the First Amendment or article I, section 11 because it is a neutral, generally applicable law that serves our state government’s compelling interest in eradicating discrimination in public accommodations.*

We have here yet another striking example of how modern state _statutory_ anti-discrimination law has come to trump a host of federal _constitutional_ rights, including speech, association, and religious free exercise. It’s not too much to say that the Constitution’s Faustian accommodation of slavery is today consuming the Constitution itself.

https://fee.org/articles/make-the-bouquet-or-else/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

https://niskanencenter.org/blog/redefining-public-charge-threat-noncitizens/

FEBRUARY 10, 2017
*REDEFINING “PUBLIC CHARGE” AND THE THREAT TO NONCITIZENS*
BY SAMUEL HAMMOND

..Using the Census Population Survey, we estimate the number of noncitizens who arrived between 2010 and 2015 and who are using some kind of federal means-tested benefit. The CPS, like many household surveys, suffers from a response bias that tends to understate participation in public programs. Nonetheless, we find as many as 1.9 million otherwise lawful noncitizens could become deportable under a maximally inclusive definition of public charge. This includes more than 1.4 million and nearly 900,000 Medicaid and SNAP beneficiaries, respectively. These recipients are disproportionately women and households with children — the key groups partially exempt from the five year restriction on lawful alien benefit eligibility.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

Citizen children of noncitizen parents also tend to participate in SNAP at a lower rate.


----------



## Wez (Feb 20, 2017)

Not worried about Corporate welfare?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

Wez said:


> Not worried about Corporate welfare?


No, I am worried about the instruments that Corporations use to protect corporate welfare programs.  Dodd-Frank being one of the instruments that claim to protect the consumer.  Albeit, after it protects the industry you work in.


----------



## Wez (Feb 20, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No, I am worried about the instruments that Corporations use to protect corporate welfare programs.  Dodd-Frank being one of the instruments that claim to protect the consumer.  Albeit, after it protects the industry you work in.


Oh please, shoot the whole thing down because of a few flawed provisions.  Most of DF protects consumers.  You sound like people complaining about the ACA instead of fixing it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

Wez said:


> Oh please, shoot the whole thing down because of a few flawed provisions.  Most of DF protects consumers.  You sound like people complaining about the ACA instead of fixing it.


Please tell us what is "flawed" about Dodd-Frank ("DF") and for whom is it flawed?

*When the administration has made an outlay unavoidable, majorities tend to feel obliged to allow it.--Ferrara  *


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

Ferrara was already well aware that* “At the end of the day, all governments are a minority”. The downside of the representative system was that it enabled governing elites to manufacture an illusion of participation in collective choices, an illusion that greatly facilitated government spending:*

The representative system is characterized by this serious flaw, *that it can effortlessly become an instrument of delusion. *The people is less loath to pay, when it deludes itself into believing that its taxes—as they are assented to by its representatives, whose interests are purportedly the same as its own—are for this only reason warranted by inescapable necessities. A large number of instances presented by modern history teach us how easily the good faith of peoples can be abused and reveal the covert motive that made not a few governments to reckon that, ultimately, it was in their own interest to suffer the establishment of deliberative assemblies, as a means to get rid of the odious appearance of oppressors of their own people and to enjoy the pleasure of spending large sums… *When the administration has made an outlay unavoidable, majorities tend to feel obliged to allow it.  

https://fee.org/articles/francesco-ferraras-19th-century-war-on-taxation/?utm_medium=popular_widget*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

*Scholars in the Italian tradition tried to develop a scientific definition of taxation, distinguishing two sorts: taxation necessary for financing for a limited government, and taxation that was essentially predatory.* *In its “purest meaning,” the imposta (tax) would be “the price—and a slim one—of the great benefits that the social state, the organized state offers to each of us”. Given the immense utility provided by the social state (that is: by the organization of law and order in society), such a price could be understood as something that would be paid voluntarily by each taxpayer. (Like the FHA MI discount, Dodd-Frank Act, Quantitative Easing, etc.)* *Since “Any tax is ultimately equivalent to a prevented consumption and a prescribed one in its stead,” and so it all boils down to the question whether “the substituted consumption is more or less productive than the prevented one”. For Ferrara, the cornerstone of the problems of taxation is the economic use of taxes, the fact that government should operate in a parsimonious way.*

But if taxation can be theoretically understood as a fee, Ferrara was fully aware that historical evidence pointed in another direction:

*In its philosophical concept, the organized state is the great reason that exalts the notion of taxation; in its historical understanding, however, taxation is the great secret that organizes tyranny… And if in its philosophical understanding the term “contribution” does appears to be truer and worthier, in its historical understanding I invite you to change it, but only to call it “scourge.*”  Looking realistically at the dry facts of history, one sees taxation as the propellant of arbitrary government:

Would you like to fathom how a swarm of parasites and harlots can exist in the royal courts? Why ignorance and intrigue are exalted and knowledge and virtue are rejected and derided? How comes it that in a temperate government a bad minister can make the houses of parliament to be in thrall of his will? And representatives and newspapers can be found to conceal his faults and incompetence? Taxation contains and explains the whole riddle. Taxation is the great source of everything a corrupt government can devise to the detriment of the peoples. Taxation supports the spy, encourages the faction, dictates the content of newspapers.


I can see the responses now:

1. Post office
2. roads
3. public this and that


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2017)

_is from pages 88-89 of Arnold Kling’s splendid 2016 book, Specialization and Trade: A Re-introduction to Economics:


[Jesse] Ausubel points out that even as farm output and overall population have increased, use of water in the United States has actually declined since 1970. That change reflects greater efficiency in farming. (Ask your friends who proudly “buy local” whether they know how much water their local farmers used compared with the distant farmers from the supermarket imports produce.)_

_…._

_*Generally speaking, in a market economy, the combination of incentives and human ingenuity has permitted the human population to grow with a reduction in the rate of resource use.* By selling books in digital format, online retailer Amazon is letting us read more while using less paper; Airbnb is giving us more places to sleep without building hotels; and iTunes is allowing us to listen to more music without manufacturing records. We are not only leaving future generations with more know-how and more tools of production, we are also leaving them with more wilderness, more forest, and more vegetation.
_

I haven't read the book yet. But I'm sure it addresses the fact that as the world gets richer we are having less kids too.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 21, 2017)

Consider each product or service shown. College is heavily subsidized, regulated, and exclusionary, and the costs are soaring. The textbook industry is hobbled by extreme copyright regulation, and can depend on captive buyers. Childcare is one of the most regulated industries in the country. Not just anyone can enter. Every aspect of childcare provision is controlled by the state. 

On the other hand, software, wireless service, toys and and TVs (see: free trade) exist in relatively freer market settings. The price pressure is down. 

*It's not that complicated, folks. If you want good services, good products, innovative ideas, and low prices, you need competitive markets. The more you control, the higher the prices and the worse the results. *


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 25, 2017)

*Republicans Are Already Trying to Raise Taxes*

*Steve Forbes
Wednesday, February 15, 2017


Here’s how, in essence, this sneaky, anti-consumer tax works. Importers will no longer be allowed to deduct an item as a business expense. To simplify things, let's say a store imports a pair of sneakers for $40 and then sells them for $50, making a $10 profit on which it would owe taxes. Under the Republican plan, however, the retailer wouldn't be able to deduct the $40 it paid for the sneakers. In fact, it would owe taxes on the entire $50! And who, ultimately, pays this tax? You, the consumer, in the form of higher prices or fewer choices of where you can shop. Retailers and their customers will be hit.

Many oil refiners import crude oil to turn into gasoline. This new tax will sharply raise their costs, which will spell pain when you fill up your tank. Worse, some could be forced out of business or have to sharply curtail operations, as drivers cut back on buying the suddenly more expensive fuel.

Companies like BMW, Toyota, Mercedes, Honda, Nissan and Hyundai have major manufacturing operations in the U.S. that employ tens of thousands of workers in good-paying jobs. These companies’ costs will soar because they import numerous parts for the vehicles their workers assemble.


*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

Behind this mirage of restored American “greatness,” American workers and consumers will be poorer than they have to be.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

*No one has perfect knowledge.* We all act on what we know or believe at the time a transaction is entered into. And sometimes we conclude that a trade, after the fact, was not as advantageous as we hoped for or had wished. But it would require a large amount of arrogance on the part of anyone else to presume that they know more than we do about what is better for us in our everyday market exchanges. T*he knowledge on which the presumptuous political paternalist asserts a right to control and interfere is at least as imperfect and limited as that possessed by the rest of us. *Rich Ebeling


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

*“It is the maxim of every prudent master of a family, never to attempt to make at home what it will cost him more to make than to buy*. The tailor does not attempt to make his own shoes, but buys them of the shoemaker. The shoemaker does not attempt to make his own clothes, but employs a tailor. The farmer attempts to make neither the one nor the other, but employs those different artificers . . .

*“What is prudence in the conduct of every private family can scarce be folly in that of a great kingdom.* If a foreign country can supply us with a commodity cheaper than we ourselves can make it, better to buy it of them with some part of the produce of our own industry, employed in a way in which we have some advantage . . .

*“It is certainly not employed to the greatest advantage when it is directed towards an object which it can buy cheaper than it can make it . . . The industry of a country, therefore, is thus turned away from a more, to a less advantageous employment, and the exchangeable value of its annual produce, instead of being increased, according to the intention of the lawgiver, must necessarily be diminished by every such regulation.”--Adam Smith*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

*Trade Retaliations Make Your Own Country Worse Off*

But what about other countries that impose import tariffs against our goods to “protect” their own industries and employments? Should we not respond with retaliatory tariffs and related import restrictions to teach them a lesson?  If we do we only injure ourselves, in so responding to the trade barriers erected by other countries.

A British economist, Henry Dunning MacLeod, gave a vivid reply to the argument for a retaliatory tariff back in 1896. He said:

“By the method of retaliatory duties, when the [other country] smites us on one cheek, we immediately hit ourselves an extremely hard slap on the other. [The other country by its import duties] does us an injury, and we, by retaliating, immediately do ourselves a great deal more. The true way to fight hostile tariffs is by free trade.”

*Retaliating with counter tariffs merely makes the goods previously purchased from the foreign country more expensive for the consumers of your own country, lowering their standard of living through higher prices and a smaller variety of goods from which to choose. And by reducing the sales earned by the foreign producer in your country, he has less revenue from which to buy your country’s exports, with a negative effect on those sectors of your own economy.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

*Donald Trump Refuted by a South Carolinian – in 1830!*

I earlier quoted from President Trump’s remarks during his recent visit to Charleston, South Carolina. Let me quote a South Carolina economist, Thomas Cooper (1759-1839), who published the following words in his 1830 Lectures on the Elements of Political Economy, in what became one of the most widely used economic textbooks at that time in the United States. Dr. Cooper was a president of South Carolina College and a Professor of Chemistry and Political Economy. He said: 

_“The whole use of foreign trade is to import commodities that are wanted, at less cost, than they are produced at home. This is the very basis and essential character of it. Hence, the principle of restrictions and prohibitory imposts [tariffs], forbidding an article into being introduced from abroad because it can be had cheaper from abroad – goes to the utter annihilation of all foreign commerce . . .

“The restrictive system tells us in fact, that we shall greatly profit by being confined as prisoners within our own houses, without intercourse out of doors; that is it our duty to let our domestic neighbor grow rich on our credulity, and persuade us to buy from him an inferior article, at a higher price . . .

For [this] principle being adopted, where is it to stop? To talk after this, of our being the most enlightened nation upon earth, is a satire upon ourselves more bitter than our own enemies have it in their power to utter. To be governed by such ignorance, is indeed a national disgrace.”_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

Mexico currently sends more than 80 percent of its exports to the United States: cars, auto parts, machinery, electrical equipment, medical instruments, oil, and fresh and processed fruits and vegetables, among other goods. In all, Mexico exported more than $316 billion in goods and services to the United States in 2015, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative reported.

A 20 percent tariff would crush some of these industries.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

The United States would suffer, too. Mexico is our third-largest trading partner, importing more than $267 billion in U.S. goods and services in 2015. Even if Mexico does not reciprocate with tariffs of its own, the United States would also be hurt. Just not as much as Mexico, since *U.S. exports to Mexico account for only about 13 percent of total U.S. exports — not 80 percent.*

The threatened 20 percent tariff is huge. By comparison, the simple average tariff rate on Mexican goods was around 4 percent prior to implementation of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA); it has declined to about 0.5 percent today.

*Since the recent great recession, the Mexican economy has expanded at an average rate of 3.2 percent per year. The U.S. economy, by comparison, has grown an average of 2.1 percent per year.*

The growing Mexican economy increased job opportunities, pushing the unemployment rate down to 3.4 percent in December 2016. It also triggered a period of reverse migration, as tens of thousands of Mexicans living in the United States returned home.

*Since 2009, in fact, the number of Mexicans returning home exceeded the number of Mexicans entering the United States by approximately 140,000, according to the Pew Research Center.

A 20 percent tariff would put the brakes on Mexico’s expansion and likely reverse the migratory trend, as Mexicans, both legally and illegally, seek economic opportunities in the United States.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

America is turning out business majors, not framers and bricklayers. “The US has approximately 200,000 unfilled construction jobs, which represents an 81% increase over the last two years, according to estimates from the National Association of Homebuilders,” writes Hahm.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

Trade barriers “dumb down” our economy by undoing the good work of our best engineers, scientists, and entrepreneurs. The most creative and best-trained minds in America developed the jet engines, the containerization technology, and the Internet and global telecommunications that have done so much to promote the growth of global trade and output.

In contrast, trade barriers are a kind of anti-technology.  The mind-numbing columns of arbitrary tariff rates in the Harmonized Tariff Schedule and the tangled regulations that limit trade and investment stand in opposition to decades of technological advancement.  We find a way to move goods, services, and capital around the world faster, more efficiently, and at lower cost, only to watch the politicians in Washington throw sand into the gears by erecting artificial barriers to commerce.

_Excerpted from Dan Griswold’s 2009 volume, Mad About Trade._


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

One Does not simply eliminate global supply chains







https://fee.org/articles/one-does-not-simply-eliminate-global-supply-chains/?utm_medium=related_widget


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

Critics have argued that U.S. multinationals are “abandoning” the home country and moving technology and jobs offshore through foreign operations and participation in global supply chains. Actually, the reverse is true: through increased firm-level competiveness enhanced by the key U.S. role in global supply chains, U.S productivity and living standards are higher today than they would have been otherwise.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2017)

Here’s a letter to the _Washington Post_:

Charles Lane deserves applause.  Not only does he expose the radical-left-wing origins of the Trump administration’s proposal to change the way that goods transshipped through the U.S. are accounted for in trade statistics, Mr. Lane also reveals the utter meaninglessness of bilateral trade ‘imbalances’ – such as America’s trade ‘deficit’ with Mexico (“Trump’s attempt to massage economic data isn’t new. But there’s a better way.” February 24th).

But I fear that a third valid point made by Mr. Lane will go unnoticed – namely, that the Trump administration is mistaken to insist that no value is added in the U.S. to goods transshipped through the U.S. to other countries.  We can see the administration’s error clearly if we ask ‘Why do foreign producers first ship their goods to the U.S. rather than directly to these goods’ ultimate destinations?’  *The answer must be that there is value to foreign producers in transshipping their goods through the U.S. Therefore, supplying transshipping services is a valuable American contribution to the global economy.*

*Such transshipments require the specialized services of American ports and warehouses – specialized services for which foreign merchants pay.  *To conclude that, because transshipment services don’t alter the physical shape or contents of goods, these services aren’t a valuable economic contribution makes no more sense than to conclude that, because the services of truck drivers don’t alter the physical shape or content of goods, the services of truck drivers aren’t a valuable economic contribution.

Just as farmers do not deliver their produce directly to the homes of final consumers but, instead, to warehouses and shippers who add value (and who profit) from supplying storage and shipping services, many foreign manufacturers do not deliver their products directly to the countries of final destination but, instead, to American warehouses and shippers who add value (and who profit) from supplying storage and shipping services.  It would be deeply misleading for the trade accounts to fail to register the value of these services.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA  22030


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 4, 2017)

*The Source of Systemic Risk*

*It is government intervention into markets, borrowing and printing money to sustain currency values and debt prices, that allows bubbles to inflate systemically, causing a financial crisis when they burst.* That’s the conclusion of Reinhart and Rogoff, This Time is Different: Eight Centuries of Financial Folly (2011).  

As the head of the FDIC, Sheila Bair argued that the sub-prime lending debacle would not have occurred had the regulators simply maintained traditional capital requirements and lending standards. Regulators, particularly the Fed and Treasury, were deeply implicated in creating the crisis and hence intent on a massive bailout. Lacking sufficient budget resources and facing angry taxpayers, they resorted to the most opaque solution, to re-inflate the asset bubble this time in both houses (to avoid trillions more in financial institution losses and global failure) and stocks (to keep consumer spending up and the economy afloat). *The multi-trillion dollar cost was shifted to savers whose interest earnings evaporated.*

Every insider account portrays a dysfunctional, unaccountable regulatory structure that any private insurer would label “irrational”. But politicians didn’t hold regulators accountable. *Instead, the subsequent reform effort, a 1,500 page bill named for the Two Congressmen most implicated in the crisis, Dodd and Frank, spawned 22,000 pages of regulation, rewarding regulators by covering up and doubling down.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 4, 2017)

The U.S. Treasury and the Fed are the biggest sources of systemic global risk.

https://fee.org/articles/the-boombust-cycle-isnt-about-emotion/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 4, 2017)

*Without Discipline Democracy is Threatened*

The U.S. financial regulatory system may look like the product of a maniacal mob, but it was made fragile by political design. Politicians aren’t necessarily irrational, but they face incentives to favor constituents (and patrons), and they avoid taxpayer accountability by raising money through opaque means, like issuing debt and/or providing implicit or explicit debt guarantees. Banks, and more recently the Fed, buy this debt or it is sold to foreign governments in return for exports. Undisciplined, government intervention erodes market discipline and feeds on itself


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Mar 4, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> America is turning out business majors, not framers and bricklayers. “The US has approximately 200,000 unfilled construction jobs, which represents an 81% increase over the last two years, according to estimates from the National Association of Homebuilders,” writes Hahm.


$upply and demand, baby.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 10, 2017)

*Actually, Repealing Obamacare Wouldn't Kill Anyone*

*https://fee.org/articles/actually-repealing-obamacare-wouldnt-kill-anyone/*

*The best statistical estimate for the number of lives saved each year by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is zero*. Certainly, there are individuals who have benefited from various of its provisions. But attempts to claim broader effects on public health or thousands of lives saved rely upon extrapola- tion from past studies that focus on the value of private health insurance. The ACA, however, has expanded coverage through Medicaid, a public program that, according to several studies, has failed to improve health outcomes for recipients. In fact, public health trends since the implementa- tion of the ACA have worsened, with 80,000 more deaths in 2015 than had mortality continued declining during 2014–15 at the rate achieved during 2000–2013.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 10, 2017)

The Affordable Care Act has led to substantial increases in Medicaid enrollment but shows no effect in the aggregate on private insurance coverage; a lower share of non-elderly Americans had private insurance in 2015 than at the start of the recession in 2007–08.

 Economic recovery, not the ACA, has driven changes in private insurance coverage: during 2007–10, total employment fell 5.5% and private insurance coverage fell 7.0%; during 2010–15, total employment rose 8.8% and private insurance coverage rose 9.5%.


 The share of non-elderly Americans with private health insurance fell from 66.8% in 2007 to 65.6% in 2015.


 By contrast, the share of non-elderly Americans enrolled in public insurance, primarily Medicaid, has increased from

18.1% in 2007 to 25.3% in 2015, accounting for the entire reduction in the uninsured share of the population. 

https://www.manhattan-institute.org/sites/default/files/IB-OC-0217.pdf


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 10, 2017)

*Obamacare and Dodd-Frank Have the Same Fatal Flaw*

*Public insurance schemes fail where private schemes succeed because politicians excessively favor constituent customers.*

*https://fee.org/articles/obamacare-and-dodd-frank-have-the-same-fatal-flaw/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 10, 2017)

Crony capitalism is worse than budgeted subsidies because it massively undermines market competition and freedom of choice.

https://fee.org/articles/obamacare-and-dodd-frank-have-the-same-fatal-flaw/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 11, 2017)

*We Don't Need Fannie and Freddie; We Need Freedom*

*https://fee.org/articles/we-dont-need-fannie-and-freddie-we-need-freedom/*

Take away Fannie and Freddie’s capital arbitrage and set their equity capital requirements in line with other financial institutions of similar size. Equity of at least 5 percent of total assets should be their required leverage capital ratio. …Given their undiversified business, something more might be prudent. In any case, the hyper-leverage which allowed Fannie and Freddie to put the whole financial system at risk needs to be permanently ended. …Designate them as the Systemically Important Financial Institutions (SIFIs) they indubitably are. Fannie and Freddie…have conclusively demonstrated their ability to generate huge systemic risk.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 11, 2017)

*FHA Mortgage Rate Cuts Are Subsidies, Not Tax Relief*

*https://fee.org/articles/fha-mortgage-rate-cuts-are-subsidies-not-tax-relief/*

Lower premiums put the FHA in a less stable financial position, which makes a future bailout more likely.

Trump’s decision to cancel the FHA premium reduction warrants praise, not criticism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 11, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/the-medias-fake-news-about-obamacare/

Leave it to the media, which spent the latter half of 2016 highlighting how outrageously expensive Obamacare premiums were becoming, to suddenly shift gears in 2017 and stress the health law’s many “pluses.”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 12, 2017)

Officers of the law are profiting from the theft of innocent Americans.

Civil asset forfeiture will always be ripe for abuse.

https://fee.org/articles/this-state-used-stolen-funds-to-pay-law-enforcement/?utm_medium=related_widget


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 12, 2017)

*Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.*
--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 12, 2017)

*Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy.* Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 12, 2017)

*Trillions in Debt and We're Just Scratching the Surface*

How Many Zeros Are in a Trillion?

The $20 trillion debt is already twice the annual revenues collected by all the world’s governments combined. Counting unfunded liabilities, which include promised Social Security, Medicare, and government pension payments that Washington will not have the money to pay, the federal government actually owes somewhere between $100 trillion and $200 trillion. The numbers are so ridiculously large that even the uncertainty in the figures exceeds the annual economic output of the entire planet.

Since 2000, the federal debt has grown at an average annual rate of 8.2%, doubling from $10 trillion to $20 trillion in the past eight years alone. Who loaned the government this money? Four groups: foreigners, Americans, the Federal Reserve, and government trust funds. But over the past decade, three of these groups have cut back significantly on their lending.

Foreign investors have slowed the growth in their lending from over 20% per year in the early 2000s to less than 3% per year today. Excluding the Great Recession years, American investors have been cutting back on how much they lend the federal government by an average of 2% each year.

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 12, 2017)

*Illinois Might Be Doomed to Financial Collapse*

Tax Payers Are Escaping

Well, the same thing is happening in Illinois.

That state is a fiscal disaster. Taxes already are high, government spending already is excessive, and promises of lavish future benefits for government bureaucrats have created a mountain of unfunded liabilities. To make matters worse, there’s a never-ending trickle of taxpayers fleeing to other states, thus making the long-run outlook even worse.

A column in today’s _Wall Street Journal_ discusses this unfolding disaster.

…what about the state’s fiscal apocalypse, which is not only happening right now but has plunged Illinois into a bona fide financial disaster? …the state has amassed $11 billion in unpaid bills—predicted to climb to more than $27 billion by the end of 2019. Illinois is facing the worst pension crisis of any U.S. state, with unfunded obligations totaling $130 billion, according to the state’s Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability. That amounts to about $10,000 in debt for each resident. …Illinois also had the lowest credit rating among the 50 states as of October, when Moody’s Investors Service downgraded it again…

Given all this, it’s no surprise that people are leaving. In 2016 Illinois lost more residents than any other state—for the third consecutive year. A total of 37,508 people fled, leaving the state’s population at its lowest level in nearly a decade.”


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Illinois Might Be Doomed to Financial Collapse*
> 
> Tax Payers Are Escaping
> 
> ...


Perhaps Mr. Obama should go home to Illinois and team up with Rahm Emanuel & straighten out this fiscal mess...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 12, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> Perhaps Mr. Obama should go home to Illinois and team up with Rahm Emanuel & straighten out this fiscal mess...


You never want to have the guys that broke the system fix it.  That's what Dodd-Frank is all about.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You never want to have the guys that broke the system fix it.  That's what Dodd-Frank is all about.


I suppose...
He might have problems what with the inability as Governor to print money as he was so fond of as President.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 16, 2017)

http://fortune.com/2016/12/14/fed-interest-rates-6/

Fed Raises Fed Funds rate despite GDP projection revised down from 3.4% to .9%.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 18, 2017)

*Without Discipline Democracy is Threatened*

The U.S. financial regulatory system may look like the product of a maniacal mob, but it was made fragile by political design. Politicians aren’t necessarily irrational, but they face incentives to favor constituents (and patrons), and they avoid taxpayer accountability by raising money through opaque means, like issuing debt and/or providing implicit or explicit debt guarantees. Banks, and more recently the Fed, buy this debt or it is sold to foreign governments in return for exports. Undisciplined, government intervention erodes market discipline and feeds on itself


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2017)

Obamacare and Dodd-Frank Have the Same Fatal Flaw

*New Law, Same Problem*

Obamacare took a similar view of the role of government subsidies. The ACA promised to maintain or improve health care while making coverage universal. Past political attempts to do this had always failed due to the expense and “moral hazard” of people taking greater health and/or financial risks. The ACA ignored or glossed over these concerns, mandating participation at multiples of a competitive market premium to generate sufficient cross subsidies and expensive coverage not paid for by the beneficiaries by fixing prices across all risk classes.

Authors of the law simultaneously avoided the major source of increasing costs by deferring reform of medical malpractice torts, saying it was politically unpalatable. Knowing in advance that premiums would skyrocket after enactment of the law, the law’s proponents incorporated a bailout scheme into the ACA. The big health insurers became essentially “too big to fail” or dropped out of the system. Most of the smaller nonprofit insurers failed.

To be clear, this is not “free” national health insurance, which would obviously lead to huge taxpayer expense for what would be a lower-quality product. But the alternative of crony capitalism is worse than budgeted subsidies because it massively undermines market competition and freedom of choice while imposing greater costs on the public.

The solutions for health insurance and financial services are the same: either bite the bullet and nationalize, or restore competitive markets. Democrats tried to get the former for health insurance, but failed. Meanwhile, commercial banks were temporarily “nationalized” — forced to issue shares to the government during the crisis.

https://fee.org/articles/obamacare-and-dodd-frank-have-the-same-fatal-flaw/


----------



## nononono (Mar 28, 2017)

Ocare is on the ropes and the POTUS has the repeal back on the books.....


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2017)

nononono said:


> Ocare is on the ropes and the POTUS has the repeal back on the books.....


It has to be a full repeal.  Cut off the money supply, seperate health care from health insurance, seperate health insurance from employment and the cost that Wez and others claim to be concerned with will go down


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It has to be a full repeal.  Cut off the money supply, seperate health care from health insurance, seperate health insurance from employment and the cost that Wez and others claim to be concerned with will go down


And privatize.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> And privatize.


That's the cutting off of money supply.  When government has less money to throw at any program, prices come down and competition becomes fierce


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That's the cutting off of money supply.  When government has less money to throw at any program, prices come down and competition becomes fierce


I told you, you are 1 smart fucker.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I told you, you are 1 smart fucker.


Ha ha ha.  Understanding Money supply escapes Wez and Espola all the time.  Not sure why when you consider the FOREX and the measures of money supply at the fed, M1, M2, M3.  Lol!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ha ha ha.  Understanding Money supply escapes Wez and Espola all the time.  Not sure why when you consider the FOREX and the measures of money supply at the fed, M1, M2, M3.  Lol!


That's why I like hanging out with you.


----------



## espola (Mar 28, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ha ha ha.  Understanding Money supply escapes Wez and Espola all the time.  Not sure why when you consider the FOREX and the measures of money supply at the fed, M1, M2, M3.  Lol!


Mission accomplished.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2017)

espola said:


> Mission accomplished.


Sophomoric


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 8, 2017)

*After Studying Basic Economics, Mayor Vetoes Minimum Wage Increase*

*https://fee.org/articles/after-studying-basic-economics-mayor-vetoes-minimum-wage-increase/*

Pugh isn’t the first politician to stand up and question the economic logic behind raising the minimum wage.

In fact, last year as he was signing California’s new minimum wage law into effect, which incrementally raises the minimum wage to $15 by the year 2020, California Governor Jerry Brown said:

“Economically, minimum wages may not make sense. But morally, socially, and politically they make every sense because it binds the community together to make sure parents can take care of their kids.”

However, even though Brown openly admitted that raising the minimum wage “may not make economic sense” he proceeded to sign the bill anyway, rather than face public scrutiny for making an economically sound choice.

Just this morning, the Baltimore City Council convened to discuss the Mayor’s actions but failed to get the needed signatures to override her veto.

As it stands currently, Baltimore is safe from the wage crusaders, but this will be an ongoing battle as the utopian rhetoric of higher wages clashes with the economic realities of actually putting those policies into action.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 8, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 8, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2017)

*Tax Progressivity and Tax Burden*. According to the most recent IRS data, the federal income tax shares by six different income groups are displayed in the chart above. Almost all federal income taxes (97.3%) are paid by the top 50%, more than 2/3 of income taxes are paid for by the top 10% and nearly 40% of taxes are paid by the top 1% of taxpayers. For all of the criticism and negative publicity the “Top 1%” get, I’d like to personally thank that group this year at tax time for shouldering such a disproportionate share of our collective tax burden. It’s a form of “disparate impact” on the 1% that we all benefit from! So, I say “Thank You Top 1%” from all of us in the bottom 99% for your valuable and significant contribution to our nation’s tax burden.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2017)

*




*
*
Tax Progressivity. *And just how progressive is the US federal income tax system? Very, very progressive, see the chart above showing average effective tax rates by various income groups in 2014 (most recent year available). That pattern of income tax progressivity explains why almost all federal income taxes are paid by the top income groups (see next few items).


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 23, 2017)

*This Video Mocked Privatization, but the Free Market Got the Last Laugh*

https://fee.org/articles/this-video-mocked-privatization-but-the-free-market-got-the-last-laugh/

And we may see similar progress in the United States. Remarkably, even the _Washington Post_ is supporting this reform.

The United States can and should learn from the experience of other Western democracies… *Take the prosaic but crucial function of air traffic control. In the United States, that is still a job for big government: specifically, the Federal Aviation Administration. Overseas, however, countries are turning away from this statist model. Canada spun off its system, Nav Canada, in 1996, to a private entity funded by user fees. Britain privatized in 2000. Australia and New Zealand are also part of the movement; ditto Germany and Switzerland… In all of these countries, safety and innovation have stayed the same or improved, which is not surprising.*

The editorial urges something similar for America.

A new corporation, funded by charges on the system’s various users, would manage flights and implement the long-stalled modernization. *The FAA would still ensure safety, a regulatory job it already does remarkably well and might do even better if it were free to focus on that exclusively.* *Major players in the industry would share governance of the new entity, working out their differences within its boardroom rather than through the costlier and more conflictual method of lobbying Congress, as they do now.*

Wow, the _Washington Post_ is pointing out that a leaner government with fewer responsibilities would be more effective. I hope in the future they apply that lesson on a consistent basis.

*So the bottom line is that there are greater incentives for safety with for-profit firms than there are with governments, where it’s just about impossible to fire someone for doing a bad job.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 28, 2017)

*Trump’s Tax Plan Is Brilliant Politics and Even Better Economics*

Under Trump's plan, taxes on corporate profits go from 35% to 15%. They should be zero (like the Bahamas), but this is a good start. Taxes on capital gains go from 23.8% to 20%. Again, it should be zero (as with New Zealand), but it is a start. Rates for all individuals are lowered to three: 10%, 25%, and 35%. The standard deduction for individuals is doubled (politically brilliant). The estate tax and the alternative minimum tax is gone. Popular deductions for charitable giving and mortgage interest are preserved. The hare-brained idea of a “border adjustment tax” is toast.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 28, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/trump-s-tax-plan-is-brilliant-politics-and-even-better-economics/

The crucial institution here is capital. Sorry, anti-capitalists. It’s just true. Capital can be defined as the produced goods for production, not consumption. It is making things for the purpose of making other things. Think about it. Without capital, you can still have markets, creativity, hard work, enterprise. But so long as you have an absence of capital, you are forever floundering around just working to make and sell things for consumption. This is called living hand to mouth. 

Without capital, and the private ownership of capital, and security over your property rights, you can’t have economic growth. You can’t have complex production. You can’t raise wages. You can’t live a better life. Every tax on capital, capital formation, capital accumulation, and business profit reduces the security of property rights over capital. This is a sure way to attack economic growth at its source.

And this is precisely what American policy has done. The rest of the world has been wising up about this, reducing taxes on capital for the last 15 years. But the US has languished in the mythology of the past, regarding capital not as a font of prosperity but rather a fund of stagnant resources to be pillaged by planners in government. It is not surprising that this strategy results in slow growth and even permanent recession.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2017)

*Another Reminder that the United States Should Not Become a European-Style Welfare State*

One of the more surreal aspects of the 2016 campaign was watching Bernie Sanders argue that the United States should become more like a European welfare state.

Was he not aware that Europe had major problems such as high unemploymentand a fiscal crisis?

Didn’t he know that America’s economy was growing faster (which is a damning indictment since growth in the U.S. was relatively anemicduring the Obama years)?

Perhaps more important, didn’t he know that Americans enjoy much higher living standards than their European counterparts? Was he not aware that European nations, if they were part of America, would be considered poor states?

*What about Denmark and Sweden, the two nations that Bernie Sanders said were role models? Well, the United States could copy them, but only if we wanted our living standards to drop by more than 30 percent.*

By the way, since the OECD is a left-leaning bureaucracy that is guilty of periodically rigging numbers against the United States, you can be confident that this AIC data isn’t structured to favor America.

So why does the United States have such a big advantage?

In a new study from the National Bureau of Economic Research, Professor Martin Feldstein addresses why Europe is lagging the United States.

Although the official statistics imply that the rate of growth of real GDP in the United States has declined in recent years, it has still been substantially higher than the real growth rates in Europe and the other industrial countries. The sustained higher rate of real GDP growth in the United States over a longer period of time has resulted in a substantially higher level of real GDP per capita in the United States than in other major industrial countries.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2017)

Mark Perry of the American Enterprise Institute has put together some apples-to-apples data suggesting the answer is no. At least if the goal is more economic output and higher living standards.

 European countries (including Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Belgium) if they joined the US, would rank among the poorest one-third of US states on a per-capita GDP basis, and the UK, France, Japan and New Zealand would all rank among America’s very poorest states, below No. 47 West Virginia, and not too far above No. 50 Mississippi. Countries like Italy, S. Korea, Spain, Portugal and Greece would each rank below Mississippi as the poorest states in the country.

And here’s the table Mark prepared:


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2017)

Shifting to a different topic, Mark Perry also takes a shot at Donald Trump, who seems to think that other nations are “winning” over America because of trade.

…maybe we should remind him that Mexico and China, as US states, would both be far below our poorest state — Mississippi — by 51% and 62% respectively for GDP per capita; and Japan would be barely above our poorest state — Mississippi. Using GDP per capita as a measure of both economic output per person and of a country’s standard of living, America is winning quite handsomely.

Excellent point. It’s a sign of American prosperity that we can afford to buy more from other nations than they can afford to buy from us.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 1, 2017)

*Like Denmarks Health Care?  I like their labor flexibility better


Wage Formation in the Private Sector*

Wage formation in the Danish labor market is undertaken at two levels: sectoral and enterprise levels. At the sectoral level, unions representing both employers and employees negotiate wage increases as well as other benefits. However, it should be noted that, at the sectoral level, only minimum wages are agreed upon. Actual wages are negotiated at the company level and are, in most cases, higher than the sectoral minimum wages agreed on the collective bargaining. As stated by Eurofound,

Wages negotiated on enterprise level are usually higher than the minimum gross wage settled through collective bargaining. Even starting salaries are often higher than the minimum. Half of all newly employed in the private sector receive a starting salary that is considerably higher (18% or more) than the required minimum of the collective agreement […] actual wage increases are determined at company level and it is probably only few employees that are paid the minimum wage.

In fact, negotiations at the enterprise level have gained importance over past decades, revealed by the percentage of employees covered by the standard-wage system as opposed to the minimum-wage system, which went from 34% in 1989 to only 16% in 1994, and has remained at that level ever since. Under the increasingly less relevant standard-wage system, salaries are negotiated at the sectoral level and individual companies are not allowed to modify the sectoral agreements. In contrast, the minimum-wage system, which is predominant nowadays, allows companies to use the sectoral agreement just as a reference to set their wages, with the company acting as the epicenter of this wage-formation process.

*What is the role of the Danish government in this process? None. The government does not interfere in how wages are determined. This is obvious in that there is no legislation that establishes a minimum wage on a national level.

Flexibility + Security = Flexicurity

*
https://fee.org/articles/labor-flexibility-beats-unemployment-a-closer-look-at-the-labor-market-in-denmark/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 1, 2017)

When looking more closely, Denmark excels at two specific economic indicators: business freedom and labor freedom. Business freedom measures the impact of government regulation on businesses. This indicator places Denmark at the top of the ranking, only behind Hong Kong. As for labor freedom, which examines the legal framework that regulates the labor market in a country, Denmark finds itself in the top six. The strong correlation between labor freedom and low unemployment ratesseems to explain why Denmark has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the EU. In the following lines, I aim to explore the specific characteristics that make the Danish labor market an example to follow in many ways.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 8, 2017)

*Is the Fed Deadly, Life-Saving, or Just Useless?*

*https://fee.org/articles/is-the-fed-deadly-life-saving-or-just-useless/*

The Fed is Useless

Much more than the Fed’s critics and supporters would like us to believe, the Fed quite simply isn’t that relevant. It deals with massively overregulated and antiquated banks that represent a small – and declining (15%) – percentage of total credit in the U.S. economy, not to mention that banks are easily the least dynamic source of credit for what is the most dynamic economy in the world.

As for the popular notion that the Fed creates credit, let’s be serious. The pursuit of credit isn’t the pursuit of dollars created by the Fed as much as it’s the pursuit of real resources like trucks, tractors, computers, desks, chairs, buildings, labor, etc. The Fed can’t create, increase, or shrink what borrowers of dollars are in need of as much as it can distort the direction of credit.

Booth thinks that the Fed is “the most important, powerful institution in the world,” but spends much of the book pointing to the incompetence of the economists in the middle and at the top of the central bank. Ok, but incompetence combined with world-leading power would logically signal a “banana republic” U.S. economy, as opposed to the world’s largest. If the Fed mattered and were as powerful as Booth presumes, the U.S. economy wouldn’t matter. But it does.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 8, 2017)

Essentially, governments hasten to not waste a crisis or a disaster. Governments use these crises as pretext for upping control and power over people and resources. 

Eventually, when the problem subsides or is answered, governments cannot maintain crises’ levels of control(s), and so they cede back some power. Some. 

The salient point, and Mr. Higgs’ masterful analysis is the trend this reveals. Graphed Cartesian style, the line of government power-grabs jut ever upward with slight dips, but the rate of increase remains and never glides back to pre-crisis levels. 

Not unlike a particularly pernicious cancer, government metastasizes, ratcheting up its power a click at a time.


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 9, 2017)

You know Bruddah, this is gonna freak some of the lefties completely out of their freakin' safezone...
Brilliant.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 9, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> You know Bruddah, this is gonna freak some of the lefties completely out of their freakin' safezone...
> Brilliant.


My last editor said the same of me when I cut and paste.  But I am very pleased with the repeal of Title II Regs over the internet at the FCC under Ajit Pai.


----------



## espola (May 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> My last editor said the same of me when I cut and paste.  But I am very pleased with the repeal of Title II Regs over the internet at the FCC under Ajit Pai.


When did that  happen?


----------



## espola (May 9, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> You know Bruddah, this is gonna freak some of the lefties completely out of their freakin' safezone...
> Brilliant.


https://fee.org/articles/central-banking-is-the-health-of-the-state/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 9, 2017)

espola said:


> When did that  happen?


When did what happen?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 9, 2017)

espola said:


> https://fee.org/articles/central-banking-is-the-health-of-the-state/


Hanapaa!! Did you read beyond the title hook?


----------



## espola (May 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> When did what happen?


"the repeal of Title II Regs over the internet at the FCC under Ajit Pai."


----------



## espola (May 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Hanapaa!! Did you read beyond the title hook?


LE said you were "brilliant".  I just wanted to clarify who wrote it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 9, 2017)

espola said:


> LE said you were "brilliant".  I just wanted to clarify who wrote it.


You did.  I took it as a compliment to those that I cited or quoted which I was fine with and still am.


----------



## espola (May 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You did.  I took it as a compliment to those that I cited or quoted which I was fine with and still am.


Did you intend that sentence to make sense?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 9, 2017)

espola said:


> Did you intend that sentence to make sense?


I did.  Help me help you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 13, 2017)

*Peace Out, iPod, I'm Rocking Spotify*

*Generating Losers*

Clearly, this process of creative destruction generates economic losers. Industries become obsolete – businesses fail, workers lose jobs, and resources get reallocated to more highly valued uses. *The competitive forces at work in the economy can be swift and brutal, but this process allows markets to direct resources toward activities that generate value for society and away from ones in which the costs of production outweigh the benefits.*

This newly generated value may make society wealthier over time, but none of this is particularly comforting to the worker whose job ceases to exist because of some new product consumers prefer.

*Does this mean that the government should pass policies making it more difficult to innovate, spend millions of dollars subsidizing industries that are not competitive in the global economy, or even restrict our participation in the global economy altogether in an attempt to save jobs?*

*Policy-makers are quick to pass laws slowing the rate of innovation in the name of preserving jobs. The many government actions taken against Uber are a prime example. Uber’s displacement of traditional taxi cabs has led to several cities to ban the ride-sharing service altogether while other cities have imposed licensing requirements and pricing restrictions that are prohibitively costly for many would-be Uber drivers.*

All the while, Uber has been hard at work innovating further by developing driverless car technology, which has been met with a similar policy response.


https://fee.org/articles/peace-out-ipod-im-rocking-spotify/?utm_source=ribbon


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 13, 2017)

Scholars have warned that excessive zoning and occupational licensing make it more difficult for the disadvantaged to access areas of greater opportunity


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 13, 2017)

Last but not least, an article in _Reason_ explains how greedy politicians are undermining the otherwise successful pot legalization in Colorado.

Colorado…voters legalized recreational marijuana in 2012, transforming the popular stuff from a prohibited vice to a substance that could be produced, bought and sold without the hassle of hiding dealings from the authorities and the fear of arrest for voluntary transactions. Yet the marijuana black market is still going strong over four years later, with many sellers and customers willing to take a chance on legal consequences rather than make a risk-free deal. …the driving force behind the black market…is taxes so sky high and regulations so burdensome that they make legal pot uncompetitive. “An ounce of pot on the black market can cost as little as 180 dollars,” according to PBS correspondent Rick Karr. “At the store Andy Williams owns, you have to pay around 240 dollars for an ounce. That’s partly because the price includes a 15 percent excise tax, a 10 percent marijuana tax, the state sales tax, and Denver’s marijuana sales tax.” Colorado also piles on expensive regulatory requirements to get a license.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 13, 2017)




----------



## Bernie Sanders (May 13, 2017)

espola said:


> LE said you were "brilliant".  I just wanted to clarify who wrote it.


Biz doesn't need to tell people he's brilliant.
Only jackasses do that.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (May 13, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


Ive been thinking of getting a piece of land in the Philippines, up near Algeria, Israel, and Ukraine.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 14, 2017)

espola said:


> Did you intend that sentence to make sense?


He's a smart fucker, he doesn't need to convince people like you people. Try to keep up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 14, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Ive been thinking of getting a piece of land in the Philippines, up near Algeria, Israel, and Ukraine.


Talaga?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 14, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> He's a smart fucker, he doesn't need to convince people like you people. Try to keep up.


I'm not smart. Now, the guys and gals I cite are smart.  They make "those people" look.......  Shale Gas comes to mind. (cast)


----------



## Bernie Sanders (May 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Talaga?


Apache.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 14, 2017)

The Transitional Gains Trap

http://www.libertylawsite.org/2013/09/26/the-transitional-gains-trap/

In the piece, Tullock talks about a tragedy that often results from government regulation or spending.  The government takes an action that initially benefits a particular group, although at the expense of imposing an inefficient policy on the public.  But over time, even that special interest group will not benefit from the government program.  Yet that group will fight hard to prevent the program from being eliminated, since eliminating it will make that group worse off.

For example, a city government may establish a taxi medallion system that, by restricting entry into the taxi business, will provide large benefits to the initial generation of taxi cabs. This medallion, of course, will harm the public, since it restricts competition.  But over time, those who purchase the medallions will pay the market rate for them and therefore will not receive any special rents.  Yet, they will fight to prevent the medallion system from being eliminated, since these owners will be harmed by such elimination.  Thus, the city will be stuck with an inefficient medallion system that will be difficult to eliminate.  Eliminating the medallion program will harm existing taxis, many of whom did not lobby for the system in the first place and do not receive supercompetitive profits.

Tullock’s basic recommendation is not to get into these traps, because they are very hard to get out of.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm not smart. Now, the guys and gals I cite are smart.  They make "those people" look.......  Shale Gas comes to mind. (cast)





Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm not smart. Now, the guys and gals I cite are smart.  They make "those people" look.......  Shale Gas comes to mind. (cast)


Are you saying all those pearls of wisdom aren't your own? I'm going to need a minute.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 14, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Are you saying all those pearls of wisdom aren't your own? I'm going to need a minute.


I'm afraid so.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm afraid so.


Oh, man.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 14, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Oh, man.


I enjoy reading the responses to the sources that I link.  Still a lot to be mined from those links if you know the big picture.


----------



## espola (May 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I enjoy reading the responses to the sources that I link.  Still a lot to be mined from those links if you know the big picture.


Gotta start somewhere --


----------



## Bernie Sanders (May 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I enjoy reading the responses to the sources that I link.  Still a lot to be mined from those links if you know the big picture.


All this time, I thought you were Milton Friedman.


----------



## espola (May 14, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> All this time, I thought you were Milton Friedman.


Izzy knows about as much economics as you know of history and politics.

You two are free to take that any way you wish.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 14, 2017)

espola said:


> Izzy knows about as much economics as you know of history and politics.
> 
> You two are free to take that any way you wish.


Thank you.  Youʻll get there one day.


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 14, 2017)

espola said:


> LE said you were "brilliant".  I just wanted to clarify who wrote it.


Arranging & posting the information was appreciated
The fact that it will freak pinheads on the left out was brilliant...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 9, 2017)

While you people have been immersed in the Russian Circus your Federal Reserve has been setting up the next financial crisis.

*Today’s First-Time Homebuyers Are Alive, but Highly Leveraged*

A glance at the data tells all: The National Mortgage Risk Index (NMRI), which monitors over 90 percent of mortgages to first-time buyers, shows big increases. In February 2017, the number of first-time buyers was up 7 percent over last year — marking the 30th consecutive month of growth — and up 35 percent from three years ago. But that’s not all. For the last 28 out of 36 months, first-time buyers were also buying more homes than repeat buyers. In February of this year, 60 percent of all mortgages underwritten by the government went to first-time buyers.

*This has happened only because standards have been lowered: buyers are putting less skin in the game and are assuming higher debt burdens. First-time buyers no longer need 20 percent of a home’s price for a down payment. *NMRI data show that only one in five borrowers are meeting or exceeding this threshold. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) and Rural Housing Services (RHS) programs are issuing loans without any down payments, and the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) guarantees loans with only 3.5 percent down. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage enterprises, are buying mortgages with as little as 3 percent down. Today, the median first-time buyer puts down 3.5 percent or $8,300 instead of the previous 20 percent standard down payment.

There is more. For those who haven’t managed to save these lower amounts, many State Housing Finance Agencies, nonprofits, or even city governments, are offering down payment and closing cost assistance. At least 15 percent of first-time buyers are taking advantage of these programs. Taken together, over 20 percent of first-time buyers bring nothing to the table.

The catch, of course, is that ever increasing demand and a severely limited supply of homes — even more so at the lower end of the market — are causing house prices to rise at 5-6 percent per year, much faster than incomes. *Today, inflation-adjusted home prices have already risen 28 percent since their early 2012 trough, and are only about 15 percent away from their 2006 pre-crisis peak.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 9, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> While you people have been immersed in the Russian Circus your Federal Reserve has been setting up the next financial crisis.
> 
> *Today’s First-Time Homebuyers Are Alive, but Highly Leveraged*
> 
> ...


Something about history and doomed.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 10, 2017)

*Meet Johannesburg's New Libertarian Mayor*

*reason:* Under apartheid, the white government claimed to be capitalist. So many black South Africans support parties that are critical of free markets, such as the ANC, or explicitly anti-capitalist, like EFF. What explains your pro-market stance?

*Mashaba:* In 1950, they passed the Suppression of Communism Act. So when I was born in 1959, by virtue of that law and being black, I was automatically a communist. Look at that piece of legislation. It says that anyone that advocated the rights of blacks must be regarded as a communist.

What compounded the problem was that as we were growing up, the communists were the ones that seemed to be helping us, and on the other hand the Americans and the British were seen to be working with the apartheid government. So as far as blacks were concerned, Russia was the savior.

People had no idea what Russia was doing to its own people. If you saw the mess that was happening in Russia – our people had no idea. But the ANC guys who had been to Russia, they knew how brutal the system is.

In 1980, with my university closing down, I tried to leave the country to go for military training. I was hoping the Russians would give me an AK-47 and train me. I had nothing to lose; the apartheid government wanted to destroy my future and my life.--Leon Louw


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 10, 2017)

*reason:* How did you become a capitalist, then?

*Mashaba:* People must be careful by what they mean by _capitalist_. Capitalism for me is my right to feed myself and my family, to provide for myself and my family without any government intervention.

Government's role is to ensure that people don't kill me; when I have a dispute with you, to have courts I can take you to; and to provide infrastructure. That's the role of government. But I don't think I need any government to tell me that I must wake up to feed my family. If I decide that I don't want to work, why should government force me to work? As long as I'm not going to be a liability to that government. If you decide you don't want to work, then you cannot expect other people to assist you.

Obviously, some people for some reason need short-term intervention. I am for that. But if someone decides, "You know what, I don't want to work"? I don't think any government needs to force people to work. I don't need government to tell me I must work for you and then determine how much you must pay me and how many hours I must work.

When they start coming out with those policies, it is when you start stifling development. I've seen trade unions in this country becoming powerful and controlling our people. I am no longer allowed to reward people who are hard-working because unions assume everyone is the same. Unions discourage people from being the best they can be. I must pay people exactly the same regardless of whether they work hard.--Leon Louw


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 11, 2017)

*What causes high tuition? Don’t trust your intuition*

A typical student in an American public college pays thousands of dollars more in tuition than just a decade ago. Students and parents are worried and frustrated, and many point the finger at state legislators, who have cut funds to state schools. During last year’s presidential campaign, Hillary Clinton blamed “state disinvestment” in higher education for soaring tuition and declared her support for “free college.”

While the “disinvestment” narrative is simple and appealing, it collapses under scrutiny. If state funding to public colleges falls by $100 per student, it seems logical to conclude that tuition must go up by $100 to compensate. But that isn’t what happens. When the Great Recession began in 2008, funding at public colleges fell, as declining tax revenue forced states to make budget cuts. Tuition went up. In the mid-2000s, when the economy was strong, state funding to public colleges rose. Tuition went up then, too.

Tuition goes up no matter what state legislators do. Public colleges, with state boundaries insulating them from competition, and generous federal student aid programs at their disposal, charge as much as they can get away with. Changes in state funding are largely irrelevant.

This article appeared in_ The Wall Street Journal_ on June 8, 2017. If you are not a _WSJ_ subscriber, you may access the full piece via _WSJ’s_ Twitter profile here.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 13, 2017)

The Power to (Over)Tax – Is the Power to Destroy
The late Supreme Court Chief Justice (amongst many other impressive gigs) John Marshall rightly noted “The power to tax – is the power to destroy.” The power to OverTax, of course – will destroy even more.

We have in our nation established a very anti-human nature approach to government. We punish things of which we claim to want more – and reward things of which we claim to want less.

We tax income generated by work – and give money to people who don’t work. Human nature empirically tells us that we will get less of the former – and more of the latter. Why do something to get something – when you get something for doing nothing?







Human nature works on a sliding scale. The more you tax work and reward non-work, the higher up the human nature industriousness ladder you go – to pull people climbing upward off and into the Do Nothing pit.

And of course, the harder and more complex the work is – and the higher the investment costs required to do it – the more likely being taxed more will drive people out of that work.

 
Trending
*Are Some Republicans Dumb Enough to Go After Robert Mueller?*
Jay Caruso


To wit: The Alaskan energy sector. Extracting energy under the best of circumstances ain’t cheap. Doing it in the climactically and topographically challenged Last Frontier – is even more expensive.

Thankfully, there is much oil and gas to be culled – and that sector is a significant portion of the state’s overall economy. Nearly one out of every three Alaskan gigs – is energy sector related. This, of course, generates a whole lot of government tax money.

The energy sector – is Alaska’s Golden Goose. Unfortunately, state House Democrats are looking to kill it.

Alaska is facing a fairly precipitous government budget shortfall – $2.5 billion. Which, ironically enough, is almost exactly how much the government increased spending…IN JUST ONE YEAR: “Between fiscal years 2014 and 2015, total government spending in Alaska increased by approximately $2.4 billion – from $11.4 billion in fiscal year 2014 to an estimated $13.8 billion in 2015. This represents a 17.22-percent increase.”

Here’s a thought: Go back to pre-MASSIVE spending increase spending levels. Problem solved.

But as with most people in government everywhere, Alaska Democrats don’t even think to perhaps, maybe…cut spending a smidge or two. Of course not.

Nigh the entirety of the government budget shortfall discussion – has been about from which Alaskans the government should take more money.

One-trick-pony state House Democrats – are again looking to wring the Golden Goose’s neck. They want to hike taxes on the energy sector. For the same reason Willie Sutton robbed banks – because that’s where the money is.

Except that – the money isn’t there so much anymore. Besides the already high taxes and expenses the energy sector faces – it has been rocked by the protracted fall of global energy prices. The industry’s threads – have been getting increasingly bare. And here come Alaskan Democrats – looking to cut even more cloth.

This time, the state’s Democrats’ desire to OverTax – could very well destroy the Alaskan energy sector. Needlessly. Pointlessly.

All to avoid even the merest thought of rolling back any of the government’s recent gigantic spending increase.

Alaska’s Donkeys should be told what government big spenders everywhere need to hear:

It ain’t a revenue problem – it’s a spending problem.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 14, 2017)

*Tax cuts aren’t only reason why Kansas has budget issues*
Taylor MillardPosted at 10:41 am on June 14, 2017
There’s been a lot of hay made over the fact Kansas Republicans rejected a plan by Governor Sam Brownback to keep taxes low because of a major budget deficit. The Legislature approved the budget over the weekend, basically undoing five years worth of tax cuts. Via KCUR:

A group of moderate Republicans and Democrats elected since the passage of the tax cuts in 2012 helped lead the charge, but even some lawmakers who initially supported the cuts joined the override effort.

Senate Majority Leader Jim Denning voted in 2012 for the cuts, hoping they would provide the Kansas economy with the shot of adrenaline that Brownback promised. But weary of perennial budget struggles, Denning said before the override vote that the time had come to admit the cuts hadn’t worked as advertised.

“I’ve always backed up and mopped up my mess. That’s what I’m doing now,” said Denning, an Overland Park Republican.

Moderate-leaning Republican Stephanie Clayton, also from Overland Park, said reversing the tax cuts was a “major step” toward fixing the state’s budget problems.

“We have turned things around and we are headed in the right direction,” Clayton said.

The $1.2 billion tax increase passed over Brownback’s objections raises individual income tax rates and restores a third tax bracket eliminated by the 2012 bill. It also repeals a controversial tax exemption given to more than 300,000 business owners and farmers.

The Kansas Legislature decided to override Brownback’s initial veto of the tax increase last week, prompting a friend of mine to proclaim on Facebook it was again proof “trickle down” economics doesn’t work. That appears to be the prevailing theory nationwide, as well, with CNN reporting it was the failure of a “grand conservative experiment.” Here’s what _Kansas City Star’s_ Bryan Lowry told CNN after being asked what happened.  
These tax cuts, which Brownback had promised would lead to astronomical job growth, had really become politically toxic over the last four years. The state was running into a budget crisis every six months pretty much from November 2014 onward. For the current year, Kansas faced a roughly $900 million budget shortfall (over the next two years) and an order from the Kansas Supreme Court to increase education funding, so raising taxes was pretty much unavoidable unless you really wanted to make deep cuts to everything but K-12 education. And after three sessions of looking for one-time fixes, I think a lot of members of the Legislature were just ready to end the perpetual budget crisis.

Lowry actually got to the truth of the matter in a later comment, by pointing out tax cut supporters were criticizing the fact Kansas refused to cut spending over the last five years. It’s something Americans for Prosperity Kansas director Jeff Glendening hammered home in February. Via _KC Star:_

Brownback’s tax cuts were supposed to be the start of a new, small-government approach to growing the economy. And yet lawmakers did little to slow the growth in state spending: The state’s all-funds budget has increased by well over $1 billion since 2013.

There was no shortage of reforms available to reduce spending. A 2016 efficiency report commissioned by the Legislature identified 105 opportunities to increase the efficiency of the state government, which would cumulatively provide over $2 billion in savings over a five-year period.

Ultimately, lawmakers failed to follow through on their promise of a smaller government by refusing to cut spending along with taxes. That is why critics of the income tax cuts are wrong to seize on our imbalanced budget as proof they didn’t work. The point of these tax cuts, which saved individuals and small businesses about $800 million per year, was not to fill the state’s coffers. The point was to put money back into people’s pockets.

The hard data proves it as well. Kansas has seen only one year where government spending dropped (FY 2014), while increasing spending every year since then. This is something Republicans and so-called small government conservatives fail to realize time and time again. It’s not just tax cuts which spur growth, but slashing expenses. Most people cut spending when their income drops below a certain level. Governments need to learn this as well, and it seems like the only U.S. president with a lick of sense was Calvin Coolidge, who met every day with his Treasury Secretary to cut the budget. 

The GOP refuses to learn this lesson, despite swearing to be the party of low spending and small government. It’s not just a GOPe problem, but a problem for pretty much the entire party. Perhaps it’s the idea of “doing something,” to appeal to constituents or the ridiculous idea that only cutting taxes will spur growth. They’ll learn it at some point, right?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 16, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


Venezuela, Greece.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


>






*Is it really true that political self interest is somehow more noble than economic self interest?*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Tax cuts aren’t only reason why Kansas has budget issues*
> Taylor MillardPosted at 10:41 am on June 14, 2017
> There’s been a lot of hay made over the fact Kansas Republicans rejected a plan by Governor Sam Brownback to keep taxes low because of a major budget deficit. The Legislature approved the budget over the weekend, basically undoing five years worth of tax cuts. Via KCUR:
> 
> ...


It's always about politicians telling citizens that they can spend your money better than you can.  Therefore, let government raise taxes.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 16, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It's always about politicians telling citizens that they can spend your money better than you can.  Therefore, let government raise taxes.


Sure, its simple to us people.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 16, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


What did FDR say about gov. unions?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 16, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It's always about politicians telling citizens that they can spend your money better than you can.  Therefore, let government raise taxes.


Sounds like the same attitude of some of these assholes around here. AKA the smart guys.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 16, 2017)

I see the all or nothing crowd is having trouble with nuance, degrees of influence and the gray areas in-between . . . sure thinking in black and white is easier, so, as you were.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 16, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I see the all or nothing crowd is having trouble with nuance, degrees of influence and the gray areas in-between . . . sure thinking in black and white is easier, so, as you were.


I honestly think a comedy class or two with tenacious cant hurt.
You remind me of the guy with the sign who shoots up baseball fields.


----------



## tenacious (Jun 16, 2017)

espola said:


> Izzy knows about as much economics as you know of history and politics.
> 
> You two are free to take that any way you wish.



It's posts like this that still make me think you're the most under appreciated poster in here.  You really do wield that sarcasm like it's Hattori Hanzo steel.  And even though I know none of these jokers would man up and admit it, you can tell by the pure venom of their responses that sarcasm cuts deep...


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> It's posts like this that still make me think you're the most under appreciated poster in here.  You really do wield that sarcasm like it's Hattori Hanzo steel.  And even though I know none of these jokers would man up and admit it, you can tell by the pure venom of their responses that sarcasm cuts deep...


You're right.
The venom in Biz's reply was pure hate.
Its hard to repeat, but I think its necessary to illustrate your point.

Bear with me, ...Biz replied, ...

" Thank you, you'll get there one day"

What an asshole.


----------



## tenacious (Jun 16, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> You're right.
> The venom in Biz's reply was pure hate.
> Its hard to repeat, but I think its necessary to illustrate your point.
> 
> ...


Well... in how many years of posting back and forth that's the first time you called me an asshole in here.  But then again, if you go back you'll see my point was to marvel at how by even the most simple of posts Espola causes you guys go bonkers.  He's really good.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> Well... in how many years of posting back and forth that's the first time you called me an asshole in here.  But then again, if you go back you'll see my point was to marvel at how by even the most simple of posts Espola causes you guys go bonkers.  He's really good.


I was sarcastically calling BIz an asshole, but if you feel left out, I can probably muster another one.
It sucks having to draw pictures to explain what I just said.

You people are supposed to be smart.


----------



## tenacious (Jun 16, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> I was sarcastically calling BIz an asshole, but if you feel left out, I can probably muster another one.
> It sucks having to draw pictures to explain what I just said.
> 
> You people are supposed to be smart.


I don't know homie.  You're posts are starting to take on a nutter twang that makes them hard to follow.  So yea, maybe a couple crayon pictures would help make them easier to understand...


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> I don't know homie.  You're posts are starting to take on a nutter twang that makes them hard to follow.  So yea, maybe a couple crayon pictures would help make them easier to follow...


"Thanks, you'll get there one day"


----------



## tenacious (Jun 16, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> "Thanks, you'll get there one day"


So no crayon drawings?  They would help me follow the reference...  just say'n


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> I don't know homie.  You're posts are starting to take on a nutter twang that makes them hard to follow.  So yea, maybe a couple crayon pictures would help make them easier to understand...


The pressure is mounting, the nutters have become increasingly unruly everyday . . . do you blame them? Best thing for their health would be if Trump just quit.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I see the all or nothing crowd is having trouble with nuance, degrees of influence and the gray areas in-between . . . sure thinking in black and white is easier, so, as you were.


Nothing more black and white than taxes.  No room for Nuance and DOI .


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> Well... in how many years of posting back and forth that's the first time you called me an asshole in here.  But then again, if you go back you'll see my point was to marvel at how by even the most simple of posts Espola causes you guys go bonkers.  He's really good.


Poor little snowflake, first bruddah and now Bernie is hurting your delicate feelings. You really need to grow a pair, you are gonna end up just like husker pretty soon. I am sure it is much easier to ignore what you can't handle or control.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> It's posts like this that still make me think you're the most under appreciated poster in here.  You really do wield that sarcasm like it's Hattori Hanzo steel.  And even though I know none of these jokers would man up and admit it, you can tell by the pure venom of their responses that sarcasm cuts deep...


hanapaa!!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 16, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> You're right.
> The venom in Biz's reply was pure hate.
> Its hard to repeat, but I think its necessary to illustrate your point.
> 
> ...


I have been trying to tell you guys about Iz, you can't trust those sneaky yellow little bastards.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> So no crayon drawings?  They would help me follow the reference...  just say'n


No crayons but try to follow along the simple econ


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> So no crayon drawings?  They would help me follow the reference...  just say'n


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The pressure is mounting, the nutters have become increasingly unruly everyday . . . do you blame them? Best thing for their health would be if Trump just quit.


Best thing for my health is to make sure you people don't elect Nicholas Maduro POTUS


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 16, 2017)

tenacious said:


> It's posts like this that still make me think you're the most under appreciated poster in here.  You really do wield that sarcasm like it's Hattori Hanzo steel.  And even though I know none of these jokers would man up and admit it, you can tell by the pure venom of their responses that sarcasm cuts deep...


Did you know that the home you live in is an asset according to Econ-spola?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nothing more black and white than taxes.  No room for Nuance and DOI .


Depends on how well you know and can take advantage of the system.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Did you know that the home you live in is an asset according to Econ-spola?


Depends, do you own it outright? Is it considered farm property for tax purposes? If you owe, what is your equity? A few nuanced questions just off the top of my head . . . oh yeah, you don't do nuance, black and white.


----------



## espola (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Depends, do you own it outright? Is it considered farm property for tax purposes? If you owe, what is your equity? A few nuanced questions just off the top of my head . . . oh yeah, you don't do nuance, black and white.


On a personal balance sheet to determine net worth, the estimated resale value of your home goes on the asset side, and the remaining mortgage balance(s) on the debit side.

https://www.moneymanagement.org/Budgeting-Tools/Credit-Articles/Money-and-Budgeting/How-To-Create-a-Personal-Balance-Sheet-and-Determine-Your-Net-Worth.aspx

Black and red.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> On a personal balance sheet to determine net worth, the estimated resale value of your home goes on the asset side, and the remaining mortgage balance(s) on the debit side.
> 
> https://www.moneymanagement.org/Budgeting-Tools/Credit-Articles/Money-and-Budgeting/How-To-Create-a-Personal-Balance-Sheet-and-Determine-Your-Net-Worth.aspx
> 
> Black and red.


Pretty simple, something we were taught in grade school.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Depends, do you own it outright? Is it considered farm property for tax purposes? If you owe, what is your equity? A few nuanced questions just off the top of my head . . . oh yeah, you don't do nuance, black and white.


Define asset.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Define asset.


Go ahead, you first.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Go ahead, you first.


Puts money in your pocket.  Does your house do that?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> On a personal balance sheet to determine net worth, the estimated resale value of your home goes on the asset side, and the remaining mortgage balance(s) on the debit side.
> 
> https://www.moneymanagement.org/Budgeting-Tools/Credit-Articles/Money-and-Budgeting/How-To-Create-a-Personal-Balance-Sheet-and-Determine-Your-Net-Worth.aspx
> 
> Black and red.


This is for net worth calculation only.  The items above are assets on the lenders balance sheet and therefore cannot be a revenue generating asset on your personal balance sheet as well.  No arguments about the liabilities.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Pretty simple, something we were taught in grade school.


Something like this


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Depends on how well you know and can take advantage of the system.


Like I said, black and white.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Puts money in your pocket.


Wrong.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Something like this


Why under Assets do you think it lists Real Estate?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Wrong.


Your turn


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Why under Assets do you think it lists Real Estate?


Beacause it generates "income" above, unlike your mortgage under "expenses".


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Beacause it generates "income" above, unlike your mortgage under "expenses".


You are assuming there and then assessing off of a possibly false assumption.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your turn


as·set
noun
plural noun: assets
a useful or valuable thing, person, or quality.
"quick reflexes were his chief asset"
synonyms:    benefit, advantage, blessing, good point, strong point, selling point, strength, forte, virtue, recommendation, attraction, resource, boon, merit, bonus, plus, pro
"he sees his age as an asset"
property owned by a person or company, regarded as having value and available to meet debts, commitments, or legacies.
"growth in net assets"
synonyms:    property, resources, estate, holdings, possessions, effects, goods, valuables, belongings, chattels
"the seizure of all their assets"
military equipment, such as planes, ships, communications and radar installations, employed or targeted in military operations.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are assuming there and then assessing off of a possibly false assumption.


Would you consider an expense an asset?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> as·set
> noun
> plural noun: assets
> a useful or valuable thing, person, or quality.
> ...


Given the above, would you consider your mortgage an asset (income) or an expense (liability)?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Given the above, would you consider your mortgage an asset (income) or an expense (liability)?


Asset


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are assuming there and then assessing off of a possibly false assumption.


I am assuming that you know the difference between your income and the sources of that income, as opposed to expenses and the sources of those expenses.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Asset


Do you have a reverse mortgage?


----------



## espola (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Asset


You're wasting your time.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> You're wasting your time.


That is also an expense.  Heʻs probably pondering cash flow.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

The silence is deafening.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> You're wasting your time.


I never really paid attention to the financial deficit disorder that afflicts Izzy, just took your word for it, now I see.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I never really paid attention to the financial deficit disorder that afflicts Izzy, just took your word for it, now I see.


Blind Econ-spola leading the blind Husker Du as usual.  You never did answer the question about whether you have a reverse mortgage or not.  So much for your nuances.  Let me know when your bank starts paying your mortgage.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Blind Econ-spola leading the blind Husker Du as usual.  You never did answer the question about whether you have a reverse mortgage or not.  So much for your nuances.  Let me know when your bank starts paying your mortgage.


Not really interested watching you twist and turn in some vain attempt to act like you know something others don't . . . these issues aren't mysterious. Maybe try to convince yourself you are a great musician and singer?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Not really interested watching you twist and turn in some vain attempt to act like you know something others don't . . . these issues aren't mysterious. Maybe try to convince yourself you are a great musician and singer?


He's a legend.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Not really interested watching you twist and turn in some vain attempt to act like you know something others don't . . . these issues aren't mysterious. Maybe try to convince yourself you are a great musician and singer?


Do either of you have a reverse mortgage?  If so, you have an asset.  If not, you have a liability/expense.  No mysteries.  A little nuance maybe, but no mystery.


----------



## espola (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I never really paid attention to the financial deficit disorder that afflicts Izzy, just took your word for it, now I see.


He has symptoms similar to people I know who paid several hundred dollars for a financial seminar that embedded kooky ideas about money, economics, THE FED IS MURDER!!!, etc.


----------



## espola (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do either of you have a reverse mortgage?  If so, you have an asset.  If not, you have a liability/expense.  No mysteries.  A little nuance maybe, but no mystery.


So it was a reverse mortgage seminar that cooked your brain?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> So it was a reverse mortgage seminar that cooked your brain?


Nah, I was just trying to make yours and Husker Du's definition of an asset fit the actual definition of an asset and not the definition of net worth.  Ever play monopoly?  Were you the guy giving money to players that landed on your property?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> He has symptoms similar to people I know who paid several hundred dollars for a financial seminar that embedded kooky ideas about money, economics, THE FED IS MURDER!!!, etc.


Those seminars don't cost money tootse.  The only kooky ideas I hear about economics and finance is that which comes from you, Husker, Wez, and Andy.  Andy and Wez tend to be more Macroecon while you and Husker are more microeconomics.


----------



## espola (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nah, I was just trying to make yours and Husker Du's definition of an asset fit the actual definition of an asset and not the definition of net worth.  Ever play monopoly?  Were you the guy giving money to players that landed on your property?


Read the Monopoly "selling property" rule.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

espola said:


> Read the Monopoly "selling property" rule.


Am I to assume that you read the rule yourself?  Please continue.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Am I to assume that you read the rule yourself?  Please continue.


Just looking to argue something, eh?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 17, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Just looking to argue something, eh?


Do you have a reverse mortgage?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 17, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do you have a reverse mortgage?


No


----------



## tenacious (Jun 18, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Puts money in your pocket.  Does your house do that?


First of all B, there seems to be a little confusion about the word asset.  I've posted it down below, and no it isn't qualified by if it puts money in your pocket...

Anyway sounds like  you're reading Read Rich Dad Poor Dad Bruddah.  Bruddah you understand the authors not really saying a house isn't an asset, but that you need to change about how you think of your house if you want to be a rich dad?  

as·set
ˈaset/
_noun_

a useful or valuable thing, person, or quality.
"quick reflexes were his chief asset"
synonyms: benefit, advantage, blessing, good point, strong point, selling point, strength, forte, virtue, recommendation, attraction, resource, boon, merit, bonus, plus, pro
"he sees his age as an asset"
property owned by a person or company, regarded as having value and available to meet debts, commitments, or legacies.
"growth in net assets"
synonyms: property, resources, estate, holdings, possessions, effects, goods, valuables, belongings, chattels
"the seizure of all their assets"
military equipment, such as planes, ships, communications and radar installations, employed or targeted in military operations.


----------



## tenacious (Jun 18, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do you have a reverse mortgage?


Why would you think a 40-50 has a reverse mortgage.  lol The banks wouldn't even sell a reverse mortgage to a 50 year old?  Don't get me wrong, I think it's great you discovered a new word.  But yo, asking middle aged soccer parents how many have a reverse mortgage makes it seems like you still don't quite have your head around your new word.


----------



## espola (Jun 18, 2017)

tenacious said:


> Why would you think a 40-50 has a reverse mortgage.  lol The banks wouldn't even sell a reverse mortgage to a 50 year old?  Don't get me wrong, I think it's great you discovered a new word.  But yo, asking middle aged soccer parents how many have a reverse mortgage makes it seems like you still don't quite have your head around your new word.


An equity line of credit from which you draw money from regularly is very similar to a reverse mortgage, especially if you are using it to make mortgage payments.  An obvious difference is that there is no government involvement in guaranteeing or encouraging the loan.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 18, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> No


Good.  So you weren't paying your fellow monopoly players money every time they landed on your properties but instead they paid you every time they landed on your properties.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 18, 2017)

espola said:


> An equity line of credit from which you draw money from regularly is very similar to a reverse mortgage, *especially if you are using it to make mortgage payments.*  An obvious difference is that there is no government involvement in guaranteeing or encouraging the loan.


A HELOC and reverse mortgage are not similar at all.  Key word, reverse.  Notice which way the cash flows for each.  I can't make it any easier than the monopoly example.  The obvi diff for not needing a guarantee on a reverse mortgage is that the house itself is the guarantee.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 18, 2017)

tenacious said:


> Why would you think a 40-50 has a reverse mortgage.  lol The banks wouldn't even sell a reverse mortgage to a 50 year old?  Don't get me wrong, I think it's great you discovered a new word.  But yo, asking middle aged soccer parents how many have a reverse mortgage makes it seems like you still don't quite have your head around your new word.


Actually I was entertaining Huskers new love affair with the word nuanced by providing a real world example of how a home can be a cash flowing asset to *you *IAW with the definition you provided.  Otherwise your mortgage is an asset for the lender only.  Most people miss these concepts despite having played monopoly from a young age.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 18, 2017)

tenacious said:


> First of all B, there seems to be a little confusion about the word asset.


There always is.  Especially when you miss the historical context of the conversation.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jun 26, 2017)

Well now, whats this? Actually this comes at no surprise,  well not to any logical person.

http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-seattle-minimum-wage-20170626-story.html


----------



## nononono (Jun 26, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> Well now, whats this? Actually this comes at no surprise,  well not to any logical person.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-seattle-minimum-wage-20170626-story.html










*Picture of Seattle Politics.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 26, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> Well now, whats this? Actually this comes at no surprise,  well not to any logical person.
> 
> http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-seattle-minimum-wage-20170626-story.html


Governmentʻs idea of how to create or maintain the labor  market is to throw more of your money at it while ignoring the market altogether.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jun 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Governmentʻs idea of how to create or maintain the labor  market is to throw more of your money at it while ignoring the market altogether.


Even a child would understand how this basic concept works.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 26, 2017)

Multi Sport said:


> Even a child would understand how this basic concept works.


That is how they need to present it to you so you can understand.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That is how they need to present it to you so you can understand.


And semi-literates too.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jun 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That is how they need to present it to you so you can understand.


Hopefully you re drinking something good tonight...


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jun 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And semi-literates too.


Rat has his run on's, and his run on's run, like run on's have never run, but when they run, and keep on running, and run, run, run, on and on, and on,...
and on, and on, again, and again, and again, and ,.....again.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jun 26, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Rat has his run on's, and his run on's run, like run on's have never run, but when they run, and keep on running, and run, run, run, on and on, and on,...
> and on, and on, again, and again, and again, and ,.....again.


Here's video of what it must be like when Daffy's talking to his doppelganger Wizbag....


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 26, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Rat has his run on's, and his run on's run, like run on's have never run, but when they run, and keep on running, and run, run, run, on and on, and on,...
> and on, and on, again, and again, and again, and ,.....again.


Then he does the backward run when he contradicts himself......without knowing it of course.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 26, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> Here's video of what it must be like when Daffy's talking to his doppelganger Wizbag....


The twin babies make more sense than dumb and dumber.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Then he does the backward run when he contradicts himself......without knowing it of course.


It is almost as painful as watching the Kenyan off promter.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Then he does the backward run when he contradicts himself......without knowing it of course.


. . . but then again you say that, but when asked to explain I get crickets . . . just saying things does not make them true, unless you say them over and over again, then a certain portion of the population will start to believe.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . but then again you say that, but when asked to explain I get crickets . . . just saying things does not make them true, unless you say them over and over again, then a certain portion of the population will start to believe.


Vast right wing conspiracy, I did not have sex with that woman, you can keep your plan, you can keep your Dr, it was a video, I only deleted emails about a wedding and a funeral. 
Please.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jun 27, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Vast right wing conspiracy, I did not have sex with that woman, you can keep your plan, you can keep your Dr, it was a video, I only deleted emails about a wedding and a funeral.
> Please.


Repeat three times a day until your followers believe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . but then again you say that, but when asked to explain I get crickets . . . just saying things does not make them true, unless you say them over and over again, then a certain portion of the population will start to believe.


Wow.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . .  but when asked to explain I get crickets


You wouldn't understand.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 27, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You wouldn't understand.


Heʻs self proclaimed semi-literate.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Heʻs self proclaimed semi-literate.


Self proclaimed liar, not possible for a lib to be self aware, they are only concerned with others.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 27, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Rat has his run on's, and his run on's run, like run on's have never run, but when they run, and keep on running, and run, run, run, on and on, and on,...
> and on, and on, again, and again, and again, and ,.....again.


You like my sentence structure I see . . . or lack thereof.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Wow.


Show me where I contradicted myself, plain and simple, should be easy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Heʻs self proclaimed semi-literate.


I'm a skilled laborer, I can read plans, I can climb high, pack tons of steel in a single day, simplify the complicated and drop a crane hook on a dime . . . that's what I get paid for, and you?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm a skilled laborer, I can read plans, I can climb high, pack tons of steel in a single day, simplify the complicated and drop a crane hook on a dime . . . that's what I get paid for, and you?


I take care of Veterans, Service members, and their Ohana.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Show me where I contradicted myself, plain and simple, should be easy.


You didn't.  I just didn't understand what you were trying to say.  It's like your fingers and brain weren't fully synced.


----------



## nononono (Jun 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Show me where I contradicted myself, plain and simple, should be easy.





*Go back just two weeks and you will have multitudes of your own examples to embarrass the shit out of yourself....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 28, 2017)

nononono said:


> *Go back just two weeks and you will have multitudes of your own examples to embarrass the shit out of yourself....*


No, you show me, if there really are "multitudes" it should be quite easy, go ahead, dare ya . . . I'll await your popcorn fart response.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2017)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jun 30, 2017)

*Buffett to reap $12 billion profit on Bank of America bet* 

Warren Buffett’s bet on Bank of America Corp. is about to pay off with a roughly $12 billion windfall.

The billionaire plans to exercise warrants obtained six years ago in a vote of confidence in Bank of America while its shares were tumbling amid multibillion-dollar probes tied to the housing meltdown. The cash infusion helped the bank put to rest doubts about whether it had enough capital, and its shares have more than tripled since then.

In the 2011 deal, Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. invested $5 billion in Bank of America in exchange for preferred stock and the right to buy 700 million common shares, a stake now worth $17 billion. Berkshire said in a statement Friday that it would convert its preferred shares into common stock once the Charlotte, North Carolina-based bank increases its dividend, now planned for the beginning of the third quarter.

Buffett laid out his thinking for the conversion, which will make him the company’s biggest shareholder, in a February letter to investors, saying that the decision would come down to simple math: The preferred investment pays $300 million a year in dividends, so it makes sense to convert that into common stock if those shares began earning more.

After receiving Federal Reserve approval of its capital plan, Bank of America said on June 28 that it planned to boost its dividend 60 percent to 12 cents a quarter. By converting the preferred stake into common shares, Berkshire’s payout will rise to $336 million a year. The $12 billion in gains come on top of more than $1.5 billion in dividends from the preferred stake over the past six years.

Buffett shored up confidence in Bank of America and its chief executive officer, Brian Moynihan, at a critical juncture. With backing from Berkshire’s billionaire chief executive officer, Bank of America soon rebounded. That generated a massive paper profit on the warrants. The warrants allow Buffett to buy the stock at a discounted rate of $7.14 a share, compared with the closing price of $24.32 on Thursday.

The episode highlighted Buffett’s role as a financial firefighter and mirrored confidence-boosting investments he made in Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and General Electric Co. during the 2008 crisis. In those cases, he was also able to extract generous terms in exchange for vouching for those companies’ long-term prospects.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/topstocks/buffett-to-reap-dollar12-billion-profit-on-bank-of-america-bet/ar-BBDu9CI?ocid=iehp


----------



## Wez (Jun 30, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> *Buffett to reap $12 billion profit on Bank of America bet*
> 
> Warren Buffett’s bet on Bank of America Corp. is about to pay off with a roughly $12 billion windfall.
> 
> ...


No doubt one of our most brilliant investors.  A side note, his ass was also saved in the financial crisis as a ton of his financial holdings received bailouts.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 30, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> *Buffett to reap $12 billion profit on Bank of America bet*
> 
> Warren Buffett’s bet on Bank of America Corp. is about to pay off with a roughly $12 billion windfall.
> 
> ...


Nice call options


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 1, 2017)

*Why Your Boss Isn't Ripping You Off*

https://fee.org/articles/debunking-marxism-101-why-your-boss-isnt-ripping-you-off/

*Workers and employers exchange to mutual advantage.*

But how can the work be worth more than $20 to the employer at the same time the $20 is worth more than the work to the employee?

The answer is that the employer and employee value things differently. The employer values the work more than $20; the employee values $20 more than the work. Both exchange what they value less for what they value more. Both parties benefit from the exchange; each is made better off according to his or her own, _different_ values. Neither “rips off” the other. They exchange by mutual consent to mutual advantage.

The way this is said in modern economics is that value is subjective. This principle has been understood since the “marginal revolution” in economics of 1870 when the idea of marginal utility was introduced.

A Marxist, Wolff argues in keeping with the labor theory of value, which the marginal revolution exploded. This is the doctrine that what determines the value of a good or service is the “socially necessary labor” required to produce it. It implies that value is inherent, determined by the labor necessary to produce the good or service in question. But value is not inherent; it is subjective. Different people value any thing differently, according to its value to them “at the margin.”

I can’t understand how Marxists such as Wolff ignore that value is subjective. Surely he cannot be ignorant of it, so either he ignores it willfully or he believes it invalid.

In any case, the first flaw in Dr. Wolff’s argument is to ignore that value is subjective and to focus on the benefits to the employer while ignoring the corresponding benefits to the employee.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 1, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Why Your Boss Isn't Ripping You Off*
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/debunking-marxism-101-why-your-boss-isnt-ripping-you-off/
> 
> ...


That's funny, have you donated?


----------



## Wez (Jul 1, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Why Your Boss Isn't Ripping You Off*
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/debunking-marxism-101-why-your-boss-isnt-ripping-you-off/
> 
> ...


Was there a point in there somewhere?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 1, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's funny, have you donated?


Absolutely.  Didn't cost me a cent.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 1, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Absolutely.  Didn't cost me a cent.


More popcorn fart logic.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 1, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> More popcorn fart logic.


Are you saying you deserve something more complex?  How about your thoughts on the AEI article now that I've read what I knew would be in it.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 1, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Are you saying you deserve something more complex?  How about your thoughts on the AEI article now that I've read what I knew would be in it.


Good for you, I only posted it as information. You never said whether you agreed or not with the premise of taxing employer provided healthcare insurance as income. I had read somewhere else that was a conservative idea, in fact a conservative dream.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 1, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Good for you, I only posted it as information. You never said whether you agreed or not with the premise of taxing employer provided healthcare insurance as income. I had read somewhere else that was a conservative idea, in fact a conservative dream.


That's what I figured.  As I've posted many times before, Health Insurance needs to be separated from health care and both need to be able to be separated from employment.  Having a third party (government or employer) shop for your health insurance is nuts.  You wouldn't allow them to do that with any other insurance you hold.  But if your employer does pay for one or both, it should be taxed as income.  Employees without employer provided healthcare pay for healthcare and/or insurance would pay with post tax dollars if they wanted or needed health products as needed not like:


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 1, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That's what I figured.  As I've posted many times before, Health Insurance needs to be separated from health care and both need to be able to be separated from employment.  Having a third party (government or employer) shop for your health insurance is nuts.  You wouldn't allow them to do that with any other insurance you hold.  But if your employer does pay for one or both, it should be taxed as income.  Employees without employer provided healthcare pay for healthcare and/or insurance would pay with post tax dollars if they wanted or needed health products as needed not like:


See, the attempted ACA bashing aside, that wasn't so hard was it?


----------



## nononono (Jul 1, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> No, you show me, if there really are "multitudes" it should be quite easy, go ahead, dare ya . . . I'll await your popcorn fart response.



*Childish response .......man up and post some facts....*


----------



## Wez (Jul 2, 2017)




----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 2, 2017)

nononono said:


> *Childish response .......man up and post some facts....*


Irony alert!


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 2, 2017)

Wez said:


>


Refer to HD's "employee theft" post.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> See, the attempted ACA bashing aside, that wasn't so hard was it?


No.  It was a cut and paste.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 2, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  It was a cut and paste.


That a boy! I'm proud of you now! . . . back to what you know.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That a boy! I'm proud of you now! . . . back to what you know.


What is known.  Like Denmark being a capitalist country with social programs that are protected by market principles.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> See, the attempted ACA bashing aside, that wasn't so hard was it?


The ACA has been bashing itself since day one.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 2, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The ACA has been bashing itself since day one.


Many people have hated Obamacare since inception, but at the same time, the same people like what the ACA has done for them . . . that's the mentality we are dealing with here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Many people have hated Obamacare since inception, but at the same time, the same people like what the ACA has done for them . . . that's the mentality we are dealing with here.


How did people go from hate to like?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

*Scandinavia Is No Socialist Valhalla*

https://fee.org/articles/scandinavia-is-no-socialist-valhalla/

Addressing Harvard University last year, Danish PM Lars Løkke Rasmussen tried to set the record straight. “I know that some people associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism," he said. “I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy.”

Indeed, viewing Scandinavian countries as socialist – or even left-wing – overlooks an essential truth about how their economies are organized. While these nations do have high taxes and generous welfare, in many respects, their markets are unusually free, adopting exactly the kind of policies that the British Left, with its rigid adherence to central planning and intervention, spends its time fighting against.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Friday, June 30, 2017
Same link

*Scandinavian Government vs. British Government*

Last week, the Labour Party pledged a minimum wage of £10 that would apply to all workers, including those aged 16-18. This policy would, if implemented, carry hugely perverse side-effects – with young and unskilled workers all but priced out of the job market.

In contrast, the very concept of central government setting a “one-size fits all” policy to cover all jobs and sectors is utterly alien to the Scandinavian economies. Neither Sweden, Norway, nor Denmark actually has a minimum wage. Instead, wages are decided by mutual agreement between unions and employers, which usually vary according to the industry or occupation in question. In this respect, Scandinavian labor markets are far more flexible and decentralized than Britain’s.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Corporate tax rates in Scandinavia compare favorably with those of overtly capitalist countries. Sweden and Denmark’s are among the lowest in the EU 15, while Finland’s, at 20 percent, is on a par with Britain. Norway has the highest rate of the five countries, but, at 27 percent, is still significantly lower than America’s (nearly 40 percent).


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Meanwhile, Sweden’s education system – inspired by the ideas of that well-known socialist thinker Milton Friedman – allows parents to top-up the cost of private schooling with government-funded vouchers, and has led to a surge of choice and competition in schools.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

*What about Norway?*

Norway, another nation often held up as an example of a “better way” by the British Left, is also something of a red herring.

It is hard to exaggerate the importance of Norway’s vast oil reserves to its economic success; these have allowed it to build up the largest sovereign wealth fund in the world (predicted to reach $1 trillion by 2020). This gargantuan fund holds around 1 percent of the world’s shares, and owns more than 2 percent of all listed companies in Europe, as well as a vast property portfolio.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

*Thus is Norwegian “socialism,” ironically, funded by investment in capitalist projects around the world.* *The historically sound investments made by the fund are a large part of the reason why Norway has proven so resilient in the face of fluctuating oil prices in recent years.* Last year, for the first time ever, Norway’s government took more money from the fund than the fund itself derives from oil revenues, due to the worldwide slump in the commodity’s price. It is a crucial buffer that allows the nation to maintain its high spending and generous welfare programs.

*Conversely, Scandinavia’s prosperity has only ever been threatened when its nations have embraced genuinely socialist policies*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

*How Did Sweden Get Here?*

In the 1970s, the size of the Swedish state began to expand in earnest under successive socialist governments. Punitive taxation, including effective marginal rates that topped 100 percent in some cases, prompted a mass exodus of wealthy citizens and entrepreneurs, including, famously, the filmmaker Ingmar Bergman and IKEA founder Ingvar Kamprad.

By 1993, when public spending had reached 67 percent of GDP, Sweden had dropped from being the 4th richest nation in the world in the 1970s, to the 14th. Both Swedish and Danish citizens have since begun to reject “tax and spend” at the ballot box and recent years have seen a growth in support for center-right parties, promising fiscal restraint.

*It is easy to see why Scandinavia is so often mythologized by adherents of socialism.......and uninformed members of the socal soccer forum.  * Its citizens enjoy some of the best universal healthcare and education in the world, which receives high levels of government funding and remains (largely) free at the point of use.

*But don’t be fooled by the high tax rates. The success of the Nordic Model hinges on its embrace of free-market capitalism, competition and defense of private property – a far cry from the centralized planning system espoused by the socialist Left.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

*Why is Milk in the Back of the Store?*
https://fee.org/articles/why-is-milk-in-the-back-of-the-store/
Safety First

Finally, there are apparently safety issues, as commenter Evan Downie noted in an Econtalk episode I did on this topic with Mike Munger of Duke University:

Though I’m not a designer, nor engineer, I do install automated control systems in large commercial properties. There are a variety of factors in placing a refrigeration system such as thermal load (windows and other heat sources), humidity, and other environmental issues. But in my experience there are basic determining facts surrounding placement that I will try to briefly sum up.

Most commercial refrigeration systems tie together to one location. Because of this all displays and storage units are placed close to that central location. Which reduces runs of lines and cables, and simplifies labor. This is the first factor of placement, to reduce initial cost. Installation of refrigeration systems represent one of largest initial expenses in this type of construction. The second factor is accessibility/serviceability. Very important in reducing long term costs. The third, and most important, factor is safety. Safety above all determines where displays are located.

Refrigerant as well as being an environmental hazard, is also a poison. It travels at extreme temperatures, under pressure, through the system. So the goal is for the lines, and equipment, to be as isolated from the general public as possible, but also accessible to service personnel in the event of a leak. Thus the back of the store is the most practical, and safest, location for the support equipment to retail milk.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Many people have hated Obamacare since inception, but at the same time, the same people like what the ACA has done for them . . . that's the mentality we are dealing with here.


Many people have hated Capitalism since inception, but at the same time, the same people like what Capitalism has done for them . . . that's the mentality we are dealing with here.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 3, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How did people go from hate to like?


Daft bit of reasoning you're pointing out...


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 3, 2017)

Wez said:


>


How many folks at or below the 50% level employ anybody, except perhaps themselves?
How many jobs are created by folks at or below the 50% level?
How much federal income tax is paid by the folks at or below the 50% level?
Buffet just called in his B0fA shares, he's making in the neighborhood of $12 billion...
How many jobs did Buffet save and how much money do you suppose trickled down from his investment?


----------



## Wez (Jul 3, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> How many folks at or below the 50% level employ anybody, except perhaps themselves?
> How many jobs are created by folks at or below the 50% level?
> How much federal income tax is paid by the folks at or below the 50% level?
> Buffet just called in his B0fA shares, he's making in the neighborhood of $12 billion...
> How many jobs did Buffet save and how much money do you suppose trickled down from his investment?


I'm not knocking rich people and I'm a big fan of Buffett (no idea why Buffett is relevant to this discussion), this meme was just criticizing trickle down economics.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 3, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How did people go from hate to like?


You must be one of them.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 3, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> How many folks at or below the 50% level employ anybody, except perhaps themselves?
> How many jobs are created by folks at or below the 50% level?
> How much federal income tax is paid by the folks at or below the 50% level?
> Buffet just called in his B0fA shares, he's making in the neighborhood of $12 billion...
> How many jobs did Buffet save and how much money do you suppose trickled down from his investment?


How is the message the meme represents wrong?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 3, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You must be one of them.


I like the Scandanavian model better.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 3, 2017)

All quiet on the capitalist driven scandanavian health care front.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 3, 2017)

Are all democrats crooks or just the ones that are alive?
Busted: Emails Show Seattle Mayor Worked With Berkeley To Preempt Study Criticizing Minimum Wage Law


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 3, 2017)

Wez said:


> I'm not knocking rich people and I'm a big fan of Buffett (no idea why Buffett is relevant to this discussion), this meme was just criticizing trickle down economics.


Buffett is a 1%er....


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 3, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How is the message the meme represents wrong?


How?
Buffett is a 1%er...without his help at BofA how many folks, not necessarily employed by BofA, would have lost their jobs?
The poor don't invest, don't employ, don't risk anything when it comes to business.
Buffett will reinvest & risk his billions again, employing thousands affecting millions.
Trickle up economics doesn't exist.


----------



## Wez (Jul 3, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> Buffett is a 1%er....


He also believes in Estate Taxes and giving his wealth back to Society.


----------



## Wez (Jul 3, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> Buffett is a 1%er...without his help at BofA how many folks, not necessarily employed by BofA, would have lost their jobs?
> The poor don't invest, don't employ, don't risk anything when it comes to business.
> Buffett will reinvest & risk his billions again, employing thousands affecting millions.
> Trickle up economics doesn't exist.


You are confusing a brilliant investor who excels at wealth creation, with an economic theory.

Trickle down is all about helping the wealthy with the hopes it helps the poor, when the wealthy spend.  That theory is proving itself, obsolete, over and over again.  Of course the rich spend, but they don't spend nearly as much as a percentage of their incomes and net worth, as people who are at the lower end of the wealth spectrum.

A stronger middle class and lower class, is much better than a strong upper class, it would seem from countless recent observations.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 3, 2017)

Wez said:


> You are confusing a brilliant investor who excels at wealth creation, with an economic theory.
> 
> Trickle down is all about helping the wealthy with the hopes it helps the poor, when the wealthy spend.  That theory is proving itself, obsolete, over and over again.  Of course the rich spend, but they don't spend nearly as much as a percentage of their incomes and net worth, as people who are at the lower end of the wealth spectrum.
> 
> A stronger middle class and lower class, is much better than a strong upper class, it would seem from countless recent observations.


I've confused nothing...you are the one who claims trickle down stops at the 1%.
Then you go on to explain that Buffett is a brilliant investor and shares his wealth by creating more wealth...I agree.
I believe most of the 1% are brilliant & excel creating wealth and prosperity for many, not just themselves.
The left like to point fingers at the Koch's as bad evil people, but they employ a 100,000 people who intern support millions...
What's with the trickle down bs? The economy is rolling along quite nicely.


----------



## Wez (Jul 4, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> you are the one who claims trickle down stops at the 1%.


It's like you are making up a conversation to have with yourself.  Your responses discuss things in your own head and not what is written here.


----------



## Wez (Jul 4, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> The left like to point fingers at the Koch's as bad evil people


The Kochs get vilified, not because of their role as employers, but because they use their extreme wealth to influence politics and fund junk science campaigns, to further their wealth creation efforts.  You don't see Buffett doing this:

https://thinkprogress.org/koch-industries-warns-45-000-employees-of-consequences-if-they-don-t-vote-for-republicans-f499fd54d1e1


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 4, 2017)

Wez said:


> The Kochs get vilified, not because of their role as employers, but because they use their extreme wealth to influence politics and fund junk science campaigns, to further their wealth creation efforts.  You don't see Buffett doing this:
> 
> https://thinkprogress.org/koch-industries-warns-45-000-employees-of-consequences-if-they-don-t-vote-for-republicans-f499fd54d1e1


How about Soros?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Are all democrats crooks or just the ones that are alive?
> Busted: Emails Show Seattle Mayor Worked With Berkeley To Preempt Study Criticizing Minimum Wage Law


I say we switch to the Scandanavian model


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Friday, June 30, 2017
Same link

*Scandinavian Government vs. British Government*

Last week, the Labour Party pledged a minimum wage of £10 that would apply to all workers, including those aged 16-18. This policy would, if implemented, carry hugely perverse side-effects – with young and unskilled workers all but priced out of the job market.

In contrast, the very concept of central government setting a “one-size fits all” policy to cover all jobs and sectors is utterly alien to the Scandinavian economies. *Neither Sweden, Norway, nor Denmark actually has a minimum wage.* *Instead, wages are decided by mutual agreement between unions and employers, which usually vary according to the industry or occupation in question. In this respect, Scandinavian labor markets are far more flexible and decentralized than Britain’s.*


----------



## Wez (Jul 4, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> How about Soros?


What about him?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> How about Soros?


Oh yes "Soros" I forgot that code word! Just say it and nutters somehow mysteriously understand the meaning although they can't explain it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh yes "Soros" I forgot that code word! Just say it and nutters somehow mysteriously understand the meaning although they can't explain it.


How many people does he employ?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How many people does he employ?


How much pollution does his corporations pump into the environment?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How much pollution does his corporations pump into the environment?


You don't know?  How much pollution do you pump in to the environment


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You don't know?  How much pollution do you pump in to the environment


Compared to Koch industries? I don't have the assets to pay politicians to allow me to be a mass polluter . . . by products happen, but what is it conservatives use to say about "personal responsibility"? If corporations are really people (see: Citizens United ruling/Mitt Romney) then don't you feel they need to show some personal responsibility as well? Or are you more in favor of rolling back all restrictions in the, once again, false narrative (see: trickle down theory) that it will "create jobs"?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Compared to Koch industries? I don't have the assets to pay politicians to allow me to be a mass polluter . . . by products happen, but what is it conservatives use to say about "personal responsibility"? If corporations are really people (see: Citizens United ruling/Mitt Romney) then don't you feel they need to show some personal responsibility as well? Or are you more in favor of rolling back all restrictions in the, once again, false narrative (see: trickle down theory) that it will "create jobs"?


I'm not comparing you to a corporation.  I'm comparing you to all the other people that demand Koch products that make their lives much better.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Compared to Koch industries? I don't have the assets to pay politicians to allow me to be a mass polluter . . . by products happen, but what is it conservatives use to say about "personal responsibility"? If corporations are really people (see: Citizens United ruling/Mitt Romney) then don't you feel they need to show some personal responsibility as well? Or are you more in favor of rolling back all restrictions in the, once again, false narrative (see: trickle down theory) that it will "create jobs"?


I do believe in corporate responsibility. But it's hard to make a profit if you're killing off your customers.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm not comparing you to a corporation.  I'm comparing you to all the other people that demand Koch products that make their lives much better.


I'm just asking that we ALL act responsibly and that the mega wealthy aren't allowed to buy their way out of that responsibility.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm just asking that we ALL act responsibly and that the mega wealthy aren't allowed to buy their way out of that responsibility.


Again, the rich didn't get rich by killing off their costumers and the environment they live in.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Again, the rich didn't get rich by killing off their costumers and the environment they live in.


The poor, the ones that are forced to live down stream, adjacent to gross polluting facilities aren't considered their customer base, at least not one given much thought. Ever see the movie, Erin Brockovich? It ain't fiction.


----------



## nononono (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The poor, the ones that are forced to live down stream, adjacent to gross polluting facilities aren't considered their customer base, at least not one given much thought. Ever see the movie, Erin Brockovich? It ain't fiction.



*But it is a Movie, with an agenda attached.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2017)

nononono said:


> *But it is a Movie, with an agenda attached.*


It's story of greed and disregard for human life.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The poor, the ones that are forced to live down stream, adjacent to gross polluting facilities aren't considered their customer base, at least not one given much thought. Ever see the movie, Erin Brockovich? It ain't fiction.


Nope it isn't.  Again, companies don't get rich or make profits by making Erin Brokovich rich and her clients sick.  Great story.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's story of greed and disregard for human life.


  Where was the EPA?


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Compared to Koch industries? I don't have the assets to pay politicians to allow me to be a mass polluter . . . by products happen, but what is it conservatives use to say about "personal responsibility"? If corporations are really people (see: Citizens United ruling/Mitt Romney) then don't you feel they need to show some personal responsibility as well? Or are you more in favor of rolling back all restrictions in the, once again, false narrative (see: trickle down theory) that it will "create jobs"?


Bla...bla...bla...blaaaaaaa.................
Ramble on Daffy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2017)

Seriously, where was the EPA?  Wasn't it their job to monitor PG&E?  They were gross polluters as you said and I would expect the EPA to at least be aware of gross polluters.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Seriously, where was the EPA?  Wasn't it their job to monitor PG&E?  They were gross polluters as you said and I would expect the EPA to at least be aware of gross polluters.


 Under staffed and under funded . . . and now even more so.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Under staffed and under funded . . . and now even more so.


But they were gross polluters according to you.  How is that the EPA doesn't know who the gross polluters are?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But they were gross polluters according to you.  How is that the EPA doesn't know who the gross polluters are?


I don't know, you tell me, that is entirely your line of thought, you brought that up not me, so you provide the answers. Were they paid off? Bribed?


----------



## Wez (Jul 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But they were gross polluters according to you.  How is that the EPA doesn't know who the gross polluters are?


That PG&E case changed the regulatory playbook at the EPA.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I don't know, you tell me, that is entirely your line of thought, you brought that up not me, so you provide the answers. Were they paid off? Bribed?


Or incompetent.  Maybe they were wooooed by Erin B


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Or incompetent.  Maybe they were wooooed by Erin B


That's all you got? All that build up, as if this time you actually knew something, then poof, yet another popcorn fart like always.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's all you got? All that build up, as if this time you actually knew something, then poof, yet another popcorn fart like always.


Oh right. Ummm yes.  The underfunded, under staffed EPA that couldn't control gross polluters.  Please make your case for funding another incompetent government agency.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh right. Ummm yes.  The underfunded, under staffed EPA that couldn't control gross polluters.  Please make your case for funding another incompetent government agency.


You mean, "underfund" then ask why they aren't effective? Reminds me of the State Departments request for funds to keep embassies safe that a Republican Congress denied, then asked why they weren't better protected.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 5, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Where was the EPA?


Wasting money?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You mean, "underfund" then ask why they aren't effective? Reminds me of the State Departments request for funds to keep embassies safe that a Republican Congress denied, then asked why they weren't better protected.


Underfunding is always the excuse for incompetence.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 5, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Under staffed and under funded . . . and now even more so.


No government agency is under funded.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> Wasting money?


Itʻs ridiculous.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 6, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Underfunding is always the excuse for incompetence.


Pouring money into a problem is the left's answer for incompetence & failed policies....
Just remember, it's the intend of a policy, not the results.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> Pouring money into a problem is the left's answer for incompetence & failed policies....
> Just remember, it's the intend of a policy, not the results.


So we shouldn't regulate our markets?

http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/how-the-united-states-looked-before-the-epa/


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> So we shouldn't regulate our markets?
> 
> http://fortune.com/2017/02/28/how-the-united-states-looked-before-the-epa/


The EPA has done some good things. Nobody will argue that point.
Like all government bureaucracies, they eventually become bloated, cumbersome, and domineering. 
To blame their failures on "under funding" is worthless and weak.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> The EPA has done some good things. Nobody will argue that point.
> Like all government bureaucracies, they eventually become bloated, cumbersome, and domineering.
> To blame their failures on "under funding" is worthless and weak.


The EPA can't catch everything, just like cops can't.  Under-funding them just makes things worse.  The Hinkley case was a lesson learned for the EPA.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> The EPA has done some good things. Nobody will argue that point.
> Like all government bureaucracies, they eventually become bloated, cumbersome, and domineering.
> To blame their failures on "under funding" is worthless and weak.


Consider the source.


----------



## espola (Jul 6, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Consider the source.


Irony alert.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 6, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> The EPA has done some good things. Nobody will argue that point.
> Like all government bureaucracies, they eventually become bloated, cumbersome, and domineering.
> To blame their failures on "under funding" is worthless and weak.


What kind of budget did ratʻs girl Erin Brokovich have?


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What kind of budget did ratʻs girl Erin Brokovich have?


The largest class action payout ever.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> The EPA has done some good things. Nobody will argue that point.
> Like all government bureaucracies, they eventually become bloated, cumbersome, and domineering.
> To blame their failures on "under funding" is worthless and weak.


Who told you that? Charles or David?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Who told you that? Charles or David?


Erin


----------



## nononono (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's story of greed and disregard for human life.


*And it's not factually correct....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

nononono said:


> *And it's not factually correct....*


It's a dramatic representation of actual events, it's not a documentary. Are you siding with those that caused people, children, to die needlessly due to the unreported and illegal pollutants pumped into the environment?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's a dramatic representation of actual events, it's not a documentary. Are you siding with those that caused people, children, to die needlessly due to the unreported and illegal pollutants pumped into the environment?


Best get the documentary.  "Pretty Woman's" boyfriend was probably on the board of PG&E.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's a dramatic representation of actual events, it's not a documentary. Are you siding with those that caused people, children, to die needlessly due to the unreported and illegal pollutants pumped into the environment?


Right, how is Erin the bad guy in the nutter world???


----------



## nononono (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's a dramatic representation of actual events, it's not a documentary. Are you siding with those that caused people, children, to die needlessly due to the unreported and illegal pollutants pumped into the environment?



*Absolutely NOT...It's just not factually correct.*

*Kinda like Barry's book......*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Right, how is Erin the bad guy in the nutter world???


That evil bitch was siding with families over corporate interests! That's just un-American (nutter style)!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

nononono said:


> *Absolutely NOT...It's just not factually correct.*
> 
> *Kinda like Barry's book......*


Don't change the subject answer the question, Whose side would you be on?


----------



## nononono (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Right, how is Erin the bad guy in the nutter world???



*Really Wez ?*

*Do you read or just skim....?*


----------



## nononono (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Don't change the subject answer the question, Whose side would you be on?


Is there a side to take when a crime has been committed....?


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

nononono said:


> Is there a side to take when a crime has been committed....?


Like Dump committing fraud with Trump U?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

nononono said:


> Is there a side to take when a crime has been committed....?


Yes, even Charles Manson gets love letters . . . not from you I hope?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Like Dump committing fraud with Trump U?


A crude con, but it worked.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A crude con, but it worked.


Shitty fraudulent Trump U, more than anything else, sums up Dump's character.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Shitty fraudulent Trump U, more than anything else, sums up Dump's character.


At one time they were building a condo complex down in Rosarito with the Trump name on it. Big billboards down there, ads up here in the Un ion etc. never went far, everyone lost their money, like always.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> At one time they were building a condo complex down in Rosarito with the Trump name on it. Big billboards down there, ads up here in the Un ion etc. never went far, everyone lost their money, like always.


I know all about it, my brother-in-law is a Realtor in Baja. Dump is a failure magnet.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That evil bitch was siding with families over corporate interests! That's just un-American (nutter style)!


What were their corporate interest?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Don't change the subject answer the question, Whose side would you be on?


Depends.  Drama or documentary?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Like Dump committing fraud with Trump U?


You must be really happy HRC lost in a route.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Shitty fraudulent Trump U, more than anything else, sums up Dump's character.


You talking about character? Please, shitface.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You must be really happy HRC lost in a route.


HRC has no relevance to the discussion, stay on target.  Just pointing out nonuts hypocrisy.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You talking about character? Please, shitface.


You can yell when the nutters get frustrated, the name calling sets in.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You must be really happy HRC lost in a route.


Are you British? "route" may not have been the word you wanted to use.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> At one time they were building a condo complex down in Rosarito with the Trump name on it. Big billboards down there, ads up here in the Un ion etc. never went far, everyone lost their money, like always.


I see you've forgotten the Tequila Crisis and the Clinton approval to bail out the American banks at the urging of then Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin.  Those banks should have been allowed to fail.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I see you've forgotten the Tequila Crisis and the Clinton approval to bail out the American banks at the urging of then Treasury Secretary Bob Rubin.  Those banks should have been allowed to fail.


Wtf??  Iz has gone too long without mentioning money supply...


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> I know all about it, my brother-in-law is a Realtor in Baja. Dump is a failure magnet.


So your brother in law is in the business of ripping people off?
Not surprising, compliance boy.


----------



## Wez (Jul 6, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> So your brother in law is in the business of ripping people off?
> Not surprising, compliance boy.


Been drinkin again?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> HRC has no relevance to the discussion, stay on target.  Just pointing out nonuts hypocrisy.


Just saying the felon HRC would have really been bad.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you British? "route" may not have been the word you wanted to use.


How did you know?


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> Been drinkin again?


*Trump vs CNN: ULTIMATE MEME COMPILATION!*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> *Trump vs CNN: ULTIMATE MEME COMPILATION!*


I like the boxer.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> So your brother in law is in the business of ripping people off?
> Not surprising, compliance boy.


First the main news agencies are labeled "Fake news" in an attempt to bolster the Trumpian preferred Breitbart, infowars and the like. Now it's "everyone is a rip off" in an attempt to make The Donalds business practices look normal? Or do you just think all businesses in Mexico are ripping people off?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Just saying the felon HRC would have really been bad.


What was she convicted of? Did she seek immunity? Did she lawyer up like the whole Trump cabinet did?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What was she convicted of? Did she seek immunity? Did she lawyer up like the whole Trump cabinet did?


Nonono.  She didn't win the election.  Remember?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Wez said:


> Been drinkin again?


"again?" Does it ever stop?


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 7, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I like the boxer.


I think the Trump/Julius Cesar one, where they put CNN logo over Trump/Cesar's face is the best.


----------



## Bernie Sanders (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> First the main news agencies are labeled "Fake news" in an attempt to bolster the Trumpian preferred Breitbart, infowars and the like. Now it's "everyone is a rip off" in an attempt to make The Donalds business practices look normal? Or do you just think all businesses in Mexico are ripping people off?


I got a condo in Baja for you. lol.


----------



## xav10 (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What was she convicted of? Did she seek immunity? Did she lawyer up like the whole Trump cabinet did?


that's a great question. i remember watergate and tom delay and lots of other, mostly republican, convictions, but not hers!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What was she convicted of? Did she seek immunity? Did she lawyer up like the whole Trump cabinet did?


No, did she commit a felony?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Bernie Sanders said:


> I got a condo in Baja for you. lol.


I see, you fell for it and now are bitter towards any Baja real estate ventures, sorry you lost your money to a con artist like Don the con.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> No, did she commit a felony?


Are you in the habit of calling those you disagree with felons? Talk about a third world mentality!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you in the habit of calling those you disagree with felons? Talk about a third world mentality!


I haven't called you, wez, andy, booty, fries or x5 1/2  a felon, have I? So the answer is no.
I see you choose not to answer my question though, I understand.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I haven't called you, wez, andy, booty, fries or x5 1/2  a felon, have I? So the answer is no.
> I see you choose not to answer my question though, I understand.


Why do you say felon HRC?

No one calls Flynn a felon . . . yet.


----------



## Booter (Jul 7, 2017)

Republican's understanding of Economics on display.  I'm sure it all makes sense to the Fox news zombies.

"Here's a little economics lesson: supply and demand. You put the supply out there, and the demand will follow," US Secretary of Energy Rick Perry

http://www.businessinsider.com/rick-perry-supply-and-demand-2017-7

And he even wears glasses.  Maybe he needs to add a professor's pipe to his costume.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Booter said:


> And he even wears glasses.  Maybe he needs to add a professor's pipe to his costume.


Watch out now, along that line of thinking you are almost repeating Trump from back when he claimed to think Perry was a joke . . . then he appointed him due to lack of volunteers.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Why do you say felon HRC?
> 
> No one calls Flynn a felon . . . yet.


Comey called her a felon, didn't you watch the press conference?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Watch out now, along that line of thinking you are almost repeating Trump from back when he claimed to think Perry was a joke . . . then he appointed him due to lack of volunteers.


You seem like you are in a good mood today.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 7, 2017)

Booter said:


> Republican's understanding of Economics on display.  I'm sure it all makes sense to the Fox news zombies.
> 
> "Here's a little economics lesson: supply and demand. You put the supply out there, and the demand will follow," US Secretary of Energy Rick Perry
> 
> ...


Irony alert


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Watch out now, along that line of thinking you are almost repeating Trump from back when he claimed to think Perry was a joke . . . then he appointed him due to lack of volunteers.


Supply and demand at work.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 7, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I haven't called you, wez, andy, booty, fries or x5 1/2  a felon, have I? So the answer is no.
> I see you choose not to answer my question though, I understand.


Good luck trying to reason with the Daftone....


----------



## Booter (Jul 7, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Irony alert


A simple thought from a simple mind from someone who spends way too much time on message boards - tell us again how Austria has a libertarian economy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 7, 2017)

Booter said:


> A simple thought from a simple mind from someone who spends way too much time on message boards - tell us again how Austria has a libertarian economy.


Again?  You call it simple, I call it efficient.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 7, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Supply and demand at work.


. . . but which comes first?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 7, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . but which comes first?


If you build it, they will come.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 5, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/the-most-important-invention-you-never-thought-about/

*The Most Important Invention You Never Thought About*

It was the container more than anything else, which made possible the huge growth in world trade.


----------



## Wez (Aug 6, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> https://fee.org/articles/the-most-important-invention-you-never-thought-about/
> 
> *The Most Important Invention You Never Thought About*
> 
> It was the container more than anything else, which made possible the huge growth in world trade.


The amount of goods on big container ships boggles the mind.  

"This year's new class of container ship, the Triple E. When it goes into service this June, it will be the largest vessel ploughing the sea. Each will contain as much steel as eight Eiffel Towers and have a capacity equivalent to *18,000 20*-foot containers "


----------



## nononono (Aug 6, 2017)

Wez said:


> The amount of goods on big container ships boggles the mind.
> 
> "This year's new class of container ship, the Triple E. When it goes into service this June, it will be the largest vessel ploughing the sea. Each will contain as much steel as eight Eiffel Towers and have a capacity equivalent to *18,000 20*-foot containers "



*WOW !  A post that I could respond to with some sort of Compliment and click a " Like ". *
*Good for Wez.....don't know how long this will last, but nice informative post.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 12, 2017)

Where Do Prices Come From? 

https://fee.org/articles/where-do-prices-come-from/

*All prices (wages and interest too) are ultimately determined through a messy but beautiful process of discovering what is true and mutually beneficial. *


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 17, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 23, 2017)

*The ‘Fight For 15’ Is Another Tool For Big Businesses To Kill Competition*

https://fee.org/articles/the-fight-for-15-is-another-tool-for-big-businesses-to-kill-competition/

*The Real Beneficiaries*

For instance, if the minimum wage was $8 and the union wage was $40, employers give up 5 hours of low-skilled work for every union worker-hour utilized. But if the minimum hourly wage were increased to $10, employers would only be foregoing 4 hours of low-skilled work for every union worker-hour employed. Consequently, it is no wonder unions, whose self-interests are advanced whether or not low-skill workers benefit, are the primary backers of minimum wage campaigns.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 30, 2017)

https://fee.org/articles/the-man-who-sowed-the-seeds-of-puerto-ricos-collapse/

*The Man Who Sowed the Seeds of Puerto Rico’s Collapse*


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Sep 30, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> https://fee.org/articles/the-man-who-sowed-the-seeds-of-puerto-ricos-collapse/
> 
> *The Man Who Sowed the Seeds of Puerto Rico’s Collapse*


USA will rebuild and bail out as usual.
There will probably be no thank you.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Sep 30, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> USA will rebuild and bail out as usual.
> There will probably be no thank you.


Another example of the everyman for himself ideology, no love for the misfortunate . . . how Catholic of you.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Sep 30, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Another example of the everyman for himself ideology, no love for the misfortunate . . . how Catholic of you.


What the hell?
I said we would rebuild and bail out as usual.
Probably without a thank you, thank you.

This is one of your standards, btw. "everyman for himself"  lol.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 30, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> USA will rebuild and bail out as usual.
> There will probably be no thank you.


But a lot of F-you's.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 30, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Another example of the everyman for himself ideology, no love for the misfortunate . . . how Catholic of you.


You mean like Roosevelt love you racist.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 30, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> What the hell?
> I said we would rebuild and bail out as usual.
> Probably without a thank you, thank you.
> 
> This is one of your standards, btw. "everyman for himself"  lol.


So Vanilla isn't he?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Sep 30, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So Vanilla isn't he?


I have a list of his simple mindedness.
The list only goes up to five.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 30, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I have a list of his simple mindedness.
> The list only goes up to five.


I didn't know Vanilla was so varied.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Sep 30, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I didn't know Vanilla was so varied.


There are hundreds of variations of vanilla.
Rat, five.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 30, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> There are hundreds of variations of vanilla.
> Rat, five.


Part of his racist bent I guess.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 2, 2017)

Somebody Q Wez's crying baby.  I guess I hurt his feelings this morn'.


----------



## Wez (Oct 2, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Somebody Q Wez's crying baby.  I guess I hurt his feelings this morn'.


Dream on.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 2, 2017)

Wez said:


> Dream on.


I'm your sheep dog while you count sheep.


----------



## Wez (Oct 2, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm your sheep dog while you count sheep.


You're barely off ignore, stop with the delusions of grandeur...


----------



## nononono (Oct 2, 2017)

Wez said:


> Dream on.


*We Dream that one Day you will have an epiphany and straighten*
*your act up !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 2, 2017)

Wez said:


> You're barely off ignore, stop with the delusions of grandeur...


Don't flatter yourself.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 2, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> What the hell?
> I said we would rebuild and bail out as usual.
> Probably without a thank you, thank you.
> 
> This is one of your standards, btw. "everyman for himself"  lol.


So you are saying you see that in a positive light or will you go noncommittal like always?


----------



## nononono (Oct 2, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you are saying you see that in a positive light or will you go noncommittal like always?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 12, 2017)

*The Tyranny of Administrative Power*
https://fee.org/articles/the-tyranny-of-administrative-power/

The most dangerous threat to freedom doesn't come from the President or the legislature, but from unelected officials making unchecked decisions.


----------



## xav10 (Oct 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The ‘Fight For 15’ Is Another Tool For Big Businesses To Kill Competition*
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/the-fight-for-15-is-another-tool-for-big-businesses-to-kill-competition/
> 
> ...


From the article, it sounds like unions argue for minimum wage hikes because it benefits them and also harms non-union labor.
So they make more money. What are they doing wrong then? I didn't really get the part about how it helps big business.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 12, 2017)

xav10 said:


> From the article, it sounds like unions argue for minimum wage hikes because it benefits them and also harms non-union labor.
> So they make more money. What are they doing wrong then? I didn't really get the part about how it helps big business.


Big businesses can sustain government mandated incremental wage increases where small business cannot.  Big business isn't doing anything wrong.  Government is.


----------



## xav10 (Oct 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Big businesses can sustain government mandated incremental wage increases where small business cannot.  Big business isn't doing anything wrong.  Government is.


well, if you take that libertarian-ish view that markets work when everyone acts in their best interest, you have a point...and big business isn't doing anything wrong. the problem is the government's "best interest" is big business, so that skews things. the unions aren't doing anything wrong either. but  small business people 
don't have groups like organized labor or the chamber of commerce or the elected officials helping them. it's a bummer.


----------



## nononono (Oct 12, 2017)

xav10 said:


> well, if you take that libertarian-ish view that markets work when everyone acts in their best interest, you have a point...and big business isn't doing anything wrong. the problem is the government's "best interest" is big business, so that skews things. the unions aren't doing anything wrong either. but  small business people
> don't have groups like organized labor or the chamber of commerce or the elected officials helping them. it's a bummer.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 12, 2017)

xav10 said:


> well, if you take that libertarian-ish view that markets work when everyone acts in their best interest, you have a point...and big business isn't doing anything wrong. the problem is the government's "best interest" is big business, so that skews things. the unions aren't doing anything wrong either. but  small business people
> don't have groups like organized labor or the chamber of commerce or the elected officials helping them. it's a bummer.


Both the Union and Government extract wages from business rather than letting the market decide.


----------



## tenacious (Oct 12, 2017)

Wez said:


> You're barely off ignore, stop with the delusions of grandeur...


lol


----------



## tenacious (Oct 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Both the Union and Government extract wages from business rather than letting the market decide.


Death and taxes bubbs.  Such is life. 
Personally I've found rather then crying about what the world owes me, that if I rolling up my sleeves and getting to work always ends in a better place.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 12, 2017)

tenacious said:


> Death and taxes bubbs.  Such is life.
> Personally I've found rather then crying about what the world owes me, that if I rolling up my sleeves and getting to work always ends in a better place.


Thatʻs what I meant by letting the market decide.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 12, 2017)




----------



## xav10 (Oct 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Both the Union and Government extract wages from business rather than letting the market decide.


Actually the opposite. The government subsidizes business, primarily big business.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 13, 2017)

xav10 said:


> Actually the opposite. The government subsidizes business, primarily big business.


And where does government extract those subsidies from?


----------



## xav10 (Oct 13, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And where does government extract those subsidies from?


taxpayers.


----------



## nononono (Oct 13, 2017)

xav10 said:


> taxpayers.



*Do Ambulance Chasers pay a mobile Tax ?*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 13, 2017)

xav10 said:


> taxpayers.





xav10 said:


> taxpayers.


Then they give those subsidies to big business.  See the problem now?


----------



## xav10 (Oct 13, 2017)

yup. all a small businessperson wants to do now is sell out to the big businesses.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 13, 2017)

xav10 said:


> yup. all a small businessperson wants to do now is sell out to the big businesses.


That is government being pro-business as opposed to pro-market.  Subsidies always distort the market and people typically see subsidies to big business as a failure of markets when really it is a failure of government distorting markets, whether health care, banking/real estate, energy, etc., by artificially driving up product and asset prices through subsidies.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 14, 2017)

*The Numbers Are in: Social Security Robs the Working Poor*

The Social Security Administration's own numbers reveal that a private investment pays more than Social Security.

https://fee.org/articles/the-numbers-are-in-social-security-robs-the-working-poor/


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 14, 2017)

tenacious said:


> Death and taxes bubbs.  Such is life.
> Personally I've found rather then crying about what the world owes me, that if I rolling up my sleeves and getting to work always ends in a better place.


I love when we agree.
It happens when you say something smart.
Let it happen more often.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 14, 2017)

Back in 2011, investment guru Warren Buffett famously complained in the _New York Times _that his secretaries were paying higher federal payroll tax rates than he was:

Our leaders have asked for 'shared sacrifice.' But when they did the asking, they spared me.... what I paid was only 17.4 percent of my taxable income – and that’s actually a lower percentage than was paid by any of the other 20 people in our office. Their tax burdens ranged from 33 percent to 41 percent and averaged 36 percent.”

Buffett used some creative accounting for his numbers; he used only “taxable income,” which means he didn't count all the deductions his employees were using to write off their income taxes. For middle-class workers making about $75,000 per year, that's typically a heavy percentage of their income. Moreover, for the tax rates Buffett claimed applied to his assistants, they must have been paid in the range of $200,000 per year or more.

Despite Buffett's accounting trickery, there was a level of truth to his complaint: the burden of Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes does fall almost exclusively upon the poor and middle classes. And Buffett acknowledged this fact in his _New York Times _op-ed:

The mega-rich pay income taxes at a rate of 15 percent on most of their earnings but pay practically nothing in payroll taxes. It’s a different story for the middle class: typically, they fall into the 15 percent and 25 percent income tax brackets, and then are hit with heavy payroll taxes to boot.”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 14, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I love when we agree.
> It happens when you say something smart.
> Let it happen more often.


As long as tenacious doesn't mind rolling up his sleeves and gettin' to work so he can pay not just for his families healthcare but, the healthcare of those who do cry about what the world owes them.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> As long as tenacious doesn't mind rolling up his sleeves and gettin' to work so he can pay not just for his families healthcare but, the healthcare of those who do cry about what the world owes them.


I just took the statement on its own.
It sounds like something I would say.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 14, 2017)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I love when we agree.
> It happens when you say something smart.
> Let it happen more often.


He must have been hacked.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2017)

*Rule of Experts*

The impact that the field of economics has on our daily lives is not easily recognized by the majority of people. Preoccupied with our immediate needs and daily tasks, the state of the economy not only seems disconnected from our lives, it feels almost completely irrelevant.

And since something as complex as the national economy is usually left to the great “experts” to decide, many also assume that it is an issue completely out of their control. This presumption is something economic planners rely on to maintain their authority.

But economics is intrinsically connected to almost every single aspect of our lives. From the clothes we wear to the food we eat, to our jobs and our education: economics is in all things. And without economic freedom, there can be no liberty. Period.

*Anyone having any doubts that economic control will necessarily lead to tyranny and oppression, need only look to Venezuela.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2017)

*Why Detest Commercial Freedom?*

It has always been peculiar to me that socialists believe so fervently in social freedom and yet detest economic liberty. This is why many proponents of socialism and other forms of state control will advocate for economic restrictions, without a concern for civil liberties. They believe them to be separate entities, each existing without impacting the other.

But once economic control has been seized by the government, the stripping of our individual rights will soon follow. And today, we have the unfortunate opportunity of witnessing a once prosperous country completely succumb to the tragedy of a controlled economy.

The situation in Venezuela has become so dire, it would fit perfectly into the plot of any dystopian novel. What started as an economic crisis has now escalated to a humanitarian nightmare of which there appears to be no end in sight.


----------



## xav10 (Oct 26, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Why Detest Commercial Freedom?*
> 
> It has always been peculiar to me that socialists believe so fervently in social freedom and yet detest economic liberty. This is why many proponents of socialism and other forms of state control will advocate for economic restrictions, without a concern for civil liberties. They believe them to be separate entities, each existing without impacting the other.
> 
> ...


The USA is probably further from their model than any country on the planet, yet you always bring up Venezuela as an analogy. It’s really the strangest thing.


----------



## Wez (Oct 26, 2017)

xav10 said:


> The USA is probably further from their model than any country on the planet, yet you always bring up Venezuela as an analogy. It’s really the strangest thing.


It's like a mental patient in the corner babbling Venezuela over and over... I try to avoid eye contact and ignore it.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 26, 2017)

xav10 said:


> The USA is probably further from their model than any country on the planet, yet you always bring up Venezuela as an analogy. It’s really the strangest thing.


It's because he is an idiot and seems to revel in that fact, they all do.


----------



## nononono (Oct 26, 2017)

xav10 said:


> yup. all a small businessperson wants to do now is sell out to the big businesses.





Wez said:


> It's like a mental patient in the corner babbling Venezuela over and over... I try to avoid eye contact and ignore it.



*Look at the above two posts......something just jumps out from both.*

*Ah Yes...Stupidity.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2017)

xav10 said:


> The USA is probably further from their model than any country on the planet, yet you always bring up Venezuela as an analogy. It’s really the strangest thing.


Peculiar actually.  "It has always been peculiar to me that socialists believe so fervently in social freedom and yet detest economic liberty. *This is why many proponents of socialism and other forms of state control will advocate for economic restrictions, without a concern for civil liberties. *They believe them to be separate entities, each existing without impacting the other."


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2017)

Wez said:


> It's like a mental patient in the corner babbling Venezuela over and over... I try to avoid eye contact and ignore it.


Yup you ignore poor socialist countries while touting what you think are rich socialist countries, like Scandinavia, that are actually capitalist countries.  This is why many proponents of socialism and other forms of state control will advocate for economic restrictions, without a concern for civil liberties. They believe them to be separate entities, each existing without impacting the other.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's because he is an idiot and seems to revel in that fact, they all do.


Not in the mood for a discussion?  Take your time.  The rest of your class isn't far ahead.


----------



## xav10 (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yup you ignore poor socialist countries while touting what you think are rich socialist countries, like Scandinavia, that are actually capitalist countries.  This is why many proponents of socialism and other forms of state control will advocate for economic restrictions, without a concern for civil liberties. They believe them to be separate entities, each existing without impacting the other.


All the Scandinavians who wanna get really rich come here.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> It's like a mental patient in the corner babbling Venezuela over and over... I try to avoid eye contact and ignore it.


Of course you do.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's because he is an idiot and seems to revel in that fact, they all do.


You sound quite emotional.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yup you ignore poor socialist countries while touting what you think are rich socialist countries, like Scandinavia, that are actually capitalist countries.


Yet another attempt to rewrite history.  diz, you are a bald face liar.  Please tell me more about what I've said in the past:



Andy Dukes said:


> Would you consider the countries I mentioned socialist leaning countries?





Wez said:


> Socialism is both economic and political, so technically a Country with a Capitalist economic structure isn't Socialist.  Those Countries try to adopt some tenets from Socialism with varying degrees of success and so the term is viewed differently, depending on who you are talking to.  Right Wing and Retardarians point to Countries like Venezuela, that attempted Socialism and has failed horribly when the price of oil collapsed.
> 
> Socialism fails because people always prioritize their own benefits over others.  Those in power under Socialism always take care of their own before they spread the wealth.  That process snowballs throughout the economy resulting in chaos.


Democratic Socialism

Again, diz, you are a liar and fraud.


----------



## xav10 (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Yet another attempt to rewrite history.  diz, you are a bald face liar.  Please tell me more about what I've said in the past:
> 
> I
> 
> ...


I’m afraid poor Iz has a scratch in his grooves...the needle keeps bouncing back to Venezuela and Scandinavia! “Why” is the question we should all help him with.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

xav10 said:


> I’m afraid poor Iz has a scratch in his grooves...the needle keeps bouncing back to Venezuela and Scandinavia! “Why” is the question we should all help him with.


It's his lying that is troublesome, I'm not worried about the topics he chooses to obsess on.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not in the mood for a discussion?  Take your time.  The rest of your class isn't far ahead.


After watching your nonsense get knocked down time and time again as BS, and then you just sit there mouth agape drooling saying, "Nuh huh". Yes I truly believe you to be an imbecile and lack reasonable thought.


----------



## *GOBEARGO* (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After watching your nonsense get knocked down time and time again as BS, and then you just sit there mouth agape drooling saying, "Nuh huh". Yes I truly believe you to be an imbecile and lack reasonable thought.


Hypocrite.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

xav10 said:


> All the Scandinavians who wanna get really rich come here.


No, they just send their money here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Yet another attempt to rewrite history.  diz, you are a bald face liar.  Please tell me more about what I've said in the past:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And again.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And again.


Your response when busted lying.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

xav10 said:


> I’m afraid poor Iz has a scratch in his grooves...the needle keeps bouncing back to Venezuela and Scandinavia! “Why” is the question we should all help him with.


Funny you should choose the bouncing back of the needle to make your point.  Thatʻs exactly how Socialism works.  Leaders of countries keep dabbling in Socialism to find a different groove.  In reality they just make the same grooves deeper while other countries go digital. Nice analogy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> It's his lying that is troublesome, I'm not worried about the topics he chooses to obsess on.


Why would you mind the topics?  By your own admission You donʻt read them!  Not that I need you to admit that.  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After watching your nonsense get knocked down time and time again as BS, and then you just sit there mouth agape drooling saying, "Nuh huh". Yes I truly believe you to be an imbecile and lack reasonable thought.


Rats like the smell of humans on traps.  Contrary to popular belief.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

*GOBEARGO* said:


> Hypocrite.


Rat has been disciplined by the maze to keep trying while never finding his way.  Itʻs fun to watch his babbling.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> It's his lying that is troublesome, I'm not worried about the topics he chooses to obsess on.


Yeah, right.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Yet another attempt to rewrite history.  diz, you are a bald face liar.  Please tell me more about what I've said in the past:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Once again RFG, you are over matched, pretty comfortable position for you I'm sure.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Your response when busted lying.


Too lazy to read, too lazy to prove.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why would you mind the topics?  By your own admission You donʻt read them!  Not that I need you to admit that.  Lol!


I read what you actually type here, not your moronic links.  You should be embarrassed at what you type here.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Once again RFG, you are over matched, pretty comfortable position for you I'm sure.


Didn't read it uh?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Once again RFG, you are over matched, pretty comfortable position for you I'm sure.


He thinks he is arguing with me.  Heʻs not.  He is challenging the continuity of three sources regarding what Nye said.  To be honest I donʻt find what Nye said to be offensive.  Birth rates have been going down as countries get richer.  That didnʻt seem to stop you though.  Lol!!  Nye and his guest are a bit behind in their “wonderment”.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He thinks he is arguing with me.  Heʻs not.  He is challenging the continuity of three sources regarding what Nye said.  To be honest I donʻt find what Nye said to be offensive.  Birth rates have been going down as countries get richer.  That didnʻt seem to stop you though.  Lol!!  Nye and his guest are a bit behind in their “wonderment”.


Liar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Liar.


Show me.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Show me.


Again?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Again?


Yes.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.


You're trolling liar.


----------



## *GOBEARGO* (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> You're trolling liar.


Whiner.


----------



## nononono (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> It's his lying that is troublesome, I'm not worried about the topics he chooses to obsess on.



*You and your Liberal cohorts are the " Grade A " Lying Kings....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> You're trolling liar.


Facts are making you desperate.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Facts are making you desperate.


You don't deal in facts diz.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> You don't deal in facts diz.


Snopes and FEE do.  Seperate those facts so you can save face.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Snopes and FEE do.  Seperate those facts so you can save face.


Snopes does, as you learned from your deceptive cut and pasting activities here.


----------



## nononono (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Snopes does, as you learned from your deceptive cut and pasting activities here.


*Snopes is funded by Democratic operatives under the guise of *
*independent revenue......100 % Bullshit.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Snopes does, as you learned from your deceptive cut and pasting activities here.


 Dizzy does not learn.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Dizzy does not learn.


Learn?  He intentionally deceives...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> Learn?  He intentionally deceives...


He's not smart or slick enough to "deceive" anyone, he gets it thrown back in his face every time he tries it in here.


----------



## Wez (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He's not smart or slick enough to "deceive" anyone, he gets it thrown back in his face every time he tries it in here.


True, he just smiles and keeps on lying...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 27, 2017)

Wez said:


> True, he just smiles and keeps on lying...


That's more how I picture nono, except balding, worse teeth and dark holes for eyes like Sarah Huckabee  . . . and neurotic as all get out. Dizzy is heavy set, on the short side, thick glasses, small hands and ill fitting clothes.







http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/2014/01/cubicle-farming-desk-jockeys.html


----------



## nononono (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He's not smart or slick enough to "deceive" anyone, he gets it thrown back in his face every time he tries it in here.



*Look " Dip " and " Shit " are discussing Honesty !*


----------



## nononono (Oct 27, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's more how I picture nono, except balding, worse teeth and dark holes for eyes like Sarah Huckabee  . . . and neurotic as all get out. Dizzy is heavy set, on the short side, thick glasses, small hands and ill fitting clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*When ever you post a retort such as that it makes me Laugh !*

*You the worn out Iron Worker with Leather for skin, Bad Breath/Teeth, Alcoholic vein map nose and a Hair line like a Soup bowl......*

*Projecting, it's the beat down Union grunts Way....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

Wez said:


> Snopes does, as you learned from your deceptive cut and pasting activities here.


I did learn that had you, bootsie, i'ole or your sensei, E-reader, read the snopes article you would find no mention of FEE whatsoever.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Dizzy does not learn.


I've been un-learning the ways of you sheeple.


----------



## espola (Oct 28, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I did learn that had you, bootsie, i'ole or your sensei, E-reader, read the snopes article you would find no mention of FEE whatsoever.


That's true, however it mentions as examples other publications that made the same error as the FEE article.  Is that too difficult a concept for you to grasp?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

Wez said:


> Learn?  He intentionally deceives...


Not according to snopes or FEE.  Or Nye for that matter.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He's not smart or slick enough to "deceive" anyone, he gets it thrown back in his face every time he tries it in here.


Take some time to reset.  Come back when you're ready to have a grown up discussion.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

Wez said:


> True, he just smiles and keeps on lying...


Tag team desperation?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's more how I picture nono, except balding, worse teeth and dark holes for eyes like Sarah Huckabee  . . . and neurotic as all get out. Dizzy is heavy set, on the short side, thick glasses, small hands and ill fitting clothes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


ahhhhhhhh ha ha ha.  You guys crack me up.  I feel like I'm back in the 5th grade again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

espola said:


> That's true, however it mentions as examples other publications that made the same error as the FEE article.  Is that too difficult a concept for you to grasp?


If you can get past your Pavlovian seizure, please show me.


----------



## espola (Oct 28, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If you can get past your Pavlovian seizure, please show me.


Done already.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2017)

espola said:


> Done already.


Don't Tap out in front of your students.


----------



## nononono (Oct 29, 2017)

*Spola it must be a North East thing, you people will leach of the Government , but*
*when things go wrong you blame the Government.*

*Just like this letter that was sent by a Parent to President Truman from the Northeast in the fifties.....*
*Notice how he involves the Presidents daughter....*

*




*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2017)

*Your New Mailman Works for Amazon*
Forgive the term but capitalism is working, despite its poor reputation.

There he was dropping off packages in the mail room. I picked up mine and walked away. Then I did a double take. *The patch on his shoulder was not USPS, FedEx, or UPS. It was the familiar lower case “a” of Amazon.*

“Wait, do you actually work for Amazon?”

“Yes, sir.”

*“The company that sells things online now has its own warehouse-to-doorstep delivery service?”*

“Yes, it’s been around for a year, but expanding by the day. I love my job. It’s a great company.”

I am pretty sure I knew this, but it was only a news story until this moment. There is something about seeing it in real time, and meeting the person who is actually doing it, that makes the reality especially prescient.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2017)

*So Much for Monopoly*

*We should take time to appreciate what this means.* For many decades, the government monopolized mail, crushing competitors at every turn. It goes back to the 19th century. When the US government cracked down on private mail services in 1834, two thirds of existing services were private. Criminal penalties were imposed and they all gradually went away.

The rise of FedEx and UPS crawled through a loophole in the law. The government maintained its monopoly on first-class mail, but permitted exceptions for packages and special deliveries. Then came email. Once the monopoly was shattered, the government’s protected sector became nearly worthless, as we all know. People under the age of 30 hardly even go to their mailboxes anymore.

*Think about it: the government’s long-held control over mail was shattered not through reform or privatization but by technology, entrepreneurship, and the forward motion of history itself.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 21, 2017)

The real drama of our times is embedded inside these seemingly small improvements in how we live, all being delivered by private enterprise. *Forgive the term but capitalism is working, despite its poor reputation. It’s not the political parties that are doing this. It’s not the bureaucracies. It’s not even the Ivory Tower. The world is being made more beautiful by the profit-and-loss system that is working to serve you and me every day.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 21, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Your New Mailman Works for Amazon*
> Forgive the term but capitalism is working, despite its poor reputation.
> 
> There he was dropping off packages in the mail room. I picked up mine and walked away. Then I did a double take. *The patch on his shoulder was not USPS, FedEx, or UPS. It was the familiar lower case “a” of Amazon.*
> ...


I wonder how long the gubment will let this go on?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 22, 2017)

Seattle's Income Tax on 'the Rich' Has Collateral Damage: The Poor
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/11/seattles_income_tax_on_the_rich_has_collateral_damage_the_poor.html


----------



## nononono (Nov 24, 2017)

*Seattle is a mess period.....*

*Beautiful area, but still a mess.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Seattle's Income Tax on 'the Rich' Has Collateral Damage: The Poor
> http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/11/seattles_income_tax_on_the_rich_has_collateral_damage_the_poor.html


_"According to Seattle, the state constitution’s protection for property should not protect anyone who lives paycheck-to-paycheck."_

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/11/seattles_income_tax_on_the_rich_has_collateral_damage_the_poor.html#ixzz4zPgSOTqv 
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook "


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 24, 2017)

*The EU Declares War on Supermarkets*
The EU seems to view every problem with the marketplace, both real and imagined, to be evidence of a conspiracy against consumers and, therefore, should be regulated in some way.

https://fee.org/articles/the-eu-declares-war-on-supermarkets/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 25, 2017)

I went to a Daily Mass on Black Friday last year. The priest didn’t waste too much time with the homily, but he made a few comments about Thanksgiving and a statement about Black Friday which I found hopefully refreshing. He said, “This is a day for the poor.” Of course, he’s right, but how often do we think of Black Friday in those terms? As Thanksgiving and Black Friday approach once again, let us reflect on this concise but incredibly profound statement.--Cole Harter


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 25, 2017)

*It’s Not About Greed*

Black Friday is truly one of the most beautiful examples of capitalism we have around these days. It’s a day when everyone gets richer. The producers get richer because more people are buying their wonderful products, and the consumers get richer because they both come into possession of something they greatly value and because they save a little of their hard earned money in the process. This is what capitalism is all about: mutual enrichment through mutual gift-giving.


Judging by his accent and the color of his skin, this priest is almost certainly an immigrant from a very poor country. He definitely understands poverty, and the fact that he sees something charitable and Christian in a day so often sneered at by Catholics and upper-middle-class Americans in general for its apparent celebration of consumerism and materialism is extremely enlightening. The truth is Black Friday benefits the poor and the working class most of all. The rich don’t need a discount. They buy what they want regardless of the price.

But Black Friday is a day when the fruits of our labor are more abundant and more available for more people. Think about this next time you mock some single mother on food stamps for taking part in a "doorbuster" crowd while trying to get a discount Christmas present for her children. It can be tumultuous, but it’s also a glorious celebration of the humanitarian implications of the free market.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 25, 2017)

*Suspend Judgment*

It’s very easy for people to sit back on Black Friday and exempt themselves from the rat race, to hold themselves above all those plebs scrambling for a television at half-price. The neo-Marxist left, and regrettably some libertarians, like to tsk-tsk at these people for being so foolish as to think “useless junk” like TVs and children’s toys and gaming consoles are worth such revelries.


This is the great tragedy of the political philosopher, who thinks he knows what’s best for everyone. “You don’t really need that TV, you don’t really need that new pair of shoes.” To these people I say, get off your morally superior high horse. Who are you to say what people need and don’t need? *That is the beauty of voluntaryism and capitalism: it is a descriptive, and not a prescriptive, worldview. Nobody is required, let alone qualified, to decide what’s best for everyone else.* In a truly free market, free from government coercion and cronyism, everyone is able to allocate for themselves what resources, goods, and services they deem most valuable and essential.

Mostly we think of Black Friday as a day of crass consumerism, of greed, and irrational attachment to material goods. But just look how good life is. The free market has yielded a surplus unthinkable to even the richest members of society as recent as two hundred years ago. So stop judging and celebrate abundance.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 5, 2017)

*There Is No Such Thing as Poverty in Hong Kong*

One of the great injustices of our age is, as _The Guardian_ reported, that 20 percent of the people in Hong Kong, one of the richest places on the planet, live in poverty.

All is not quite as it seems though. The actual correct statement is that as well as being one of the richest places on the planet, Hong Kong is also one of the more unequal rich places. That isn’t quite so serious.

.....................

*But giggles aside, there’s an important underlying point: inequality – not poverty – is being measured here.* The international definition of poverty is less than $1.90 a day. There’s no one in Hong Kong on this at all, therefore there’s no poverty. There are, however, people in Hong Kong who have much less than others. And it’s entirely true that Hong Kong is more unequal than most of the developed world. But it’s still not true that relative poverty and poverty are the same thing.

https://fee.org/articles/there-is-no-such-thing-as-poverty-in-hong-kong/


----------



## xav10 (Dec 6, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Suspend Judgment*
> 
> It’s very easy for people to sit back on Black Friday and exempt themselves from the rat race, to hold themselves above all those plebs scrambling for a television at half-price. The neo-Marxist left, and regrettably some libertarians, like to tsk-tsk at these people for being so foolish as to think “useless junk” like TVs and children’s toys and gaming consoles are worth such revelries.
> 
> ...


Thanks man. Now I can buy that Bentley and not feel like an asshole? Please tell my wife!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 6, 2017)

xav10 said:


> Thanks man. Now I can buy that Bentley and not feel like an asshole? Please tell my wife!


I'll tell her.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 6, 2017)

xav10 said:


> Thanks man. Now I can buy that Bentley and not feel like an asshole? Please tell my wife!


I sub contracted your request out to the Sheriff.  He has a way with women.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2017)

*Even If Marine Le Pen Goes Away, Economic Illiteracy Won't*
Most of France —* and the rest of the world — are deeply ignorant of economic truths.
http://www.socalsoccer.com/threads/essential-economics-for-politicians.694/page-59#post-144785*

*If free-marketeers are sincere about their attempt to change the political landscape, they need to start at the bottom by educating people.*


----------



## xav10 (Dec 10, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *There Is No Such Thing as Poverty in Hong Kong*
> 
> One of the great injustices of our age is, as _The Guardian_ reported, that 20 percent of the people in Hong Kong, one of the richest places on the planet, live in poverty.
> 
> ...


You can’t be this stupid.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2017)

xav10 said:


> You can’t be this stupid.


No I can't.  But enough about me.  Have you ever been to Hong Kong?


----------



## xav10 (Dec 10, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No I can't.  But enough about me.  Have you ever been to Hong Kong?


Three times. There’s a lot of poverty in Kowloon.. The government increases the minimum wage periodically and is introducing universal pensions to try to alleviate it. All civilized economies have substantial government intervention. We have less than most others.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 10, 2017)

xav10 said:


> Three times. There’s a lot of poverty in Kowloon.. The government increases the minimum wage periodically and is introducing universal pensions to try to alleviate it. All civilized economies have substantial government intervention. We have less than most others.


We have more freedom than all others...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2017)

xav10 said:


> Three times. There’s a lot of poverty in Kowloon.. The government increases the minimum wage periodically and is introducing universal pensions to try to alleviate it. All civilized economies have substantial government intervention. We have less than most others.


What years were you there?


----------



## xav10 (Dec 10, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What years were you there?


94 96 and 98


----------



## xav10 (Dec 10, 2017)

Lion Eyes said:


> We have more freedom than all others...


More than Italians or French? How so?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2017)

xav10 said:


> 94 96 and 98


What is your definition of poverty in Kowloon?


----------



## nononono (Dec 11, 2017)

*No Jones !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

*Pope Francis Is Mistaken about Free Markets*
Free market capitalism does not increase inequality; it decreases it.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 12, 2017)

Are conservatives ever right?

The question isn’t meant to suggest that liberals are never wrong. But reviewing the last few decades of conservative policy initiatives—or their objections over that timespan to policies they hate—shows a consistent pattern of failure: predictions never pan out, and intended results turn to catastrophic flops.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/politics/2014/11/conservative-nonsense-political-history


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are conservatives ever right?


In case you forgot who your POTUS is, Yes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The question isn’t meant to suggest that liberals are never wrong. https://www.vanityfair.com/news/politics/2014/11/conservative-nonsense-political-history


Oh good.  He should have stopped right there before he launched in to his whataboutism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Pope Francis Is Mistaken about Free Markets*
> Free market capitalism does not increase inequality; it decreases it.





> *Meeting with global-finance students recently at the Chartreux Institute in Lyon, France, Pope Francis warned them “to remain free from the lure of money, from the slavery in which money traps those who worship it.” He also counseled them not to “blindly obey the invisible hand of the market” but rather to become “promoters and defenders of a growth in equality.”*


Lighten up Francis and stick to the word.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Even though I’m a professional economist, I am sympathetic to Pope Francis’s remarks. Indeed, I think many of my colleagues are too quick to dismiss criticisms of the market as being unsophisticated, and they ignore the wise sentiments that motivate the popular distrust of capitalism. In the Independent Institute’s new collection of essays, Pope Francis and the Caring Society, my fellow contributors and I did our best to grapple with the pope’s calls for social justice as we unapologetically defended the benefits of private property and market prices. 

Regarding his specific remarks to the students in Lyon, I hope we can all agree with Pope Francis that the lure of money is indeed a trap for those who _worship_ it (as he put it). The Bible teaches that the love of money is “the root of all evil,” and people of all religious traditions — or none at all — can surely recognize that the single-minded pursuit of material wealth is no way to live.--Bob Murphy


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Pope Francis Is Mistaken about Free Markets*
> Free market capitalism does not increase inequality; it decreases it.


The pope is wrong all the time.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The pope is wrong all the time.


*But He's Not Entirely Correct*

Having agreed with the pope thus far, where I strongly differ is in *his dismissal of the “invisible hand.”* It’s not merely that I think Pope Francis needs to better appreciate the workings of the market economy. *As a Christian myself, I think Adam Smith’s famous metaphor illustrates a pattern in the way a loving God deals with His fallen children. *

To set the context, in his treatise The Wealth of Nations (1776), Adam Smith famously wrote, 

By preferring the support of domestic to that of foreign industry, [an individual] intends only his own security; and by directing that industry in such a manner as its produce may be of the greatest value, he intends only his own gain, and he is in this, as in many other cases, led by an invisible hand to promote an end which was no part of his intention. 

*Smith is showing that the government doesn’t need to promote domestic industry, because individuals who seek only their own narrow gain will do so on their own. *

*This helps us see that Pope Francis has set up a false dichotomy:* *He seems to be urging those entering the financial sector to ignore market signals and personal gain in order to better help the poor and downtrodden.* Yet Adam Smith’s point was that people who are pursuing personal gain — as long as their activity relies on exchanges that are consensual among all participants — end up unwittingly promoting the welfare of others. *In modern times, the only way to become a billionaire in the free market is to create a new product or service that millions of people want or enjoy.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 12, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The pope is wrong all the time.


Oh my! How dare you disparage the leader of the Catholic Church and the millions of devout Catholics that look to him for supreme guidance . . . isn't that right Lion Eyes? I mean really if it is wrong for wez to do . . . ?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh my! How dare you disparage the leader of the Catholic Church and the millions of devout Catholics that look to him for supreme guidance . . . isn't that right Lion Eyes? I mean really if it is wrong for wez to do . . . ?


The Pope Knows as much about economics as you do.  That makes him wrong all the time RFG 2


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 12, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Pope Knows as much about economics as you do.  That makes him wrong all the time RFG 2


Funny coming from Dizzy the prophet of no profit.


----------



## nononono (Dec 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Funny coming from Dizzy the prophet of no profit.


*The Joe McGee has spoken, and as sloppy as can be is he....*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh my! How dare you disparage the leader of the Catholic Church and the millions of devout Catholics that look to him for supreme guidance . . . isn't that right Lion Eyes? I mean really if it is wrong for wez to do . . . ?


The Pope's a nut. If any of those Catholics need advice, I am willing to guide them.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 12, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Funny coming from Dizzy the prophet of no profit.


Funny coming from the guy that is only worth $2 more an hour after 10 years.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 13, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Funny coming from the guy that is only worth $2 more an hour after 10 years.


Sorry you don't understand how that works, or how anything works judging from your posting history. Besides the Republican caused recessions we've been through and the attempts at "trickledown economics" that have stifled the economy over the last 30+ years I've done fine . . . the $2? That was scale, on the check, I've always made over scale and unlike you have invested well. Sorry things haven't worked out for you and that you have become so bitter.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Sorry you don't understand how that works, or how anything works judging from your posting history. Besides the Republican caused recessions we've been through and the attempts at "trickledown economics" that have stifled the economy over the last 30+ years I've done fine . . . the $2? That was scale, on the check, I've always made over scale and unlike you have invested well. Sorry things haven't worked out for you and that you have become so bitter.


Iʻm not bitter now that I know you were only making .20 cents more a year for the last 10 years according to your stagnating wages post in which you tried to associate yourself with the stagnating wages of those folks that have long ago and continuously  moved on from those jobs that you assumed people work at throughout their whole life.   Nice reasoning RFG2. At .20 cents more a year you must be quite the investor.


----------



## xav10 (Dec 13, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are conservatives ever right?
> 
> The question isn’t meant to suggest that liberals are never wrong. But reviewing the last few decades of conservative policy initiatives—or their objections over that timespan to policies they hate—shows a consistent pattern of failure: predictions never pan out, and intended results turn to catastrophic flops.
> 
> https://www.vanityfair.com/news/politics/2014/11/conservative-nonsense-political-history


They don't care. They speak from the gut, not the brain. Their gut tells them that immigrants and taxes and minorities are screwing them over and if we throw out those types and get back to being "politically incorrect" and helping out the wealthy and the large corporations, then they'll be safer and their wages will go up and we will have more jobs. It's instinctual. They are not interested in any factual underpinnings or historical evidence of whether their beliefs are the correct solution or not. Emotions are more powerful than intellect...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2017)

xav10 said:


> They don't care. They speak from the gut, not the brain. Their gut tells them that immigrants and taxes and minorities are screwing them over and if we throw out those types and get back to being "politically incorrect" and helping out the wealthy and the large corporations, then they'll be safer and their wages will go up and we will have more jobs. It's instinctual. They are not interested in any factual underpinnings or historical evidence of whether their beliefs are the correct solution or not. Emotions are more powerful than intellect...


Thatʻs some powerful emotions youʻve got there!!  x10 even!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 13, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Iʻm not bitter now that I know you were only making .20 cents more a year for the last 10 years according to your stagnating wages post in which you tried to associate yourself with the stagnating wages of those folks that have long ago and continuously  moved on from those jobs that you assumed people work at throughout their whole life.   Nice reasoning RFG2. At .20 cents more a year you must be quite the investor.


 You have no idea, google Hunt brothers silver to see where it all began.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 13, 2017)

xav10 said:


> They don't care. They speak from the gut, not the brain. Their gut tells them that immigrants and taxes and minorities are screwing them over and if we throw out those types and get back to being "politically incorrect" and helping out the wealthy and the large corporations, then they'll be safer and their wages will go up and we will have more jobs. It's instinctual. They are not interested in any factual underpinnings or historical evidence of whether their beliefs are the correct solution or not. Emotions are more powerful than intellect...


It starts in their gut alright. It starts with the most basic of human emotions, fear, they are biologically more prone to respond irrationally to fear.

Peer-reviewed research shows that conservatives are more sensitive to threat. While this threat-bias can distort reality, fuel irrational fears, and make one more vulnerable to fear-mongering politicians, it could also promote hyper vigilance, perhaps making one better prepared to handle an immediate threat. 

*1. Conservatives tend to focus on the negative*
*2. Conservatives have a stronger physiological response to threat
3. Conservatives fear new experiences
4. Conservatives’ brains are more reactive to fear

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/mind-in-the-machine/201612/fear-and-anxiety-drive-conservatives-political-attitudes*


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Sorry you don't understand how that works, or how anything works judging from your posting history. Besides the Republican caused recessions we've been through and the attempts at "trickledown economics" that have stifled the economy over the last 30+ years I've done fine . . . the $2? That was scale, on the check, I've always made over scale and unlike you have invested well. Sorry things haven't worked out for you and that you have become so bitter.



*Hey Mr Sad Sack.....you work for a wage. That's your limit.*
*Anyone who runs a business works for a profit....*
*You can tell us you invest, you save your nuts, whatever you want...*
*Good for your. But YOU do NOT dictate your wage.*
*Your UNION does.*
*I on the other hand I control my destiny and my profitability...*
*I can expand and make as much as I want or I can stay stable and *
*watch the markets and the changes to see if increases are viable.*
*You are collared by you employer ( The Union ).*
*When they say jump, you ask how high.*

*That's why BI has you by the short hairs and a $ 2.00 raise.*


----------



## nononono (Dec 13, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It starts in their gut alright. It starts with the most basic of human emotions, fear, they are biologically more prone to respond irrationally to fear.
> 
> Peer-reviewed research shows that conservatives are more sensitive to threat. While this threat-bias can distort reality, fuel irrational fears, and make one more vulnerable to fear-mongering politicians, it could also promote hyper vigilance, perhaps making one better prepared to handle an immediate threat.
> 
> ...



*That's Fear right there in your post, and you own it.*

*You couldn't have made my task any easier !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You have no idea, google Hunt brothers silver to see where it all began.


That's a great story.  Where do you fit in?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2017)

*China Is Moving in the Right Direction on Tariffs*
Chinese consumers are now benefitting from more competition and lower prices.

https://fee.org/articles/china-is-moving-in-the-right-direction-on-tariffs/?utm_source=ribbon

On November 24, China’s Ministry of Finance announced that it would cut tariffs on 187 consumer products. The lower duty rate took effect on December 1, so Chinese consumers are now benefitting from more competition and lower prices. As noted in the announcement, the average tariff on the covered products will be brought down from 17.3% to 7.3%.

To give some specific examples, the tariff on cosmetics will be reduced from 10% to 5%; 30% to 10% for electronic toothbrushes; 32% to 10% for coffee makers; and 20% to 10% for mineral water. Baby formula and diapers will no longer face tariffs at all, dropping from 20% and 7.5%, respectively.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2017)

Nevertheless, the tariff reduction is a positive development. Commentary on this policy change suggests that the Chinese government’s goal here was, in part, to satisfy the demand of Chinese consumers and to improve the efficiency of Chinese production by introducing foreign competitors. These days, it is nice to see any government basing decisions on this kind of thinking. (And it may contribute to China soon becoming the world’s largest importer, as one report suggests.)

One can imagine that the Trump administration would try to take credit for this tariff reduction. All that badgering of China paid off, right? In reality, this is the fourth tariff cut since 2015. The previous three tariff cuts reduced tariffs on 152 consumer products totaling $11 billion per year in imports. This time the tariff cut has an even broader impact: Imports under this tariff cut are valued at up to $14 billion per year.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2017)

*Net Neutrality Isn't Neutral At All*
The Open Internet rules the FCC devised based on Title II authority expressly permit ISPs to block, filter and curate content.

https://fee.org/articles/net-neutrality-isnt-neutral-at-all/?utm_source=FEE+Email+Subscriber+List&utm_campaign=5c8e5cefac-MC_FEE_DAILY_2017_12_14&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_84cc8d089b-5c8e5cefac-108435785

One consideration in examining the empirical question is the history of the development of the internet in the period from the 90s to the 2015 reclassification. The most significant tech policy that applied to the early internet was the 1996 Congressional update to Title 47 telecom law in Section 230, which carved out significant legal space for an environment of permissionless online innovation.

The early 90s internet was basically just a few big newspapers and a bit of porn (with pics taking upwards of 45 frustrating seconds to load). You might check your email or maybe buy a few books (instead of, well, basically anything) on Amazon, too, but you would quickly run out of things to do. Anyway, you might need to free up the telephone line or want to turn on whatever Must See TV (literally must, since streaming options didn’t exist) happened to be programmed viewing at that precise moment.

*Power of Information*

But in this deregulated environment, in the span of only about 20 years, we now have access to an amazingly creative, entertaining, dynamic and connected virtual world that now even extends into meatspace (with Uber, AirBnB, etc., and driverless cars just around the corner). *All this happened, of course, without FCC-enforced net neutrality regulations.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2017)

Actually, the early 90s internet is a strikingly accurate picture of the worst dystopian fears of net neutrality advocates who want public utility regulation for ISPs. Then, we purchased access to the internet by purchasing access to content centers, like those curated by CompuServe or AOL. These ISPs only provided access to their associated content, forum sites and users. The wider world of the web was essentially blocked. Over time though, and pretty quickly, ISPs came around to the current model where they provide genuine access, and along with FAMGA, et al., some content, apps, and other services, as well.

*Again, all this happened without public utilities-style FCC prescriptive regulations. Are there reasons to think the pre-2015 environment was a bad basis for internet innovation and access to continue apace?*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2017)

*One worry* I have already alluded to concerns limited ISP competition. Most customers have at least two wireline competitors, but some still only have one. ISPs will, if they can, abuse situations where they have market power. *To the extent they have it, of course, they do because we mostly continue to live with the structure left over from when local telephone and cable networks were public monopolies.*

*But this sounds like a job for the FTC – to address complaints about anti-competitive practices (and, by the way, the FTC doesn’t have legal enforcement authority over Title II public utilities).* I think more should be done to promote ISP competition, but in addition to cable broadband services, there is also competitive pressure from cellular and satellite providers. *As long as barriers to market entry are sufficiently low, I would expect this pressure to induce ISPs to provide consumers with the internet they want.*


----------



## Wez (Dec 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Pope Francis Is Mistaken about Free Markets*
> Free market capitalism does not increase inequality; it decreases it.


Is someone here complaining about free market economies?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2017)

Wez said:


> Is someone here complaining about free market economies?


Just the Pope maybe.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 14, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It starts in their gut alright. It starts with the most basic of human emotions, fear, they are biologically more prone to respond irrationally to fear.
> 
> Peer-reviewed research shows that conservatives are more sensitive to threat. While this threat-bias can distort reality, fuel irrational fears, and make one more vulnerable to fear-mongering politicians, it could also promote hyper vigilance, perhaps making one better prepared to handle an immediate threat.
> 
> ...


So what you are trying to say is conservatives are realistic, aware, cautious and brave.
Thank you, finally you post the truth.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 14, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That's a great story.  Where do you fit in?


Is that Mike Hunt?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2017)

*Why Cutting the US Corporate Tax Rate Is Good Foreign Policy*

https://fee.org/articles/why-cutting-the-us-corporate-tax-rate-is-good-foreign-policy/?utm_source=ribbon

When Ronald Reagan slashed tax rates in America in the 1980s, the obvious direct effect was more prosperity in America. But the under-appreciated indirect effect of Reaganomics was that it helped generate more prosperity elsewhere in the world.

Not because Americans had higher income and could buy more products from home and abroad (though that is a nice fringe benefit), but rather because the Reagan tax cuts triggered a virtuous cycle of tax competition. Politicians in other countries had to lower their tax rates because of concerns that jobs and investment were migrating to America







(Margaret Thatcher also deserves some credit since she also dramatically reduced tax rates and put even more competitive pressure on other nations to do the same thing).

If you look at the data for developed nations, the average top income tax rate in 1980 was more than 67 percent. It’s now closer to 40 percent.

And because even countries like Germany and France enacted supply-side reforms, the global economy enjoyed a 25-year renaissance of growth and prosperity.


----------



## xav10 (Dec 15, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Why Cutting the US Corporate Tax Rate Is Good Foreign Policy*
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/why-cutting-the-us-corporate-tax-rate-is-good-foreign-policy/?utm_source=ribbon
> 
> ...


Huh?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 15, 2017)

xav10 said:


> Huh?


You wouldn't understand.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2017)

*No, It’s Actually the Rich Who Deserve a Tax Break*
The truth of the matter is that high-earners in America pay well beyond their fair share.

In technical terms, the ratio of the rich’s contribution to the tax pool to their share of national income is higher in the US than in European countries, e.g. Sweden, Germany, the UK, France, and so on. The Washington Post produced a fun graphic to illustrate this fun point (the figure relies on OECD data from 2008, before the expiration of the Bush tax cuts).







Observe that the top 10 percent of earners in the US make 33.5% of national income, yet are responsible for 45% of tax revenues; on the other hand, Sweden’s top 10 percent make 26.6% of national income, but shoulder exactly 26.6% of the tax burden. America’s ratio of 45/33.5 is the highest in the developed world, and thus our tax code is the most progressive.


----------



## xav10 (Dec 15, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You wouldn't understand.


i think the article says we reduced our tax rates and made the whole world more prosperous because they reduced their tax rates too. not very complicated, just silly and simplistic.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 15, 2017)

xav10 said:


> i think the article says we reduced our tax rates and made the whole world more prosperous because they reduced their tax rates too. not very complicated, just silly and simplistic.


What the hell is wrong with you? Simple is a good thing. You libs like to gum up the works with bullshit.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 15, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *No, It’s Actually the Rich Who Deserve a Tax Break*
> The truth of the matter is that high-earners in America pay well beyond their fair share.
> 
> In technical terms, the ratio of the rich’s contribution to the tax pool to their share of national income is higher in the US than in European countries, e.g. Sweden, Germany, the UK, France, and so on. The Washington Post produced a fun graphic to illustrate this fun point (the figure relies on OECD data from 2008, before the expiration of the Bush tax cuts).
> ...


Can't wait for the libs to justify this and talk shit on the tax bill at the same time.


----------



## xav10 (Dec 15, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Can't wait for the libs to justify this and talk shit on the tax bill at the same time.


it seems weird to mess with the economy at this moment, but i guess we will see. i don't have much of an opinion on the fairly confusing tax bill.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2017)

xav10 said:


> i think the article says we reduced our tax rates and made the whole world more prosperous because they reduced their tax rates too. not very complicated, just silly and simplistic.


Competition is pretty simple.  Anti-competitive/Anti-trust is where things get really complicated.  Politicians and attorneys like complicated.   "Lack of transparency is of great political advantage" in bilking the tax payer.


----------



## xav10 (Dec 15, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Competition is pretty simple.  Anti-competitive/Anti-trust is where things get really complicated.  Politicians and attorneys like complicated.   "Lack of transparency is of great political advantage" in bilking the tax payer.


From your posts, it's clear you have a very limited understanding of tax policy and who benefits. You seem to view lower taxes as being pro-competition, which could not be less correct. The entire tax system exists to benefit capital and not labor and large instead of small...it's very anti-competitive.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2017)

xav10 said:


> From your posts, it's clear you have a very limited understanding of tax policy and who benefits. You seem to view lower taxes as being pro-competition, which could not be less correct. The entire tax system exists to benefit capital and not labor and large instead of small...it's very anti-competitive.


I always enjoy it when you make my point for me albeit in a convoluted way.


----------



## nononono (Dec 16, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Is that Mike Hunt?



*He's related to Spola's cousin " Holden McGroin "*


----------



## nononono (Dec 16, 2017)

xav10 said:


> From your posts, it's clear you have a very limited understanding of tax policy and who benefits. You seem to view lower taxes as being pro-competition, which could not be less correct. The entire tax system exists to benefit capital and not labor and large instead of small...it's very anti-competitive.


*As usual .....you're full of Donkey Dung.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2017)

*We Need a New Name for "Trickle-Down" Economics*
The goal of economic policy ought to be to create enduring, widespread economic prosperity.--Chuck Baird

Keynesians, like all statists, assume that prosperity begins with government action.


----------



## Wez (Dec 18, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Keynesians, like all statists, assume that prosperity begins with government action.


Fake News


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Dec 18, 2017)

nononono said:


> *He's related to Spola's cousin " Holden McGroin "*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2017)

Wez said:


> Fake News


Just history.

The goal of economic policy ought to be to create enduring, widespread economic prosperity. The principal characteristic of widespread prosperity is high and growing employment at high and growing rates of compensation, and that requires prosperous employers who actively compete for the types of labor they need. Durable employment opportunities emerge from entrepreneurs and investors who provide the means for entrepreneurs to put their ideas into action. As successful enterprises emerge, competition for qualified labor increases.


----------



## Wez (Dec 18, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Just history.
> 
> The goal of economic policy ought to be to create enduring, widespread economic prosperity. The principal characteristic of widespread prosperity is high and growing employment at high and growing rates of compensation, and that requires prosperous employers who actively compete for the types of labor they need. Durable employment opportunities emerge from entrepreneurs and investors who provide the means for entrepreneurs to put their ideas into action. As successful enterprises emerge, competition for qualified labor increases.


Thanks for the non-sequiter cut and paste, my comment stands.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2017)

Wez said:


> Thanks for the non-sequiter cut and paste, my comment stands.


What comment?


----------



## Wez (Dec 18, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What comment?


Exactly, you don't even know what you're responding to.


----------



## nononono (Dec 18, 2017)

Wez said:


> Exactly, you don't even know what you're responding to.


*Wez's street name is Holden McGroin.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2017)

Wez said:


> Exactly, you don't even know what you're responding to.


Sorry RFG.  Clarity is not your strong point.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2017)

*Of Course the Alt-Right Is Against Capitalism*
If any tribe seeks to control the market, they will have to abolish it first.

https://fee.org/articles/of-course-the-alt-right-is-against-capitalism/

In the much-truncated and cartoonish remake in the presidential election of 2016, many observers noted the odd way in which it was difficult to distinguish the platforms of Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump: anti-trade, pro-"worker", promising universal health coverage, and generally railing against globalism and capitalist financial power. That they hated each other was not a surprise. This fits the narrative of history in which political tribes save their most vituperative attacks for those closest to them in outlook. 

(Fortunately for the American people, the winner of that election has come to discover that deregulation and tax cuts are more popular among the public than protectionism and executive centralization.) 

The alt-right’s turn toward overt anti-capitalism is neither surprising nor new nor counterintuitive. It doesn’t just stem from anti-Semitism, even if that is a seemingly inevitable part of it. Collectivism of all sorts and every form stands opposed to economic liberty. Just give it time: all types of collectivism end up sounding more or less like each other.


----------



## Wez (Dec 19, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Clarity is not your strong point.


Don't project your confusion to others.  You're the one who responded and had no idea what you responded to.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2017)

Wez said:


> Don't project your confusion to others.  You're the one who responded and had no idea what you responded to.


Now I recall.  Your scope was too narrow as usual.


----------



## Wez (Dec 19, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now I recall.  Your scope was too narrow as usual.


Show me.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2017)

Wez said:


> Show me.





Wez said:


> Fake News


Shown.


----------



## nononono (Dec 20, 2017)

Wez said:


> Show me.


*Childish is your Thinking.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 23, 2017)

*Free Markets Accomplish Progressives' Housing Ideals*
There is a blatant disconnect between the goals of progressives and the effects their policies on housing.







Rents rose faster than incomes in more progressive, coastal U.S. cities, while incomes rose faster than rents in more conservative cities such as Houston and Atlanta.

https://fee.org/articles/free-markets-accomplish-progressives-housing-ideals/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 23, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 23, 2017)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 23, 2017)

*History Is on the Side of Tax Cuts*
Fueled by low-tax, pro-growth economic policies, the 5.5 percent unemployment rate of 1960 dropped to 3.5 percent by 1969.

https://fee.org/articles/history-is-on-the-side-of-tax-cuts/

In his May 15, 2016 column “Why tax cuts work: The Trump plan means growth and jobs” in the Washington Times, economist Stephen Moore summarized how economic growth and tax revenues increased under the tax cut policies of Reagan and Kennedy:

Many times, tax rate cuts – including in the 1960s under John F. Kennedy and in the 1980s under Mr. Reagan – have raised tax revenues from the wealthiest tax filers because lower rates reduce incentives for tax avoidance and recharge the batteries of the economy and grow taxable incomes.

In both the 1960s and 1980s, supply-side tax cuts were followed by increased revenues. As Larry Kudlow puts it in his soon-to-be-released book on the JFK tax cuts: ‘We had six percent growth and the tax payments by the wealthiest filers nearly doubled. We had quarters of six percent growth back then.’ After the Reagan cuts, the share of taxes paid by the top 1 percent rose from 19 percent in 1980 to above 25 percent in 1988, according to IRS tax return data.’


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 23, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


*How nature proves men like Milton Friedman wrong*

*Markets and conservation*

This and other abuses of nature led to a conservation movement that has since rescued numerous other species of birds and wildlife from extinction. Yet as we speak, elephant populations in Africa are still being decimated, destroyed by markets both legal and illegal. These serve parts of the world ignorantly hungry for the ivory tusks of elephants. Some love ivory for its decorative qualities. Other think it an aphrodisiac. These are the 'separate interests' of individuals who clearly do not care if the last elephant in the world is shot by some poacher in a dry African field. This is raw capitalism at work. It cares not for conservation or tradition. It cares only about consumption. 

*Worldwide exodus*

We are in fact in the midst of a worldwide exodus of species bordering on the worst extinctions in geological history. In the past, these extinctions came about from natural disasters. Volcanism and meteor strikes helped change the climate, wiping out dinosaurs and even fish species. 

So it could be argued that extinction is all part of the natural process of the earth. Even the seminal comic George Carlin tried to point out this fact by branding environmentalists a silly, sentimental lot. But Carlin was wrong on this subject. Because all the world's economy depends on nature, and massive extinctions are a clear sign of both commodities and markets at risk. In other words, what Carlin deemed silly is no joke at all. 

*Holding commerce to account*

Milton Friedman may have been a brilliant economist. But he would have made a lousy biologist. Men like Friedman (and sheepdogs like Rush Limbaugh) refuse to admit that the human race and those billions of individuals pursuing their precious 'separate interests' are what's causing a massive failure of the one commodity none of us can afford to lose. That is nature. 

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-nature-proves-men-like-milton-friedman-wrong-christopher-cudworth


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2017)

> *How nature proves men like Milton Friedman wrong*
> 
> *Markets and conservation*
> 
> This and other abuses of nature led to a conservation movement that has since rescued numerous other species of birds and wildlife from extinction. Yet as we speak, elephant populations in Africa are still being decimated, destroyed by markets both legal and illegal. These serve parts of the world ignorantly hungry for the ivory tusks of elephants. Some love ivory for its decorative qualities. Other think it an aphrodisiac. These are the 'separate interests' of individuals who clearly do not care if the last elephant in the world is shot by some poacher in a dry African field. This is raw capitalism at work. It cares not for conservation or tradition. It cares only about consumption.




Too extreme for capitalism.  This is a property rights issue.  Government in Africa is failing the elephants.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2017)

*Who’d a-thunk it? Game ranching and private ownership of wildlife for hunting, tourism and meat are saving rhinos, etc.?*

There’s a pretty interesting and stark contrast between two completely different approaches to saving wildlife in Africa (rhinos, elephants, lions, leopards and African buffaloes, etc.): a) ban the private ownership and all commercialization of wildlife except for eco-tourism vs. b) allow the private ownership of wildlife and legalize commercial activities relating to wildlife like private game ranching. Most African countries like Kenya take the first approach – individuals are not allowed to own or profit commercially from wildlife. A change in South Africa’s law in 1991 legalizing private ownership of wildlife and private game ranching provides a natural experiment to compare the two approaches.

A recent Bloomberg article provides these details:

1. South Africa’s private game-ranching is a $1.1 billion a year industry and growing at 10 percent annually. Foreign hunters, about 60 percent of whom came from the U.S., spent $118.1 million on licenses to hunt in South Africa in 2012.

2. Private game ranches have increased fivefold to 10,000 since South Africans were allowed to own and profit commercially from wild animals. The game ranches cover 20 million hectares, or about 16 percent of the country’s land.

*So what’s happened to the number of wild animals in South Africa?*

3. The private game industry is largely responsible for boosting the country’s large mammal population to 24 million, the most since the 19th century, and up from 575,000 in the early 1960s. For example, South Africa now has more than 20,000 white rhinos, 80 percent of the world’s total, up from 1,800 in 1968 when limited hunting was first introduced.

4. South Africa’s law change has also led to a commercial trade in wild animals with captive-bred species ranging from sable antelope to wildebeest sold at wildlife auctions.

*And what about the situation in Kenya?*

5. Kenya has lost 80 percent of its wildlife since it banned hunting in 1977 and large-mammal numbers are declining by 4.2 percent a year. The country’s elephant population has dropped 76 percent since the 1970s, while rhinos are down 95 percent.

http://www.aei.org/publication/who-d-a-thunk-it-game-ranching-and-private-ownership-of-wildlife-for-hunting-tourism-and-meat-are-saving-rhinos-etc/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2017)

> *Worldwide exodus*
> 
> We are in fact in the midst of a worldwide exodus of species bordering on the worst extinctions in geological history. In the past, these extinctions came about from natural disasters. Volcanism and meteor strikes helped change the climate, wiping out dinosaurs and even fish species.
> 
> So it could be argued that extinction is all part of the natural process of the earth. Even the seminal comic George Carlin tried to point out this fact by branding environmentalists a silly, sentimental lot. But Carlin was wrong on this subject. Because all the world's economy depends on nature, and massive extinctions are a clear sign of both commodities and markets at risk. In other words, what Carlin deemed silly is no joke at all.


No it's not a joke.  Carlin wasn't wrong and neither was Friedman.  You people have always been wrong about these things.  Your pillar doom sayers Erlich and Malthus were horribly wrong.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2017)

> *Holding commerce to account*
> 
> Milton Friedman may have been a brilliant economist. But he would have made a lousy biologist. Men like Friedman (and sheepdogs like Rush Limbaugh) refuse to admit that the human race and those billions of individuals pursuing their precious 'separate interests' are what's causing a massive failure of the one commodity none of us can afford to lose. That is nature.


Hanapaa!! or Sucker if you prefer.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2017)

*The Fallacy of Macroeconomic Aggregates and Averages*

In fact, however, there is no such thing as aggregate demand, or aggregate supply, or output and employment as a whole. They are statistical creations constructed by economists and statisticians, out of what really exists: the demands and supplies of multitudes of individual and distinct goods and services produced, and bought and sold on the various specific markets that make up the economic system of society.

There are specific consumer demands for different kinds and types of hats, shoes, shirts, reading glasses, apples, and books or movies. No one demands just “output,” and no one creates just “employment.” When we go into the marketplace we are interested in buying the specific goods and services for which we have particular and distinct demands. And businessmen and entrepreneurs find it profitable to hire and employ particular workers with specific skills to assist in the manufacture, production, marketing, and sale of those distinct goods that individual consumers are interested in buying.

In turn, each of these individual and distinct goods and services has its own particular price in the marketplace, established by the interaction of the individual demanders with the individual suppliers offering them for sale. 

The profitable opportunities to bring desired goods to market result in the demand for different resources and raw materials, specific types of machinery and equipment, and different categories of skilled and less-skilled individual workers to participate in the production processes that bring those desired goods into existence. The interactions between the individual businessmen and the individual suppliers of the factors of production generate the prices for their purchase, hire, or employment on, again, multitudes of individual markets in the economic system.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2017)

*Capitalism the Solution, Government the Stumbling Block*

The capitalist system is a great engine of human prosperity. It creates the profit incentives for industry and innovation that just over the last quarter of a century has literally raised hundreds of millions of people out of poverty in what used to be called “the third world” of underdeveloped nations. The competitive process of supply and demand brings the productive activities of tens of thousands of businesses into balance with the demands of all of us as consumers, around the globe.

*There is no economic system in all of history that has had the same ability to do so much material and cultural good as the open, competitive free market. But the capitalist system cannot do its job if government interferes with its operation. Burdensome government taxes, heavy-handed government regulation, misguided government spending, and mismanagement of the monetary system only succeed in gumming up the works like so much sand in the machine.*

The best pro-active policy that any government could follow once an economy has fallen into a recession would be to accept and admit that its own past monetary and fiscal policies had caused the economic crisis that is being experienced, and then leave the market alone to rebalance itself and reestablish the basis for sustainable growth and employment.

But, of course, this would require the reversal of the premises, presumptions and political plundering of the modern interventionist-welfare state, and its accompanying system of monetary central planning in the form of the U.S Federal Reserve. It would require a rejection of the collectivist ideological and policy perspectives that did and continue to dominate and direct all that governments do around the world. 

However, in the meantime, Murray Rothbard’s insightful and historically important explanation of how government central banking and misguided interventionist policies caused and prolonged _America’s Great Depression_ of the 1930s, now available with this volume in Chinese, offers an opportunity for the people of the world’s rising economic giant to better understand the dangers from trusting too much in the power of government to assure and maintain economic growth and stability. And it may help in better appreciating the importance of competitive free market institutions, even in the banking and financial sectors, to bring about long-run economic betterment for all in society.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 26, 2017)

More false info derived from a false premise eh dizzy?


----------



## nononono (Dec 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> More false info derived from a false premise eh dizzy?



*You must be referring to the Democrats Information time line that culminates with the *
*origination of the " Illegal " FISA " warrant based on manufactured evidence derived from a*
*Known False Premise......*

*All you DemocRATS can do now is hope you can swim to the shoreline before you drown...*


----------



## nononono (Dec 26, 2017)

*It's VERY BAD for you DemocRATS .....Very Bad !*

*Let's not even talk about the Corrupt election in Alabama or*
*the VERY corrupt election that transpired in Virginia !!!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> More false info derived from a false premise eh dizzy?


Show me which *economic system in all of history has had the same ability to do so much material and cultural good as the open, competitive free market.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 26, 2017)

Hüsker Dü said:


> More false info derived from a false premise eh dizzy?


*Myth 2. Free trade doesn’t lead to better economic outcomes in the real world.*

Paul Krugman once quipped, “If there were an Economist's Creed, it would surely contain the affirmations 'I understand the Principle of Comparative Advantage' and 'I advocate Free Trade.'" However, critics of free trade, such as development economist Ha Joon Chang, have made very odd statements such as this one:

There is a respectable historical case for tariff protection for industries that are not yet profitable. … By contrast, free trade works well only in the fantasy theoretical world of perfect competition.

Comments like these are puzzling because proponents of free trade don’t assume there is perfect competition. They simply recognize that if one country can produce a product at a lower opportunity cost than another, trade between the countries (or individuals) is mutually beneficial. (This is known as the theory of comparative advantage.)

Economists have examined countless times whether or not freer trade leads to greater economic growth. In regard to trade liberalization — reform that lowers barriers to international trade — the evidence consistently shows that such reforms improve economic performance over time.

According to one study that examined 141 trade liberalizations and compared economic performance before and after liberalization (after controlling for confounding factors), “Per capita growth of countries [after]liberalization was some 1.5 percentage points higher than before liberalization, and investment rates were 1.5–2.0 percentage points higher.”

Subsequent research from Antoni Estevadeordal and Alan M. Taylor took the analysis further by comparing growth rates before and after 1990, when a wave of trade liberalizations occurred. The economists divided countries into an experimental group (the countries that liberalized trade regimes) and a control group (those that did not). According to a summary of their research, the authors “find strong evidence that liberalizing tariffs on imported capital and intermediate goods raised growth rates by about one percentage point annually in the liberalizing countries.” Research has also shown that trade liberalization has caused greater economic performance in sub-Saharan Africa, a region desperately in need of growth.

Reforms that result in freer trade generally lead to superior economic outcomes. This is a well-documented observation. Although there may be situations in which freer trade is undesirable, these situations are not the norm, and free trade policies are still the “reasonable rule of thumb,” as Paul Krugman has put it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 26, 2017)

*Myth 5. Capitalism isn’t economically superior to socialism.*

A considerable amount of research has examined how a transition from socialism (or a repressed-market economy) to a market economy (or a freer market economy) — a process known as economic liberalization — affects economic growth.

For example, using data from 140 countries over the time period 1960–2000, economists from Bocconi University compared countries that underwent economic liberalization to those that didn’t. After controlling for other relevant variables, they found that

economic liberalization is good along all dimensions: it is accompanied by better structural policies and better macroeconomic policies, and it is followed by improved economic performance. This timing suggests a causal interpretation, at least with regard to economic outcomes.

Subsequent research published in the Journal of Economic Surveys has found that “there are strong indications that liberalization … stimulates economic growth." For a specific example, look no further than China.

Research from Oxford University’s economics department has found that China’s economic growth, which has been driving its massive poverty reduction, was fueled by trade liberalization, rapid privatization, and sectorial changes. As a result of these reforms, China’s GDP per capita grew 4.1 percentage points faster than it otherwise would have, lifting millions out of poverty.

A review of over 40 studies on the relationship between economic freedom and economic growth (with economic freedom measured using the Fraser Institute’s Economic Freedom of the World Index) found that research consistently demonstrates that freer markets are robustly associated with greater economic performance. Studies have shown that economic freedom causes economic growth; the relationship is not a mere correlation.

Empirical research also finds that “countries can increase the utility of their national resources by approximately 45% simply by converting to market-based economies” and also consistently finds that the private sector is more efficient than the public sector.


----------



## nononono (Dec 28, 2017)

*That's what Liberal/Progressive/Socialists do after they give their word they won't......*

*I guess the Chinese are just following the United States Democrats Lead !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2017)

*The Wealth Gap Isn't a Crisis, It's a Good Sign*
When authorities attempt to equalize outcomes, they inadvertently create a permanent underclass.

https://fee.org/articles/the-wealth-gap-isnt-a-crisis-its-a-good-sign/?utm_source=ribbon

The market is a mechanism that rewards those who meet the needs of others. Those who meet the needs of others best are compensated accordingly and create wealth faster than others. Thus a gap is created between those who meet the needs and desires of others in an extraordinary way and those who do not.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 31, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The Wealth Gap Isn't a Crisis, It's a Good Sign*
> When authorities attempt to equalize outcomes, they inadvertently create a permanent underclass.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/the-wealth-gap-isnt-a-crisis-its-a-good-sign/?utm_source=ribbon
> ...


You sure know how to piss people off.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 31, 2017)

nononono said:


> *That's what Liberal/Progressive/Socialists do after they give their word they won't......*
> 
> *I guess the Chinese are just following the United States Democrats Lead !*


I can't wait until Trump digs into and terminates the Iranian nuke deal.


----------



## nononono (Dec 31, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I can't wait until Trump digs into and terminates the Iranian nuke deal.



*Yes... and the money we will save !!!*

*I really wonder how much money was on those *
*undocumented flights out of Tehran Airport today....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2017)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You sure know how to piss people off.


Ignorance has that effect on those that choose to be pissed off.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 31, 2017)

nononono said:


> *Yes... and the money we will save !!!*
> 
> *I really wonder how much money was on those *
> *undocumented flights out of Tehran Airport today....*


The bigger question is how much the Kenyan skimmed off the top. 
What other reason is there for cash?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 31, 2017)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The Wealth Gap Isn't a Crisis, It's a Good Sign*
> When authorities attempt to equalize outcomes, they inadvertently create a permanent underclass.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/the-wealth-gap-isnt-a-crisis-its-a-good-sign/?utm_source=ribbon
> ...


You certainly are a gullible rube.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You certainly are a gullible rube.


Your hate for the common man is showing again.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 1, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your hate for the common man is showing again.


Hate is a waste of time.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jan 1, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Hate is a waste of time.


Its a new year, rat.
Love the new attitude.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Hate is a waste of time.


You certainly are a gullible rube.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

*2018's New Minimum Wages Come with a Cost*
At best, the minimum wage transfers money from one group to another with no net gain.

https://fee.org/articles/2018s-new-minimum-wages-come-with-a-cost/

*It All Has to Come from Somewhere*

The minimum wage supporters see almost endless benefits despite the economic destruction that characterizes minimum wage laws. They see miracles of multiplying prosperity, increased income, and more jobs coming from minimum wage hikes, a form of economic magic enacted in state capitals, by city councils, and the federal government. But once we trace the long-term effects of such public policy on all groups in the economy, and analyze both what is seen and what is unseen, we should easily understand that the minimum wage cannot, and will not, have overall positive effects. At best it can only transfer income from one group (business owners like Mrs. Johnson above and/or their customers in the form of higher prices) to another group (low-skilled, limited-experienced workers), but with_ no net gain_.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

Once, years ago, during a confidential discussion with a member of the Congressional Black Caucus, I asked how they could possibly vote for minimum-wage laws.

The answer I got was that members of the Black Caucus were part of a political coalition and, as such, they were expected to vote for things that other members of that coalition wanted, such as minimum-wage laws, in order that other members of the coalition would vote for things that the Black Caucus wanted.

When I asked what could the black members of Congress possibly get in return for supporting minimum-wage laws that would be worth sacrificing whole generations of young blacks to huge rates of unemployment, the discussion quickly ended. I may have been vehement when I asked that question.

The same question could be asked of black public officials in general, including President Obama, who have taken the side of the teachers’ unions, who oppose vouchers or charter schools that allow black parents (among others) to take their children out of failing public schools.-Sowell

https://nypost.com/2013/09/17/why-racists-love-the-minimum-wage-laws/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

*Knowing Their Harm, Politicians Still Push for Minimum Wages
We have minimum wage hikes for the same reason we have rent control, protectionism, and thousands of other destructive policies.


https://fee.org/articles/knowing-their-harm-politicians-still-push-for-minimum-wages/

So Why Raise the Minimum Wage?*

With four studies produced by the Ontario government showing negative employment effects of raising the minimum wage without any reduction in poverty, why are politicians pushing forward with the policy?

*The answer as to why we have minimum wage hikes is the same as to why we have rent control, and protectionism, and thousands of other destructive government policies – polls show raising the minimum wage is a political winner.
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

*After Studying Basic Economics, Mayor Vetoes Minimum Wage Increase
Finally! An economics story with a happy ending, at least for now.

https://fee.org/articles/after-studying-basic-economics-mayor-vetoes-minimum-wage-increase/


A Complete 180*

Last week, Baltimore’s new Democratic Mayor, Catherine Pugh, surprised her constituents by changing her position on the issue of raising the city’s minimum wage to $15 an hour.

This came as a shock to those who had previously supported her during her mayoral run when she not only vocally promised to support the legislation, but also said in writing on a union questionnaire that, "I am aware of the current initiative to raise the minimum wage in the City Council to $15 per hour and when it reaches my desk I will sign it."

However, after she was elected into office and when the minimum legislation did reach the new Baltimore Mayor’s desk, instead of signing the legislation, Mayor Pugh used her power to veto it!

Pugh, who is only four months into her term as mayor, did what many mayors have not taken the time, nor had the courage to do: she actually researched the economic policies set to be implemented in the legislation, and the potential harm these policies could cause in Baltimore.

As a result of what she learned, Pugh decided she could no longer in good conscience support or sign the legislation when the economic repercussions were potentially dangerous enough to harm her entire city.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 1, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You certainly are a gullible rube.


Did I hurt your overly-sensitive little feelings? No wonder they kicked you off the islands . . . snowflakes don't last long in a tough environment like that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Did I hurt your overly-sensitive little feelings? No wonder they kicked you off the islands . . . snowflakes don't last long in a tough environment like that.


I hit the ignore button and then left the islands on a big metal canoe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 7, 2018)

*Warren Buffett Won a Decade-Old $1M Bet*
Now, the ten-year betting period is officially over.

In 2007, Warren Buffett challenged finance professionals in the hedge fund industry to accept a bet that Buffett described in his 2016 letter to shareholders of Berkshire-Hathaway (see p. 21-21):

In Berkshire’s 2005 annual report, I argued that active investment management by professionals – in aggregate – would over a period of years underperform the returns achieved by rank amateurs who simply sat still. I explained that the massive fees levied by a variety of “helpers” would leave their clients – again in aggregate – worse off than if the amateurs simply invested in an unmanaged low-cost index fund.

Subsequently, I publicly offered to wager $500,000 that no investment pro could select a set of at least five hedge funds – wildly-popular and high-fee investing vehicles – that would over an extended period match the performance of an unmanaged S&P-500 index fund charging only token fees. I suggested a ten-year bet and named a low-cost Vanguard S&P fund as my contender. I then sat back and waited expectantly for a parade of fund managers – who could include their own fund as one of the five – to come forth and defend their occupation. After all, these managers urged others to bet billions on their abilities. Why should they fear putting a little of their own money on the line?

Specifically, Buffett offered to bet that over a ten-year period from January 1, 2008, to December 31, 2017, the S&P 500 index would outperform a portfolio of hedge funds when performance is measured on a basis net of fees, costs, and all expenses. Hedge fund manager Ted Seides of Protégé Partners accepted Buffett’s bet and he identified five hedge funds that the predicted would out-perform the S&P 500 index over ten years.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 7, 2018)

*How Legal Activism Stopped the Market from Abolishing Segregation*

The erroneous holding of Plessy permitted states to require separate facilities in public accommodations and other public institutions, such as schools. Afterward the language of “separate but equal” became a widespread justification for discriminatory practices. Justice Harlan stated that the Constitution was “colorblind” and as such, could not permit legal distinctions based on race.

 by James Devereaux

*
The Untold Story*

*What is often lost in the short history-class-version of this case is the effort by the company to comply and remove the segregation law. This may appear counterintuitive to some, but the market reality made segregation expensive.*  Looking at the requirements of the law (see above) makes it clear why securing separate accommodations, either by car or partition, is costly, and when you are in the business of selling seats, increasing the likelihood of empty seats works against that interest.

In the 1950’s the economist Gary Becker at the University of Chicago began to write about the economics of discrimination. His writing was contemporaneous to the Brown case which was decided in 1954. Becker’s book, titled *The Economics of Discrimination and released in 1957, began a discussion on discrimination in the market which has yielded counterintuitive results in many instances. *

Using economic assumptions to describe discriminatory behavior, Becker observed two basic features of discrimination. First, that discrimination may depress the wages and employment opportunities of those discriminated against and conversely that the discriminator may pay higher wages to avoid hiring a minority. 

*If for example, a white worker gets paid $2 more an hour than an African American worker, the employer is paying a $2 an hour penalty to maintain his discriminatory preferences. Over time, this is a difficult practice to maintain in a competitive environment. *The result is parity when comparing equal, similarly situated people. Most employers or businesses are not willing to pay that penalty in the long run.

Since Becker’s book, others have also observed the impact of discrimination in markets and the tendency to move away from discrimination unless the base is sufficiently broad and the taste for discrimination is rather strong. However, in this scenario discrimination is highly likely to arise via democratic mechanisms as well, as it did in the South unless there is a constitutional constraint to prevent discriminatory democratic results.


----------



## nononono (Jan 8, 2018)

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2018)

*When the State Partners with Business, the Devil's in the Details*
Demand risk partnerships are good because user fees ensure that projects are worthwhile and costs do not get out of control.

https://fee.org/articles/when-the-state-partners-with-business-the-devils-in-the-details/

President Trump has reportedly expressed reservations about public-private partnerships, but White House economic advisor Gary Cohn is still enthusiastic about building the administration’s fabled infrastructure plan around them. Not everyone realizes, however, that there are two very distinct kinds of public-private partnerships, which I call the good kind and the bad kind. I’d like to believe that it is the bad kind that worries Trump while it is the good kind that encourages Cohn.

*Two Kinds of Partnerships*

The good kind of public-private partnership is more formally known as a _demand risk _partnership. In this case, the public partner essentially gives the private partner a franchise to build a road or some other infrastructure. The private partner is allowed to collect tolls or other revenues from the infrastructure for a fixed period of time, usually three or four decades, after which ownership and management of the infrastructure are turned over to the public partner (who may contract it out again). *The key is that the private partner accepts the risk that revenues may not cover the costs. For example, the I-495 Capital Beltway express lanes are a demand risk partnership.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2018)

*The bad kind of public-private partnership is more formally known as an availability payment partnership.* As with the good kind, the public partner designs the project while the private partner builds and, usually, operates it. Unlike the good kind, the private partner takes no risk that the project might not pay its way. Instead, the public partner contracts to pay the private partner enough money over several decades to completely repay the private partner’s costs regardless of whether anyone is actually using the infrastructure.

Availability payment partnerships might make sense in the case of infrastructures that no one expects to earn user fees, such as common schools. But, in most cases, such partnerships are formed mainly to allow the public partner to sidestep legal debt limits. For example, euro nations are supposed to limit their debts to a fixed percentage of GDP. Some nations, such as Italy, have built high-speed rail and other infrastructures using availability payment partnerships so that the debts appear on the books of the private partners, not the government.

For the same reason, Denver’s Regional Transit District (RTD) formed a public-private partnership to build a billion-dollar rail line to the airport. *Voters had approved a sales tax increase for the rail line but set a debt limit. When cost overruns made it impossible to build the line without exceeding the debt limit, RTD entered into an availability payment partnership so the debt wouldn’t appear on its books. Of course, it was still contractually obligated to pay the private partner enough to repay its debt.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 12, 2018)

Anybody wanna guess what Bozo the Clown Brown is doing?


----------



## nononono (Jan 14, 2018)

-----------------------


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2018)

FROM THE MAGAZINE
*If You Build It . . .*
Myths and realities about America’s infrastructure spending

Edward L. Glaeser
Summer 2016 

Economics teaches two basic truths: people make wise choices when they are forced to weigh benefits against costs; and competition produces good results. Large-scale federal involvement in transportation means that the people who benefit aren’t the people who pay the costs. The result is too many white-elephant projects and too little innovation and maintenance.

No one denies that the United States suffers gaping infrastructure deficiencies, including potholed roads, unsafe bridges, and awful airports. But we also have a dreary history of federally supported infrastructure boondoggles. America spends too much time arguing about whether to spend more money or less on infrastructure—including as a jobs program—and far too little time on how to construct and maintain infrastructure wisely. Treating transportation infrastructure as yet another public-works program ensures the mediocrity that we see all around us. A wise approach means, contrary to Bernie Sanders, a much diminished federal role and a lot more transportation initiatives that look like private industry, with users paying for the services they receive.


----------



## xav10 (Jan 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> FROM THE MAGAZINE
> *If You Build It . . .*
> Myths and realities about America’s infrastructure spending
> 
> ...


You've obviously not ridden the National Rail System in London and vicinity. Or bullet trains in Japan.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2018)

xav10 said:


> You've obviously not ridden the National Rail System in London and vicinity. Or bullet trains in Japan.


I have not.  But I did ride the regular trains in Japan for 3 years when I was stationed there from 1987-1990.  I set  my watch by them too.  Great system.  We didn't worry about crime or bombs at the stations either.  Definitely not a shit hole country.  You see any differences between the U.S. and those two countries?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2018)

*Why Tokyo's Privately Owned Rail Systems Work So Well*
STEPHEN SMITH
 OCT 31, 2011
Large cities with cash-strapped transit agencies would do well to study Japan's rail history

https://www.citylab.com/transportation/2011/10/why-tokyos-privately-owned-rail-systems-work-so-well/389/

As the post-war years marched on, the private railways proved to be more efficient than those run by the state, which were hemorrhaging cash. It was understandable that lines outside the big cities might need subsidies, but there was no excuse for operating losses in the dense Tokaido megalopolis. *So in 1987, the government privatized the Japanese National Railways (JNR), which operated every type of transit except trams and inner-city metros. JR East, JR Central, and JR West, the three spin-offs operating around Tokyo, Nagoya, and Osaka, respectively, emerged healthy and profitable. They were able to pay back their construction debt and make capital improvements to their networks, reversing the stagnation and decline that JNR had seen over the previous decade.*

*Privatization was later applied to Tokyo Metro, the largest subway network in the city. And according to Tatsuhiko Suga, who has been active in Japanese railways for decades and now leads Japan's Foundation for Transport Publications, the city's other metro network, Toei, may also be thrown into the mix by the time the process is complete. (Privatization in Japan has been nothing if not slow, a strategy which seems to have paid off.) All railways now strive to emulate the private firms,* but metro systems outside of Tokyo have not attempted privatization.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2018)

*Thomas Sowell: California’s high-speed rail example of getting nowhere fast*

*By THOMAS SOWELL | 
February 2, 2012 at 8:42 am
*
*California has a huge state debt and Washington has a huge national debt. But that does not discourage either Gov. Jerry Brown or President Barack Obama from wanting to launch a very costly high-speed rail system. *

Most of us might be a little skittish about spending money if we were teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. But the beauty of politics is that it is all other people’s money, including among those other people of generations yet to be born. 

The high-speed rail system proposed for California has been envisioned as a model for similar systems elsewhere in the United States. A recent story in *the San Francisco Chronicle used the high-speed rail system in Spain as an analogy for California. *

Spain is about the same size as California and has a similar population density — and population density is the key to the economic viability of mass transportation, from subways to high-speed rail. 

It so happens that I have ridden on Spain’s high-speed rail system. It was very nice, especially since I did not have to pay the full costs, which were subsidized by Spanish taxpayers. 

*While the Spanish government has been subsidizing the passengers on its high-speed rail system, the European Union has been subsidizing the Spanish government. Someone once said that government is the illusion that we can all live off somebody else. Spain’s high-speed rail system is not even covering its operating costs, never mind the enormous costs of setting up the system in the first place. One reason is that half the seats are empty in the high-speed trains of Spain. *

*That is what happens when you don’t have the population density required for passengers to cover the operating costs.* You would need the hordes of Genghis Khan riding the high-speed rail system to cover the additional costs of the rails and the trains. 

An economics professor at the University of Barcelona says that Spain “has not recovered one single euro from the infrastructure investment.” 

*The most famous high-speed rail system is in Japan, one of the most densely populated countries in the world. The “bullet train” between Tokyo and Osaka has 130 million riders a year. Tokyo has more than three times the population of San Francisco and Los Angeles put together.*


----------



## xav10 (Jan 16, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I have not.  But I did ride the regular trains in Japan for 3 years when I was stationed there from 1987-1990.  I set  my watch by them too.  Great system.  We didn't worry about crime or bombs at the stations either.  Definitely not a shit hole country.  You see any differences between the U.S. and those two countries?


London is crowded and incredibly diverse and victimized by more terror attacks in the US. The public rail system is admirable. But I think for longer, intercity trips, it's Richard Branson's Virgin train service.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 16, 2018)

Surging shale production is poised to push U.S. oil output to more than 10 million barrels per day, toppling a record set in 1970 and crossing a threshold few people could have imagined even a decade ago.

And this new record, expected within days, likely won't last long. The U.S. government forecasts that the nation's production will climb to 11 million barrels a day by late 2019, a level that would rival Russia, the world's top producer.

The economic and political impacts of soaring U.S. output are breathtaking, cutting the nation's oil imports by a fifth over a decade, providing high-paying jobs in rural communities and lowering consumer prices for domestic gasoline by 37 percent from a 2008 peak.

Fears of dire energy shortages that gripped the country in the 1970s have been replaced by a presidential policy of global "energy dominance."
entire article:
http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/us-oil-industry-set-to-break-record-upend-global-trade/ar-AAuLdxY?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 17, 2018)

By all means let's continue the cycle of the rich getting richer and hence their political influence strengthening allowing them to get laws enacted that once again, make them richer.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 17, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> By all means let's continue the cycle of the rich getting richer and hence their political influence strengthening allowing them to get laws enacted that once again, make them richer.


Daffy! Have an adult read the quote below and explain it to you. Then have them slowly read the entire article & explain it to you.... 

*"The economic and political impacts of soaring U.S. output are breathtaking, cutting the nation's oil imports by a fifth over a decade, providing high-paying jobs in rural communities and lowering consumer prices for domestic gasoline by 37 percent from a 2008 peak."*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 17, 2018)

Some inequality of income and wealth is inevitable, if not necessary. If an economy is to function well, people need incentives to work hard and innovate.

The pertinent question is not whether income and wealth inequality is good or bad. It is at what point do these inequalities become so great as to pose a serious threat to our economy, our ideal of equal opportunity and our democracy.

http://robertreich.org/post/85532751265


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 17, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Daffy! Have an adult read the quote below and explain it to you. Then have them slowly read the entire article & explain it to you....
> 
> *"The economic and political impacts of soaring U.S. output are breathtaking, cutting the nation's oil imports by a fifth over a decade, providing high-paying jobs in rural communities and lowering consumer prices for domestic gasoline by 37 percent from a 2008 peak."*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 17, 2018)

Hey Duck!!! Have someone explain this to you, ya pinhead.....

*Apple announces plans to repatriate billions in overseas cash, says it will contribute $350 billion to the US economy over the next 5 years*

Apple says the new tax law will help it will contribute $350 billion to the U.S. economy over the next five years.
It says it will create 20,000 new jobs and open a new campus.
Apple expects to pay about $38 billion in taxes for the horde of cash it plans to bring back to the United States.
Apple on Wednesday made a slew of announcements about its investment in and contribution to the U.S. economy in part because of the new tax law.
entire article:
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/01/17/apple-announces-350-billion-investment-20k-jobs-over-5-years.html


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> By all means let's continue the cycle of the rich getting richer and hence their political influence strengthening allowing them to get laws enacted that once again, make them richer.


----------



## xav10 (Jan 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


Hey,  under Obama you may have noticed that the pie got muuuuch bigger. Or did you have your head in a 70's Econ text and not notice? You may also know (but unlikely) that Obama made about zero efforts toward more equal distribution.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


I'm not a big Reich fan but 5 minutes in and I like what I'm hearing.  He is basically acknowledging that the real economy in November 2013 is not recovering despite 3 rounds of QE.  Did you watch it?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Hey,  under Obama you may have noticed that the pie got muuuuch bigger.


Not according to Reich.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


"The most anemic recovery".  "Remarkably underwhelming (economy)"  Gotta love QE for the rich.  Pizza anyone?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> "The most anemic recovery".  "Remarkably underwhelming (economy)"  Gotta love QE for the rich.  Pizza anyone?


Out of context cherry picking anyone?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Out of context cherry picking anyone?


Agree.  One would assume you watched what you posted.  Lol! Give me the big picture RFG3.


----------



## Booter (Jan 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


And that fine Tombstone Pepperoni has been downgraded to a Totino's cheese.  This is a travesty!!!  Although I suppose the poor would do better without pepperoni from a health standpoint.


----------



## nononono (Jan 18, 2018)

xav10 said:


> You've obviously not ridden the National Rail System in London and vicinity. Or bullet trains in Japan.


*Are they like " Jerry's " Train ?*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 18, 2018)

Booter said:


> And that fine Tombstone Pepperoni has been downgraded to a Totino's cheese.  This is a travesty!!!  Although I suppose the poor would do better without pepperoni from a health standpoint.


The poor get no pepperoni, crumbs, that's it . . . and for the last 30+ years those crumbs have been slowly dwindling.


----------



## nononono (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The poor get no pepperoni, crumbs, that's it . . . and for the last 30+ years those crumbs have been slowly dwindling.



*You need to buy larger paper towels.....your tears are drowning out your ill informed*
*message.*

*Nancy Pelosi's " Crumbs " are large bonuses to the average Employee of *
*Employers who are realizing the Tax benefits of the New Tax Plan !*

*Hey Rat....if you were employed in the Private sector you might have received one of *
*these bonuses. But your NOT and you are Envious and Jealous as HELL !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The poor get no pepperoni, crumbs, that's it . . . and for the last 30+ years those crumbs have been slowly dwindling.


Show us.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Show us.


Circle . . . jerk.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Circle . . . jerk.


Exactly.  Rather than just show us you rattle off your lies.


----------



## nononono (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Circle . . . jerk.



*Your attitude and complicit posting nature is EXACTLY why the Corrupt Criminals in*
*the Government still exist. You and all the other Liberal posters should hang your head *
*in shame for what you've supported and enabled to continue within the Federal Govt.*
*You are trying to destroy a good man and his family because he doesn't go along with*
*the criminal enterprise you've supported by shilling daily for the Clinton's, Obama's and*
*all the supporting cast members who have been FLEECING the United States of mine*
*and every other concerned American citizens hard earned Tax Dollars.*

*You and the rest of the Liberal supporters are Disgusting Cowards and don't*
*deserve the classification of Human Being, sewer Rat better serves your *
*description. Low Down Sewer Rats .....*


----------



## nononono (Jan 18, 2018)

*Make*
*America*
*Great*
*Again*

*Step on a Low Down Sewer Rat.*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Circle . . . jerk.


F'n idiot....

*List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed*
Adam Shell, USA TODAY

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/01/11/list-companies-paid-bonuses-boosted-pay-since-tax-bill-passed/1023848001/

*Over 100 companies giving 'Trump Bonuses' after tax victory, 'tsunami building'*
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/over-100-companies-giving-trump-bonuses-after-tax-victory-tsunami-building/article/2644944

*Companies Are Handing Out Bonuses Thanks to the Tax Law*
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/business/corporate-tax-cut-bonuses-employees.html

*Some of the companies giving out raises and bonuses because of tax reform*
*American corporations are chipper about tax reform. That's been great news for some workers.*
http://money.cnn.com/2018/01/11/news/economy/tax-law-raises-bonuses/index.html


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 18, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> F'n idiot....
> 
> *List of companies that paid bonuses or boosted pay since tax bill passed*
> Adam Shell, USA TODAY
> ...


These partisan idiots don't want or need fact to make up their empty heads.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 19, 2018)

*Pelosi's 'crumbs'....*


Amazon  announced its shortlist of the North American cities that are still in the running for its second headquarters on Thursday. Though 238 states, cities, and regions submitted bids, only 20 metros made the final cut.

The company has promised a $5 billion investment and says HQ2 will bring 50,000 jobs, making it one of the largest corporate-civic giveaways in modern American history.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/these-are-all-of-the-cities-amazon-could-choose-for-its-dollar5-billion-headquarters-ranked-by-the-experts/ss-AAuRIpC?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=iehp


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 4, 2018)

*No Stadium Subsidies: Not Even for the Super Bowl*
NFL teams can afford to pay for their own stuff.

https://fee.org/articles/no-stadium-subsidies-not-even-for-the-super-bowl/

After the roof of the previous stadium collapsed under the weight of snow, it became clear that some kind of new facility would be needed for the team. Vikings owner Zygi Wilf made it clear that he wanted public subsidies to defray the cost, unveiling a proposal that would have required about $400 million in subsidies. After the state’s House Government Operations and Elections Committee voted it down, he warned that failure to pass a deal could lead to “serious consequences.” He even went so far as to visit Los Angeles, at the time the top relocation possibility for NFL franchises, and policymakers at all levels eventually relented.

*The subsidies should be enough to raise eyebrows and elicit concern on their own, but the Vikings stadium went a step further. According to the Minneapolis Star Tribune, government appointees of the Minnesota Sports Facilities Authority who oversee the stadium on behalf of taxpayers, and negotiated the deal, received free tickets to two lower-level luxury suits for all events.

The data on who gets the 36 seats in the suites each game was not made available to the public.* The justification given was that the suites are for marketing purposes, and confidentiality is important for booking event spaces, although the appointees admit “friends and family are often in attendance.” The backlash to these revelations was enough to cause the chairwoman and executive director of the board to resign last year and the legislature to pass another bill to tighten oversight of finances and suite use.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 4, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *No Stadium Subsidies: Not Even for the Super Bowl*
> NFL teams can afford to pay for their own stuff.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/no-stadium-subsidies-not-even-for-the-super-bowl/
> ...


If they can afford 100 000 000 for social justice they don't need my money.


----------



## nononono (Feb 4, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> If they can afford 100 000 000 for social justice they don't need my money.




*Correct !*

*The NFL is a Losing business model at present.*
*The flywheel affect is no longer in their favor....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 6, 2018)

*A Protectionist is Someone Who…*
by Don Boudreaux on February 6, 2018

… upon seeing the additional sales made by pharmaceutical companies during an especially bad flu season concludes that society is enriched by the flu.

… upon seeing the additional income earned by restaurant owners and workers if government imposes a punitive tax on the preparation of home-cooked meals concludes that society is enriched by punitively taxing the preparation of home-cooked meals.

… believes that the artificial creation of more work – that is, the artificial creation of more needs to be satisfied – enriches society.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 6, 2018)

Here’s a letter to the _Wall Street Journal_:

You report that America’s “Goods deficit with China hit record $375.2 billion” (“U.S. Trade Deficit Grew to $566 Billion in 2017, Its Widest Mark in Nine Years,” Feb. 6).  Unfortunately, this report is inadvertently misleading – and misleading in a way that fuels destructive protectionist sentiment.

First, in our world of nearly 200 countries, one country’s trade deficit with another country is as meaningless as is one individual’s trade deficit with another individual.  For the same reason that absolutely no relevant information about my economic health is conveyed by knowledge of the fact that I have a large trade deficit with my plumber (who is one of many people with whom I economically interact), absolutely no relevant information about America’s economic health is conveyed by knowledge of the fact that America has a large trade deficit with China (which is one of many countries with which Americans economically interact).

Second, because 80 percent of the U.S. economy is service-based while no more than half of China’s economy is service-based, it’s unsurprising that we Americans buy more goods from the Chinese than than they buy from us.  (Equally unsurprising, by the way, is the reality that the Chinese buy more services from us than we buy from them.)  More fundamentally, because services are every bit as economically relevant as are goods, reporting on the U.S. “goods deficit with China” (or with the world, for that matter) makes no more sense than does reporting on, say, the U.S. “things-that-are blue deficit” with China.  The dollar value of blue things that we Americans buy from the Chinese might well be greater than is the dollar value of blue things that the Chinese buy from us, but this factoid is obviously of zero relevance.  Equally irrelevant – and for the same reason – is the factoid that the dollar value of goods that we buy from the Chinese is greater than is the dollar value of goods that the Chinese buy from us.

Sincerely,
Donald J. Boudreaux
Professor of Economics
and
Martha and Nelson Getchell Chair for the Study of Free Market Capitalism at the Mercatus Center
George Mason University
Fairfax, VA  22030


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 6, 2018)

By all objective measures, NAFTA is working well, for the U.S. economy and the U.S. automotive sector. In 2017, U.S.-based automakers produced 11.1 million cars and light trucks. That number has not declined since NAFTA was enacted in 1994, and is in fact above the average annual output of 10.9 million assemblies during the past 30 years. Real U.S. output of motor vehicles and parts, adjusted for inflation and quality, is up 85 percent since the passage of NAFTA, according the Federal Reserve Board.

Because of NAFTA, domestic U.S. automakers have been able to deploy their supply chain across North America, creating lower-value vehicles and parts in Mexico while concentrating higher-end production here in the United States. The result has been a U.S. auto sector that is able to deliver more affordable and higher quality cars and trucks to American families while competing more effectively in global export markets. In recent years, U.S. exports of motor vehicles have topped 2 million for the first time.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 6, 2018)

…. is from Thomas Sowell’s book _Intellectuals and Society_:

If, at a given time, three-quarters of the consumers prefer to buy the Acme brand of widgets to any other brand, then Acme Inc. will be said to ‘control’ three-quarters of the market, even though consumers control 100 percent of the market, since they can switch to another brand of widgets tomorrow if someone else comes up with a better widget, or stop buying widgets altogether if a new product comes along that makes widgets obsolete.

Another great example of Thomas Sowell’s masterful “idea density” — *his ability to pack more insight and wisdom into a single sentence than what is usually contained in an entire paragraph or entire essay of the average writer.*


----------



## xav10 (Feb 6, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *A Protectionist is Someone Who…*
> by Don Boudreaux on February 6, 2018
> 
> … upon seeing the additional sales made by pharmaceutical companies during an especially bad flu season concludes that society is enriched by the flu.
> ...


As for #3, that’s the entire basis of the Capitalist system, obviously. You don’t like it? Is that why you work for the government?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 6, 2018)

xav10 said:


> As for #3, that’s the entire basis of the Capitalist system, obviously. You don’t like it? Is that why you work for the government?


Go back and read the whole thing this time.....#3 that is.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 6, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Go back and read the whole thing this time.....#3 that is.


The creation of more needs, leading to more jobs fulfilling those needs (like building automobiles, for example), is a foundational element of market growth, which is a requirement for the capitalist system. What am I missing?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 6, 2018)

xav10 said:


> The creation of more needs, leading to more jobs fulfilling those needs (like building automobiles, for example), is a foundational element of market growth, which is a requirement for the capitalist system. What am I missing?


That's not what #3 is talking about.  It's talking about creating artificial jobs for artificial needs.  Having said that, the auto industry is a poor example of #3 because it is actually doing the opposite of #3.  In the 1950s the average worker at General Motors (GM) could make 7 cars in a year, and now they make 28--that's an unbelievable transformation.  It means that for the same amount of cars sold, now GM needs 70% fewer workers. That alone means that there are fewer and fewer jobs in this sector. In some sense, this sector becomes so productive and so successful at using the best possible machinery and robots that it needs fewer and fewer workers.--Enrico Moretti, _The New Geography of Jobs_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 8, 2018)

*The Solar Panel Tariff Threatens Far More American Jobs than It Protects*
by Barry Brownstein

*“While there are fewer than 1,000 jobs in U.S. panel manufacturing, some 260,000 jobs rely on access to imported panels.”*

Today those 260,000 jobs are at risk because of a ruling by President Trump. The president — to show he is serious about his “America First” trade policy —imposed steep new tariffs on imported solar panels from China and on washing machines from South Korea.

“Solar tariffs would be another destructive exercise that benefits a handful of Suniva and SolarWorld [panel manufactures] investors at the expense of everyone else — including the rest of the solar industry. *This is protectionism at its worst.”*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 8, 2018)

*How Easy Money Is Rotting America from*
*the Inside-Out*
by David Veksler

The same thing will happen to streets, bridges, and plumbing. This is one of the ways urban decay happens: easy money policies fund unsustainable urban infrastructure projects which make politicians look good, but end up crumbling a few years or decades later. *The Flint water crisis happened in large part because the Federal government funded infrastructure projects that were not sustainable by the incomes of the people of Michigan.*

*Easy money from the Fed also rots the guts of American corporations. New money goes to the most politically-connected businesses first, and funds projects that would not be possible in a free market.* Because private investors haven’t actually saved enough to see the projects through to completion, and consumers don’t value the product enough to cover production costs, the companies getting free money from the government either fail or receive endless bailouts. *For example, easy money encouraged unsustainable commitments like high union wages and pensions, forcing US automakers to sell cars for prices that consumers could not pay given their actual savings rate. When sales dipped in 2009, the government was forced to bail out GM, Chrysler, and Ford in 2009.*


----------



## Booter (Feb 8, 2018)

Give them Hell Rand!


----------



## xav10 (Feb 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *How Easy Money Is Rotting America from*
> *the Inside-Out*
> by David Veksler
> 
> ...


Huh? Ford didn’t get a buyout and this article makes no sense at all.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 8, 2018)

Booter said:


> Give them Hell Rand!


I like the Rand Paul angle.
I agree with him.
What's funny, is how you people wont take your own medicine, but want to force feed it to those you disagree with.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 8, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Huh? Ford didn’t get a buyout and this article makes no sense at all.


Lol!  A buyout?  Obama wanted more electric cars on the road and Ford was a vulnerable key player in achieving that goal through a very quiet bailout of Ford.  Make sense now?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  A buyout?  Obama wanted more electric cars on the road and Ford was a vulnerable key player in achieving that goal through a very quiet bailout of Ford.  Make sense now?


They didn’t take any TARP money and their credit line was part of a program put in place by the Bush administration. You poor thing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 8, 2018)

xav10 said:


> They didn’t take any TARP money and their credit line was part of a program put in place by the Bush administration. You poor thing.


They took TALF money tootse.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 8, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I like the Rand Paul angle.
> I agree with him.
> What's funny, is how you people wont take your own medicine, but want to force feed it to those you disagree with.


Big-spending Republicans, as always.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 8, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Big-spending Republicans, as always.


Im with Rand.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 8, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Big-spending Republicans, as always.


QE anyone?


----------



## espola (Feb 9, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Im with Rand.


I can see that - For all practical purposes, Rand's actions had the same effect as a 5-year old sitting in the corner with his lower lip out.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

As was the case with W, we learn that Republicans don't understand economics. I think too much money from daddy and banks, with both W and Trump.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

espola said:


> I can see that - For all practical purposes, Rand's actions had the same effect as a 5-year old sitting in the corner with his lower lip out.


You'll get over it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> As was the case with W, we learn that Republicans don't understand economics. I think too much money from daddy and banks, with both W and Trump.


As was the case with BOH, we learn that Democrats don't understand economics. I think too much QE from everybody elses daddy but their own, with both Slick Willy and Barry.


----------



## espola (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> As was the case with W, we learn that Republicans don't understand economics. I think too much money from daddy and banks, with both W and Trump.


Didn't the donald get an interest-free, no-payments-required loan from Daddy T when he had some financial difficulties early in his career?  And then forgave himself that loan when he inherited Daddy's business?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> As was the case with BOH, we learn that Democrats don't understand economics. I think too much QE from everybody elses daddy but their own, with both Slick Willy and Barry.


nope. one had us at a budget surplus an the other took us from deep recession to growth. Obviously better economy under Clinton and O than under W.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

espola said:


> Didn't the donald get an interest-free, no-payments-required loan from Daddy T when he had some financial difficulties early in his career?  And then forgave himself that loan when he inherited Daddy's business?


And stiffed the banks after that. Doesn't know how to balance a budget...all about leveraging.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> nope. one had us at a budget surplus an the other took us from deep recession to growth. Obviously better economy under Clinton and O than under W.


There was no budget surplus from Clinton.

Commentary
*No, Bill Clinton Didn’t Balance the Budget*
By Stephen Moore
October 8, 1998


Let us establish one point definitively: Bill Clinton didn’t balance the budget. Yes, he was there when it happened. But the record shows that was about the extent of his contribution.

Many in the media have flubbed this story. The New York Times on October 1st said, “Clinton balances the budget.” Others have praised George Bush. Political analyst Bill Schneider declared on CNN that Bush is one of “the real heroes” for his willingness to raise taxes — and never mind read my lips. (Once upon a time, lying was something that was considered wrong in Washington, but under the last two presidents our standards have dropped.) In any case, crediting George Bush for the end of the deficit requires some nifty logical somersaults, since the deficit hit its Mount Everest peak of $290 billion in St. George’s last year in office.

And 1993 — the year of the giant Clinton tax hike — was not the turning point in the deficit wars, either. In fact, in 1995, two years after that tax hike, the budget baseline submitted by the president’s own Office of Management and Budget and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office predicted $200 billion deficits for as far as the eye could see. The figure shows the Clinton deficit baseline. What changed this bleak outlook?

Newt Gingrich and company — for all their faults — have received virtually no credit for balancing the budget. Yet today’s surplus is, in part, a byproduct of the GOP’s single-minded crusade to end 30 years of red ink. Arguably, Gingrich’s finest hour as Speaker came in March 1995 when he rallied the entire Republican House caucus behind the idea of eliminating the deficit within seven years.



We have a balanced budget today that is mostly a result of 1) an exceptionally strong economy that is creating gobs of new tax revenues and 2) a shrinking military budget. Social spending is still soaring and now costs more than $1 trillion.

Skeptics said it could not be done in seven years. The GOP did it in four.

Now let us contrast this with the Clinton fiscal record. Recall that it was the Clinton White House that fought Republicans every inch of the way in balancing the budget in 1995. When Republicans proposed their own balanced-budget plan, the White House waged a shameless Mediscare campaign to torpedo the plan — a campaign that the Washington Post slammed as “pure demagoguery.” It was Bill Clinton who, during the big budget fight in 1995, had to submit not one, not two, but five budgets until he begrudgingly matched the GOP’s balanced-budget plan. In fact, during the height of the budget wars in the summer of 1995, the Clinton administration admitted that “balancing the budget is not one of our top priorities.”

And lest we forget, it was Bill Clinton and his wife who tried to engineer a federal takeover of the health care system — a plan that would have sent the government’s finances into the stratosphere. Tom Delay was right: for Clinton to take credit for the balanced budget is like Chicago Cubs pitcher Steve Trachsel taking credit for delivering the pitch to Mark McGuire that he hit out of the park for his 62nd home run.

The figure shows that the actual cumulative budget deficit from 1994 to 1998 was almost $600 billion below the Clintonomics baseline. Part of the explanation for the balanced budget is that Republicans in Congress had the common sense to reject the most reckless features of Clintonomics. Just this year, Bill Clinton’s budget proposed more than $100 billion in new social spending — proposals that were mostly tossed overboard. It’s funny, but back in January the White House didn’t seem too concerned about saving the surplus for “shoring up Social Security.”

Now for the bad news for GOP partisans. The federal budget has not been balanced by any Republican spending reductions. Uncle Sam now spends $150 billion more than in 1995. Over the past 10 years, the defense budget, adjusted for inflation, has been cut $100 billion, but domestic spending has risen by $300 billion.

We have a balanced budget today that is mostly a result of 1) an exceptionally strong economy that is creating gobs of new tax revenues and 2) a shrinking military budget. Social spending is still soaring and now costs more than $1 trillion. Is this the kind of balanced budget that fiscal conservatives want? A budget with no deficit, but that funds the biggest government ever?

So the budget is balanced, but now comes the harder part: cutting the budget. Bill Clinton has laid down a marker in the political debate with his “save Social Security first,” gambit. That theme should be turned against him and his government expansionist agenda. Congress should respond: No new government programs until we have fixed Social Security. This means no IMF bailouts. No new day care subsidies. No extending Medicare coverage to 55-year-olds. (Honestly, if Clinton has his way, it won’t be long till teenagers are eligible for Medicare.)

The budget surpluses over the next five years could easily exceed $500 billion. Leaving all of that extra money lying around within the grasp of vote-buying politicians is an invitation to financial mischief. If Congress and the president use the surpluses to fund a new spending spree, we may find that surpluses are more a curse than a blessing.

Who Really Balanced the Budget
Federal Deficits (Billions $)
  Clinton Baseline* Actual
1994 $203 $203
1995 175 164
1996 205 107
1997 210 22
1998 210 +60
* Congressional Budget Office forecast, April 1995.
Tweet

Like

Submit

Plus
Stephen Moore is director of fiscal policy studies at the Cato Institute.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> There was no budget surplus from Clinton.
> 
> Commentary
> *No, Bill Clinton Didn’t Balance the Budget*
> ...


Of course there wasn’t. And Bannon didn’t hit his wife and Dennis Hastert didn’t molest young boys and the stock market is up this week! Try facts, pal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

espola said:


> Didn't the donald get an interest-free, no-payments-required loan from Daddy T when he had some financial difficulties early in his career?  And then forgave himself that loan when he inherited Daddy's business?


Shocking.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> nope. one had us at a budget surplus an the other took us from deep recession to growth. Obviously better economy under Clinton and O than under W.


The tequila crisis was a private sector crisis until Clinton made it a public sector crisis.  And the current market correction is the natural outcome of 5 years of QE under BOH.  It just is.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Of course there wasn’t. And Bannon didn’t hit his wife and Dennis Hastert didn’t molest young boys and the stock market is up this week! Try facts, pal.


....Obama's FBI, DOJ and IRS didn't target their political enemies, HRC didn't send classified info and store it on her personal bathroom server.
McCabe just an early retirement and comey shouldn't have been fired.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> And stiffed the banks after that. Doesn't know how to balance a budget...all about leveraging.


Let us know when the QE lever is pulled.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Of course there wasn’t. And Bannon didn’t hit his wife and Dennis Hastert didn’t molest young boys and the stock market is up this week! Try facts, pal.


There was a surplus for Clinton thanks to Newts Republican Congess.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Of course there wasn’t. And Bannon didn’t hit his wife and Dennis Hastert didn’t molest young boys and the stock market is up this week! Try facts, pal.


Try a white flag


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> There was a surplus for Clinton thanks to Newts Republican Congess.


Surplus for Clinton and Trump’s budget increases the deficit a trillion dollars in 1 year during a healthy economy. Republican economics.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Surplus for Clinton and Trump’s budget increases the deficit a trillion dollars in 1 year during a healthy economy. Republican economics.


Not if Rand Paul has his way.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Of course there wasn’t. And Bannon didn’t hit his wife and Dennis Hastert didn’t molest young boys and the stock market is up this week! Try facts, pal.


I am not sure you can handle facts. You haven't dealt with the facts of November 8th at all.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am not sure you can handle facts. You haven't dealt with the facts of November 8th at all.


Sure I do. Trump won. He’s president. Pretty simple fact. The facts are that the Russians helped him. You have a hard time dealing with that. Further, for whatever reasons, there’s all this suspicion, fed by his own words and actions, that his people may have conspired with them in that assistance. Hence, an investigation is ongoing, as with Monica gate, Watergate, Iran/Contra and others. You seem to have a very difficult time accepting those facts. In fact, you deny those facts every day and I never deny Trump’s election.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Sure I do. Trump won. He’s president. Pretty simple fact. The facts are that the Russians helped him. You have a hard time dealing with that. Further, for whatever reasons, there’s all this suspicion, fed by his own words and actions, that his people may have conspired with them in that assistance. Hence, an investigation is ongoing, as with Monica gate, Watergate, Iran/Contra and others. You seem to have a very difficult time accepting those facts. In fact, you deny those facts every day and I never deny Trump’s election.


Proof?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 9, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Proof?


Of what? Or are you making my point, ie that all intelligence agencies and the isp’s etc (Facebook, google, aol) all acknowledge that the Russians meddled on trump’s behalf, but you don’t?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 9, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Of what? Or are you making my point, ie that all intelligence agencies and the isp’s etc (Facebook, google, aol) all acknowledge that the Russians meddled on trump’s behalf, but you don’t?


You mean the 3 most left wing partisan pro Clinton companies let a foreign country elect Trump?
Ok. Time for more tinfoil.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You mean the 3 most left wing partisan pro Clinton companies let a foreign country elect Trump?
> Ok. Time for more tinfoil.


You're having a hard time processing. I understand.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> You're having a hard time processing. I understand.


Fake news media.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake news media.


Fake dossier, fake news, fake George W Bush (said yesterday it's obvious from the evidence the Russians meddled), fake everything. You can't face facts and you're scared.  But again, I understand.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Fake dossier, fake news, fake George W Bush (said yesterday it's obvious from the evidence the Russians meddled), fake everything. You can't face facts and you're scared.  But again, I understand.


Just waiting for facts, with all the his corruption from the deep state left and the media ignoring their responsibility hard to tell what the truth is, but if will come out soon enough.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Just waiting for facts, with all the his corruption from the deep state left and the media ignoring their responsibility hard to tell what the truth is, but if will come out soon enough.


Exactly. I still wonder what's on those wiretaps Trump is freaking out about.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Sure I do. Trump won. He’s president. Pretty simple fact. The facts are that the Russians helped him. You have a hard time dealing with that. Further, for whatever reasons, there’s all this suspicion, fed by his own words and actions, that his people may have conspired with them in that assistance. Hence, an investigation is ongoing, as with Monica gate, Watergate, Iran/Contra and others. You seem to have a very difficult time accepting those facts. In fact, you deny those facts every day and I never deny Trump’s election.


Nobody helped Trump more than Hillary, Comey, Bernie and you people.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Exactly. I still wonder what's on those wiretaps Trump is freaking out about.


It’s not what’s on those taps that has him freaked out.  It’s that those taps existed at all.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Fake dossier, fake news, fake George W Bush (said yesterday it's obvious from the evidence the Russians meddled), fake everything. You can't face facts and you're scared.  But again, I understand.


We knew Russia was "meddling" in the election long before the vote was taken.
The Obama administration was aware of it.
"Meddling" does make colluding & the CIA determined no votes were changed in the Presidential election.
Are you sure you understand counselor?

The irony......
*Obama White House Knew of Russian Election Hacking, but Delayed Telling*
By EMMARIE HUETTEMANJUNE 21, 2017

WASHINGTON — The Obama administration feared that acknowledging Russian meddling in the 2016 election would reveal too much about intelligence gathering and be interpreted as “taking sides” in the race, the former secretary of homeland security said Wednesday.

“One of the candidates, as you recall, was predicting that the election was going to be ‘rigged’ in some way,” said Jeh Johnson, the former secretary, referring to President Trump’s unsubstantiated accusation before Election Day. “We were concerned that by making the statement we might, in and of itself, be challenging the integrity of the election process itself.”

entire article:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/21/us/politics/jeh-johnson-testimony-russian-election-hacking.html


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 10, 2018)

*Russia's role is shocking but there's no evidence the vote was hacked*
By Joshua A. Douglas
Updated 6:16 PM ET, Mon December 12, 2016

(CNN)The revelations that Russia actively sought to influence the American election and help Donald Trump become the next president are shocking, mind-blowing and downright scary. But here is something they are not: evidence that the Russians hacked voting machines or changed the Election Day count. Unsubstantiated assertions that Russia actually manipulated the vote tally are themselves dangerous.

News reports have said that the CIA concluded Russia sought to influence the election result, particularly by providing WikiLeaks with emails that Russia obtained by hacking the servers of the Democratic National Committee and Democratic individuals.

The Russians may still be holding onto information they hacked from the RNC servers. These facts, which the intelligence community knew about even before the election, should send shivers down the spines of all Americans. They are what prompted a bipartisan group in Congress, as well as Hillary Clinton spokesman John Podesta, to demand further investigation and public disclosure of what exactly Russia did to influence the campaign. Understanding what happened is vitally important, so the intelligence community should act quickly to assuage Americans' concerns.

entire article"
https://www.cnn.com/2016/12/12/opinions/russia-role-shocking-but-not-hacked-douglas/index.html


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> We knew Russia was "meddling" in the election long before the vote was taken.
> The Obama administration was aware of it.
> "Meddling" does make colluding & the CIA determined no votes were changed in the Presidential election.
> Are you sure you understand counselor?
> ...


Correct. Russia was meddling via information that was fake in an attempt to sway voters. Glad you acknowledge that. The ongoing investigation is to determine if Trump and co unlawfully conspired with them in doing so. Of course, the investigator has a broad mandate so all of the ongoing lying and coverup has led him to expand the investigation to determine if money laundering is involved, etc. These are simple facts upon which you and i seem to agree. Go tell your friend Joe.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Correct. Russia was meddling via information that was fake in an attempt to sway voters. Glad you acknowledge that. The ongoing investigation is to determine if Trump and co unlawfully conspired with them in doing so. Of course, the investigator has a broad mandate so all of the ongoing lying and coverup has led him to expand the investigation to determine if money laundering is involved, etc. These are simple facts upon which you and i seem to agree. Go tell your friend Joe.


The CIA was aware of this as it was happening...I posted this info a year ago...
Do you honestly believe they would be aware of the Russian hacking and not aware of some collusion by the "Trump team"....?
The fact that their is a special council investigating & by all accounts the administration is cooperating indicates a cover up to you?
I've never met Joe, but I know he can read what you just posted on his own. But thanks counselor.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Correct. Russia was meddling via information that was fake in an attempt to sway voters. Glad you acknowledge that. The ongoing investigation is to determine if Trump and co unlawfully conspired with them in doing so. Of course, the investigator has a broad mandate so all of the ongoing lying and coverup has led him to expand the investigation to determine if money laundering is involved, etc. These are simple facts upon which you and i seem to agree. Go tell your friend Joe.


No one is disputing anything in you post, except the lying and cover up part, it's the ifs that are the most factual words in your post. 
This might just end up being fruit from a poisoned tree.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> No one is disputing anything in you post, except the lying and cover up part, it's the ifs that are the most factual words in your post.
> This might just end up being fruit from a poisoned tree.


Fruit from the poisonous tree is the evidence rule I’m talking about. No matter how authentic or incriminating the evidence of a crime may be, it can be suppressed if it was gathered through unconstitutional means.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Correct. Russia was meddling via information that was fake in an attempt to sway voters. Glad you acknowledge that. The ongoing investigation is to determine if Trump and co unlawfully conspired with them in doing so. Of course, the investigator has a broad mandate so all of the ongoing lying and coverup has led him to expand the investigation to determine if money laundering is involved, etc. These are simple facts upon which you and i seem to agree. Go tell your friend Joe.


When you knowingly send 8 Top Secret e-mails and 30 plus Secret e-mails via an unsecured server that our intelligence agencies were well aware of and,  then point to a conspiracy elsewhere, that's the real conspiracy. LMAO!  Where do they get you people from?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Fruit from the poisonous tree is the evidence rule I’m talking about. No matter how authentic or incriminating the evidence of a crime may be, it can be suppressed if it was gathered through unconstitutional means.


Speaking of fruit from the poisonous forest.  When you knowingly send 8 Top Secret e-mails and 30 plus Secret e-mails via an unsecured server that our intelligence agencies were well aware of and, then point to a conspiracy elsewhere, that's the real conspiracy. LMAO! Where do they get you people from?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Speaking of fruit from the poisonous forest.  When you knowingly send 8 Top Secret e-mails and 30 plus Secret e-mails via an unsecured server that our intelligence agencies were well aware of and, then point to a conspiracy elsewhere, that's the real conspiracy. LMAO! Where do they get you people from?


You and Joe should be doing this investigation! Let’s tell Mueller! You guys are the real pros...just listen to you!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> You and Joe should be doing this investigation! Let’s tell Mueller! You guys are the real pros...just listen to you!


"What are you scared of?"


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> "What are you scared of?"


Not my investigation. I have no stake in the results, so therefore no fear. You and Joe are the experts. Fruit of poisonous tree, he mentioned. You mentioned top secret emails. Go get ‘em! I will await the results of your investigation and Mueller’s investigation, how’s that? Remind me of your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Not my investigation. I have no stake in the results, so therefore no fear. You and Joe are the experts. Fruit of poisonous tree, he mentioned. You mentioned top secret emails. Go get ‘em! I will await the results of your investigation and Mueller’s investigation, how’s that? Remind me of your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?


So now you want to wait? I thought you had already convicted him.


----------



## nononono (Feb 10, 2018)

*Super Bowl LII final ratings are the lowest in 9 years*

James Hibberd
February 05, 2018 AT 11:24 AM EST
*UPDATED*: Sunday’s Super Bowl fell to its lowest ratings in nine years.

Despite what fans considered a strong game — with the Philadelphia Eagles winning their first Super Bowl in a 41-33 victory over defending champion the New England Patriots — the telecast delivered “only” 103.4 million viewers — the biggest TV audience since the previous Super Bowl, as one might expect, yet also the lowest turnout since 2009. 

NBC pointed out that the last time the Patriots and Eagles met in the Super Bowl the game drew far less — 86.1 million viewers — but that was in 2005 when Super Bowl ratings tended to be lower. Ratings for the big game were gradually rising for decades … until they seemed to plateau starting in 2011 at around 111 million total viewers. Every game since has been between 108 and 114 million until this year.

The ratings decline wasn’t entirely unexpected given the viewership decreases the NFL has endured overall the last couple years. NBC points out that the margin between the Super Bowl’s overnight ratings and the NFL Playoffs was the largest ever — basically, that the big game performed really well relative to the popularity of the season.

Also, in some good ratings news for NBC: The network’s presentation of _This Is Us_ had the biggest post-Super Bowl entertainment telecast rating in six years *despite the big game slouching.*


*NFL is a losing franchise unless the Business model is changed !*
*That model change is contingent on the PLAYERS acting like human*
*beings instead of PUPPETS !*


----------



## nononono (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Exactly. I still wonder what's on those wiretaps Trump is freaking out about.



*NOTHING !*


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> So now you want to wait? I thought you had already convicted him.


No! You’re assuming, because of course I think he’s a jerk and trying to be a dictator. I don’t know anything about the results of the wiretaps or whether he’s guilty. I’m awaiting an investigation to finish, but he and you keep screaming that everything is fake. I’m saying that it’s a Republican-led investigation and trump heartily endorsed the Chief investigator mueller and now he and his supporters are trying to derail it. I find that very suspicious, but I am not an idiot who screams “lock him up” when I don’t know what the F I’m talking about. People who do that are bad for the country. I have no idea if he’s guilty of anything except being a total creep who wants to be a dictator.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Not my investigation. I have no stake in the results, so therefore no fear. You and Joe are the experts. Fruit of poisonous tree, he mentioned. You mentioned top secret emails. Go get ‘em! I will await the results of your investigation and Mueller’s investigation, how’s that? Remind me of your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?


Why would I remind you of that which is not true?  I can only remind you of that which is true:


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Not my investigation. I have no stake in the results, so therefore no fear. You and Joe are the experts. Fruit of poisonous tree, he mentioned. You mentioned top secret emails. Go get ‘em! I will await the results of your investigation and Mueller’s investigation, how’s that? Remind me of your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?


Mueller is doing damage control given the facts in my previous post.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> No! You’re assuming, because of course I think he’s a jerk and trying to be a dictator. I don’t know anything about the results of the wiretaps or whether he’s guilty. I’m awaiting an investigation to finish, but he and you keep screaming that everything is fake. I’m saying that it’s a Republican-led investigation and trump heartily endorsed the Chief investigator mueller and now he and his supporters are trying to derail it. I find that very suspicious, but I am not an idiot who screams “lock him up” when I don’t know what the F I’m talking about. People who do that are bad for the country. I have no idea if he’s guilty of anything except being a total creep who wants to be a dictator.


Cool, that is not the impression you display here.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Cool, that is not the impression you display here.


Just trying to keep the deniers in line.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> No! You’re assuming, because of course I think he’s a jerk and trying to be a dictator. I don’t know anything about the results of the wiretaps or whether he’s guilty. I’m awaiting an investigation to finish, but he and you keep screaming that everything is fake. I’m saying that it’s a Republican-led investigation and trump heartily endorsed the Chief investigator mueller and now he and his supporters are trying to derail it. I find that very suspicious, but I am not an idiot who screams “lock him up” when I don’t know what the F I’m talking about. People who do that are bad for the country. I have no idea if he’s guilty of anything except being a total creep who wants to be a dictator.


Dictators don't normally reduce the amount of taxes you pay.  Dictators don't normally reduce the amount of taxes the companies you work for pay.  Dictators don't normally reduce regulations.  What exactly is he dictating?  Need a hint?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Dictators don't normally reduce the amount of taxes you pay.  Dictators don't normally reduce the amount of taxes the companies you work for pay.  Dictators don't normally reduce regulations.  What exactly is he dictating?  Need a hint?


How does it feel to never make any sense?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> No! You’re assuming, because of course I think he’s a jerk and trying to be a dictator. I don’t know anything about the results of the wiretaps or whether he’s guilty. I’m awaiting an investigation to finish, but he and you keep screaming that everything is fake. I’m saying that it’s a Republican-led investigation and trump heartily endorsed the Chief investigator mueller and now he and his supporters are trying to derail it. I find that very suspicious, but I am not an idiot who screams “lock him up” when I don’t know what the F I’m talking about. People who do that are bad for the country. I have no idea if he’s guilty of anything except being a total creep who wants to be a dictator.


Although, "There are fine people . . . on both sides, on both sides." Those who scream lock him up are as bad as those that scream no collusion (as if that's the only thing Mueller is looking into).


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Dictators don't normally reduce the amount of taxes you pay.  Dictators don't normally reduce the amount of taxes the companies you work for pay.  Dictators don't normally reduce regulations.  What exactly is he dictating?  Need a hint?


It's "a move", "a game", "an operation", "a grift", "a scam", "a hustle" . . . it's a con. You do know what the 'con' in "con artist" is short for right?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> How does it feel to never make any sense?


Don't know.  You asked the question.  How does it feel?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's "a move", "a game", "an operation", "a grift", "a scam", "a hustle" . . . it's a con. You do know what the 'con' in "con artist" is short for right?





xav10 said:


> How does it feel to never make any sense?


Now I get who you were responding to.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

*Let's Take a Look at the Latest World Rankings for Liberty*
America's score has improved, but not enough.








As you can see, America’s #17 ranking is a function of our position for economic freedom (#11) and our position for personal freedom (#24).







For what it’s worth, America’s worst score is for “civil justice,” which basically measures rule of law. It’s embarrassing that we’re weak in that category, but not overly surprising.

Anyhow, here’s how the U.S. score has changed over time.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now I get who you were responding to.


We have always known you aren't good with comprehension . . . backing your assertions . . . explaining anything in your own words . . . history . . . math . . . investing . . . to be continued . . .


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Let's Take a Look at the Latest World Rankings for Liberty*
> America's score has improved, but not enough.
> 
> 
> ...


So that means you should be a big Obama fan as when his policies started truly taking form we gained freedom, eh?


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Let's Take a Look at the Latest World Rankings for Liberty*
> America's score has improved, but not enough.
> 
> 
> ...


Cato Institute?  Sucker.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now I get who you were responding to.


I was responding to you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So that means you should be a big Obama fan as when his policies started truly taking form we gained freedom, eh?





Hüsker Dü said:


> We have always known you aren't good with comprehension . . . backing your assertions . . . explaining anything in your own words . . . history . . . math . . . investing . . . to be continued . . .


Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So that means you should be a big Obama fan as when his policies started truly taking form we gained freedom, eh?





Hüsker Dü said:


> We have always known you aren't good with comprehension . . . backing your assertions . . . explaining anything in your own words . . . history . . . math . . . investing . . . to be continued . . .


Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> I was responding to you.


Silly me.  Thanks for the clarification.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> Cato Institute?  Sucker.


No.  Fraser Institute.... E-reader



Hüsker Dü said:


> We have always known you aren't good with comprehension . . . backing your assertions . . . explaining anything in your own words . . . history . . . math . . . investing . . . to be continued . . .


Now I know who you were responding to.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> No! You’re assuming, because of course I think he’s a jerk and trying to be a dictator. I don’t know anything about the results of the wiretaps or whether he’s guilty. I’m awaiting an investigation to finish, but he and you keep screaming that everything is fake. I’m saying that it’s a Republican-led investigation and trump heartily endorsed the Chief investigator mueller and now he and his supporters are trying to derail it. I find that very suspicious, but I am not an idiot who screams “lock him up” when I don’t know what the F I’m talking about. People who do that are bad for the country. I have no idea if he’s guilty of anything except being a total creep who wants to be a dictator.


What makes you believe he wants to be a dictator? I'm not a Trump fan but I am a fan of some of the things he is trying to do. What's wrong with trying to secure our boarders with a wall? Other Presidents and Presidential candidates wanted a fence/barrier. I think a wall is a better barrier then a fence.

But back to President Trump wanting to be a dictator. I see no evidence of that.


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  Fraser Institute.... E-reader


Ignoramus.

https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/human-freedom-index-files/2017-human-freedom-index-2.pdf


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Multi Sport said:


> What makes you believe he wants to be a dictator? I'm not a Trump fan but I am a fan of some of the things he is trying to do. What's wrong with trying to secure our boarders with a wall? Other Presidents and Presidential candidates wanted a fence/barrier. I think a wall is a better barrier then a fence.
> 
> But back to President Trump wanting to be a dictator. I see no evidence of that.


Not a t fan?  You're not fooling anybody.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> Ignoramus.
> 
> https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/human-freedom-index-files/2017-human-freedom-index-2.pdf


Did you read it?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

From the acknowledgement page:

Fred McMahon of the Fraser Institute once again served as an assiduous project editor, whose expertise
and careful eye improved the quality of the report. His work on the topic of freedom and his management of many of the scholarly seminars that led up to this publication played a key role in the creation of the index. We thank him for his collegiality, discipline, and valuable insights.


I love it when you post things that you don’t read.....again.


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> From the acknowledgement page:
> 
> Fred McMahon of the Fraser Institute once again served as an assiduous project editor, whose expertise
> and careful eye improved the quality of the report. His work on the topic of freedom and his management of many of the scholarly seminars that led up to this publication played a key role in the creation of the index. We thank him for his collegiality, discipline, and valuable insights.
> ...


Clueless.

From page 389 -

About the Authors

Ian Vásquez is the director of the Center for Global Liberty and Prosperity at the Cato Institute and a columnist at El Comercio, a newspaper in Peru. 

Tanja Porčnik is president and cofounder of the Visio Institute, a think tank based in Slovenia, and an adjunct scholar of the Cato Institute. She was formerly a senior fellow at the Atlas Economic Research Foundation; a government teaching fellow at the American Institute on Political and Economic Systems in Prague, Czech Republic (a joint program of Georgetown University and the Fund for American Studies); and a research associate and manager of external relations at the Cato Institute.​


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> Clueless.
> 
> From page 389 -
> 
> ...


So now that you've successfully defended the authorship that was clearly edited by McMahon of the Fraser institute, please tell us why the report is for "Suckers".


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So now that you've successfully defended the authorship that was clearly edited by McMahon of the Fraser institute, please tell us why the report is for "Suckers".


Sucker.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> Sucker.


Sucker


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

*What's Missing from the Public Land Conservation Debate? Property Rights*
Federal ownership is not the best way to preserve the land — private ownership is.

*Land Management and the Knowledge Problem*

Unfortunately, this is often executed poorly. Consider, for example, the longstanding issue of so-called overgrazing on federal lands in the west.

*Environmental protection groups such as the Center for Biological Diversity argue that the Bureau of Land Management is subsidizing the destruction of native vegetation and wildlife habitats by charging ranchers a submarket rate for livestock grazing access.*

While this suits the ranchers, does the practice meet the present and future needs of the Center for Biological Diversity’s thousands of supporters? 

Dilemmas like this in federal lands policy that pit interest groups against one another should come as no surprise. The multiple use guiding principle, which demands the “combination that will best meet” Americans’ needs, holds the Bureau of Land Management and its counterparts to an impossible standard.

It is not the case that government agencies and their dutiful employees mean ill — we all know how earnest park rangers are — it is that agencies lack the capacity to administer resources in a way that reflects the best combination of uses.

Economists like Friedrich Hayek teach us that knowledge is diffuse, that valuations differ, and, therefore, that a concentration of economic power in government can lead to inefficient, harmful judgments.

Applied to federal lands policy, this principle indicates that guidance from Washington cannot tell us how to utilize land to best meet the present and future needs of the American people. *What Hayek’s insight suggests, rather, is that the way to best meet present and future needs would be to enable the American people themselves to make determinations based on their own knowledge and valuations in a price-based marketplace.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

*Avoiding the Tragedy of the Commons*

There is a popular misconception that markets are “short-sighted” and do not take future needs into account. But if this were true, then farmers would slaughter all of their livestock and would eat all of their seed corn.

Indeed, the “tragedy of the commons” is a well-known phenomenon in which overgrazing, overfishing, deforestation, and other issues occur because of a lack of property rights. For a recent example, consider the African white rhino, which was in danger of extinction due to black market poaching until private property rights in the rhinos were introduced and the species was saved. *For the very same reason, nobody ever worries that cows will go extinct.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Groups that value land preservation, like the Center for Biological Diversity and Patagonia, Inc., would have just as much of a right to participate in the marketplace as would ranchers or companies that might use the land for commercial development.

With the implementation of a price-centric system for federal lands policy reform, individuals, advocacy groups, and companies alike would be able to express the value they attach to the land not through lobbying the government, as we see now, but through trading.

Rather than fuming at President Trump’s Bears Ears downsizing, conservationists and recreationists should consider whether they truly want the lands they love to be controlled from the sterile confines of federal offices in Washington or whether they might benefit from a more open, free system.


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker


You don't even know what you are copying.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> You don't even know what you are copying.


Prove it.


----------



## espola (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Prove it.


You prove it every day.

q.e.d.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> You prove it every day.
> 
> q.e.d.


Prove it


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

espola said:


> Not a t fan?  You're not fooling anybody.


You have everyone figured out don't you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You have everyone figured out don't you.


You mean except himself.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Multi Sport said:


> What makes you believe he wants to be a dictator? I'm not a Trump fan but I am a fan of some of the things he is trying to do. What's wrong with trying to secure our boarders with a wall? Other Presidents and Presidential candidates wanted a fence/barrier. I think a wall is a better barrier then a fence.
> 
> But back to President Trump wanting to be a dictator. I see no evidence of that.


He has condoned violence toward political opponents at rallies, suggesting he wants violent support from a mob. He denounces the press as the enemy and suggests pulling their licenses, which would tend to leave “his” media (ie fox, etc) unopposed. He continues to have rallies even though he’s already president. He denounces judges as “Mexican” and, therefore, “biased,” when they are ruling in his case. He denounces the Department of Justice and the FBI as “biased” and “corrupt” while investigating him. The latter two are examples of attempting to delegitimization government forces that are independent of his power. He wants a military
parade. Nepotism is a hallmark if his administration. He lies every day, more than any president in history, and denies that he lied. These are all hallmarks of one who seeks to rule without any opposition, ie a dictator.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> He has condoned violence toward political opponents at rallies, suggesting he wants violent support from a mob. He denounces the press as the enemy and suggests pulling their licenses, which would tend to leave “his” media (ie fox, etc) unopposed. He continues to have rallies even though he’s already president. He denounces judges as “Mexican” and, therefore, “biased,” when they are ruling in his case. He denounces the Department of Justice and the FBI as “biased” and “corrupt” while investigating him. The latter two are examples of attempting to delegitimization government forces that are independent of his power. He wants a military
> parade. Nepotism is a hallmark if his administration. He lies every day, more than any president in history, and denies that he lied. These are all hallmarks of one who seeks to rule without any opposition, ie a dictator.


Has anyone mentioned the sky is not falling?


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Not my investigation. I have no stake in the results, so therefore no fear. You and Joe are the experts. Fruit of poisonous tree, he mentioned. You mentioned top secret emails. Go get ‘em! I will await the results of your investigation and Mueller’s investigation, how’s that? Remind me of your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?


You certainly have a stake in the results.....what are "your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> He has condoned violence toward political opponents at rallies, suggesting he wants violent support from a mob. He denounces the press as the enemy and suggests pulling their licenses, which would tend to leave “his” media (ie fox, etc) unopposed. He continues to have rallies even though he’s already president. He denounces judges as “Mexican” and, therefore, “biased,” when they are ruling in his case. He denounces the Department of Justice and the FBI as “biased” and “corrupt” while investigating him. The latter two are examples of attempting to delegitimization government forces that are independent of his power. He wants a military
> parade. Nepotism is a hallmark if his administration. He lies every day, more than any president in history, and denies that he lied. These are all hallmarks of one who seeks to rule without any opposition, ie a dictator.


What has he dictated so far?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Has anyone mentioned the sky is not falling?


That’s your a-hole response when I made a sincere attempt to answer your question about why I think he’s trying to be a dictator? With a bunch of accurate observations?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> That’s your a-hole response when I made a sincere attempt to answer your question about why I think he’s trying to be a dictator? With a bunch of accurate observations?


Oops my bad. You’re not the one who asked me.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> You certainly have a stake in the results.....what are "your credentials as a lawyer or investigator, please?"


I am a lawyer but I know enough not to scream about “lock her up” like the idiots. “8 top secret emails, blah blah blah”


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Has anyone mentioned the sky is not falling?


Yet.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> I am a lawyer but I know enough not to scream about “lock her up” like the idiots. “8 top secret emails, blah blah blah”


Why do you defend Hillary is the face of actual proof?


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Why do you defend Hillary is the face of actual proof?


Proof of what? She negligently used her personal server for business purposes? BFD. What else? Nobody has been investigated more, ever. Did she whine like a bitch about their bias to delegitimization the Benghazi investigation and the email investigation? Did she rant and rave about comey when he possibly cost her the election by saying “re-opening the investigation?” Guilty of what?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Proof of what? She negligently used her personal server for business purposes? BFD. What else? Nobody has been investigated more, ever. Did she whine like a bitch about their bias to delegitimization the Benghazi investigation and the email investigation? Did she rant and rave about comey when he possibly cost her the election by saying “re-opening the investigation?” Guilty of what?


And you talk about us? You are officially a kook.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Proof of what? She negligently used her personal server for business purposes? BFD. What else? Nobody has been investigated more, ever. Did she whine like a bitch about their bias to delegitimization the Benghazi investigation and the email investigation? Did she rant and rave about comey when he possibly cost her the election by saying “re-opening the investigation?” Guilty of what?


You are trying to talk sense to a political tool? Someone who has chosen Trump over country.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> He has *condoned* violence toward political opponents at rallies, *suggesting* he wants violent support from a mob. He *denounces *the press as the enemy and suggests pulling their licenses, which would tend to leave “his” media (ie fox, etc) unopposed. He continues to *have rallies *even though he’s already president. He *denounces* judges as “Mexican” and, therefore, “biased,” when they are ruling in his case. He *denounces* the Department of Justice and the FBI as “biased” and “corrupt” while investigating him. The latter two are examples of *attempting to delegitimization government forces* *that are independent of his power. He wants a military parade*. *Nepotism* is a hallmark if his administration. *He lies *every day, more than any president in history, and denies that he lied. These are all hallmarks of one who seeks to rule without any opposition, ie a dictator.


Again, dictators don't let people keep more of the wages that they earned.  Dictators don't let corporations keep more of the money that they earned.  Dictators don't want to penalize people for not buying health insurance.  Dictators don't tell people they can keep their healhtcare if they like it and then reduce the options for healthcare, while prices increase.  None of what you stated actually dictate$ anything.


----------



## xav10 (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> And you talk about us? You are officially a kook.


She’s guilty of what? What crime did she commit? Why does the idiot mob shout “lock her up” all the time? It’s not a complicated question.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are trying to talk sense to a political tool? Someone who has chosen Trump over country.


No, just over hillary and that's what you can't handle.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Proof of what? She negligently used her personal server for business purposes? BFD.


Sounds like the hallmark of a dictator.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> She’s guilty of what? What crime did she commit? Why does the idiot mob shout “lock her up” all the time? It’s not a complicated question.


Because she is a crook.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Did she whine like a bitch about their bias to delegitimization the Benghazi investigation and the email investigation? Did she rant and rave about comey when he possibly cost her the election by saying “re-opening the investigation?”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> She’s guilty of what? What crime did she commit? Why does the idiot mob shout “lock her up” all the time? It’s not a complicated question.


You're sounding an awful lot like a dictator.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> No, just over hillary and that's what you can't handle.


Game Over


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> I am a lawyer but I know enough not to scream about “lock her up” like the idiots. “8 top secret emails, blah blah blah”


A lawyer knows enough to get paid for being wrong or losing a case.  Just like Hillary.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

xav10 said:


> That’s your a-hole response when I made a sincere attempt to answer your question about why I think he’s trying to be a dictator? With a bunch of accurate observations?


Yes you did.  But you were sincerely wrong.  It happens.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes you did.  But you were sincerely wrong.  It happens.


Because you only do pester, never sincere.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 10, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Because you only do pester, never sincere.


You wouldn't feel pestered if you weren't so consistently wrong.  That happens too.  And the alleged Lawyer doesn't need your help.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 11, 2018)

xav10 said:


> He has condoned violence toward political opponents at rallies, suggesting he wants violent support from a mob. He denounces the press as the enemy and suggests pulling their licenses, which would tend to leave “his” media (ie fox, etc) unopposed. He continues to have rallies even though he’s already president. He denounces judges as “Mexican” and, therefore, “biased,” when they are ruling in his case. He denounces the Department of Justice and the FBI as “biased” and “corrupt” while investigating him. The latter two are examples of attempting to delegitimization government forces that are independent of his power. He wants a military
> parade. Nepotism is a hallmark if his administration. He lies every day, more than any president in history, and denies that he lied. These are all hallmarks of one who seeks to rule without any opposition, ie a dictator.



Did the above happen? Yep. Is your interpretation of what happened far reaching? I think so. Now if President Trump were to run again, lose and then declare the election void and claim victory and at the same time try to change the laws so that he can stay in power indefinitely... well I would be in total agreement with you.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 11, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You wouldn't feel pestered if you weren't so consistently wrong.  That happens too.  And the alleged Lawyer doesn't need your help.


Show me where I am wrong.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2018)

WATCH: Shapiro On Fox & Friends: 'Nobody Wants To Talk About The Real Drivers Of The Debt, And That’s Not Military Spending'
1 day ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/26984/watch-shapiro-fox-friends-nobody-wants-talk-about-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwiw6NGPgZ7ZAhVs3IMKHVwXAV4QqUMIRjAI&usg=AOvVaw1m9mHhcNxcCY3V6Yw9Ke8n


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 11, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> WATCH: Shapiro On Fox & Friends: 'Nobody Wants To Talk About The Real Drivers Of The Debt, And That’s Not Military Spending'
> 1 day ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/26984/watch-shapiro-fox-friends-nobody-wants-talk-about-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwiw6NGPgZ7ZAhVs3IMKHVwXAV4QqUMIRjAI&usg=AOvVaw1m9mHhcNxcCY3V6Yw9Ke8n


Again with the gullible stupidity? When have any of these people you listen to ever been correct? Idiocracy is truly upon us.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Again with the gullible stupidity? When have any of these people you listen to ever been correct? Idiocracy is truly upon us.


What is he wrong about?
We all know a union boy like you is all for entitlements,
Shocker.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 11, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You wouldn't feel pestered if you weren't so consistently wrong.  That happens too.  And the alleged Lawyer doesn't need your help.





Hüsker Dü said:


> Show me where I am wrong.





Sheriff Joe said:


> WATCH: Shapiro On Fox & Friends: 'Nobody Wants To Talk About The Real Drivers Of The Debt, And That’s Not Military Spending'
> 1 day ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/26984/watch-shapiro-fox-friends-nobody-wants-talk-about-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwiw6NGPgZ7ZAhVs3IMKHVwXAV4QqUMIRjAI&usg=AOvVaw1m9mHhcNxcCY3V6Yw9Ke8n





Hüsker Dü said:


> Again with the gullible stupidity? When have any of these people you listen to ever been correct? Idiocracy is truly upon us.


Yes it is.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 11, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What is he wrong about?
> We all know a union boy like you is all for entitlements,
> Shocker.
> View attachment 2036


You continue to show your ignorance and you seem proud of it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You continue to show your ignorance and you seem proud of it.


I see X10 making up for your diminishing word count.  Well done.  Pat yourself on the back.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You continue to show your ignorance and you seem proud of it.


I am waiting.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 11, 2018)

*Close the Loophole Legalizing Union Violence*
There are no "legitimate" circumstances for aggressive violence.
*by **Emily Top*

Some might be surprised to know that labor union violence, exploitation, and coercion are still legal today as a result of a loophole in the 1946 Hobbs Act.

It is absurd that under so-called “legitimate” circumstances, such as seeking higher wages, union members can potentially get away with slashing tires or detonating pipe bombs in order to coerce their opponents. U.S. laws do not fully protect employers, nonmembers, and non-striking members from union threats.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Show me where I am wrong.


Easy money...that's your post Daffy.
_"Don't remember any santa ana's in late January in my almost 57 years here . . . but of course you know more than me (and the scientists), just ask you."_

Next!

From the LA TIMES:


CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
*Santa Anas may join the parade*
December 31, 2007 | Scott Gold, Times Staff Writer
The Rose Parade and the Rose Bowl have long served as Southern California's annual infomercials, as millions of people around the world gather around their television sets to marvel at the floats and the football -- but also to wonder how it could possibly be so darn sunny in the middle of the winter. This year, though, the parade and the game could feature another trademark of Southern California weather: Santa Ana winds.


CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
*Red-flag fire danger lurks under blue skies in Los Angeles*
January 11, 2009 | Hector Becerra
Santa Ana winds left Southern California skies sunny and blue Saturday but kept firefighting strike teams on the lookout for any hint of fire as brush-covered hillsides quickly dried out in rising temperatures. No major brush fires were reported in the region by Saturday night. A red-flag warning issued by the National Weather Service for Los Angeles and Ventura counties is expected to persist until about 4 p.m. today, when temperatures are expected to reach the low 80s in some places.


CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
*Word for the Week: Warm : Santa Ana Winds and Sunny Skies Are Expected to Stick Around*
February 25, 1992 | KRISTINA LINDGREN and AJOWA N. IFATEYO, TIMES STAFF WRITERS
Dig out a few more warm-weather clothes, because balmy temperatures and sunny skies are expected to dominate Orange County this week. Unseasonably warm winds blowing from the northeast continued to push moist marine air out to sea Monday, meteorologists said. That allowed the mercury to climb to 87 degrees in Santa Ana, which shared the mantle as the nation's hot spot. But the warm Santa Ana winds that had raked the Southland with gusts to nearly 60 m.p.h.


CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
*3 Die as 75 M.P.H. Santa Ana Winds Bowl Over Trucks*
January 8, 1986 | SEBASTIAN DORTCH and JERRY BELCHER, Times Staff Writers
Two Florida men were killed Tuesday when 75 m.p.h. Santa Ana winds overturned their tractor-trailer truck on Interstate 8, 40 miles east of San Diego. Another driver was killed in Riverside County when the wind slammed his twin-trailer truck into a guard rail on Interstate 15 east of Ontario. The California Highway Patrol reported that six other vehicles were also bowled over by high winds roaring out of the desert in Southern California.



CALIFORNIA | LOCAL
*86--L.A. Record Set With Aid of Santa Ana Winds*
February 7, 1987
As might have been suspected, the temperature set a record in Los Angeles Civic Center on Friday, reaching 86 degrees as hot Santa Ana winds whipped down out of the deserts. The previous maximum reading for Feb. 6 was 34 years ago, when it was 84. Winds were strong below the canyons. Some gusts in the Tehachapis and around the mountains of San Diego County were 60 m.p.h. Wind advisories were also issued for many other Southland mountain areas, where gusts were 20 to 40 m.p.h.

more articles:
http://articles.latimes.com/keyword/santa-ana-winds


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 11, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Easy money...that's your post Daffy.
> _"Don't remember any santa ana's in late January in my almost 57 years here . . . but of course you know more than me (and the scientists), just ask you."_
> 
> Next!
> ...


Sunshine is currently scouring the internet to try and figure out what fake news outlet you used. It may take him a few days to figure it out...


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 12, 2018)

Sunshine almost always makes me laugh out loud....


----------



## nononono (Feb 12, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Show me where I am wrong.



*Your very first post on this Forum you were WRONG !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 12, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Your very first post on this Forum you were WRONG !*


He was a bit of a speed bump.  E, Wez, and Du were just annoyances when Laced and I were posting.  But for sure Du was just lost.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 13, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Your very first post on this Forum you were WRONG !*


So show me, should be easy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You will find that, "significant minority" is overly represented in here.


Wrong


----------



## nononono (Feb 14, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So show me, should be easy.


*Prove me wrong .....Should be easy Adam Schiff the Rat !*


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He was a bit of a speed bump.  E, Wez, and Du were just annoyances when Laced and I were posting.  But for sure Du was just lost.


Who was Du? And what ever became of Grandpa Duck?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 14, 2018)

Multi Sport said:


> Who was Du? And what ever became of Grandpa Duck?


Du was Rat Patrol.


----------



## Multi Sport (Feb 14, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Du was Rat Patrol.


Lol... makes sense. All that was missing was the R, N and K.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 16, 2018)

– *let’s say that Beijing subsidized the successful development of a pill that cures all cancers.  *The pill need be taken only once, it has no ill side-effects, and it is sold globally by Chinese pharmaceutical companies for $10 apiece.  *This pill would destroy the comparative advantage long enjoyed by American oncologists. * *Do you believe that Uncle Sam should obstruct Americans who are victimized by cancer from having access to this pill on the grounds that its development is the result of foreign-government intervention that destroyed the comparative advantage of some very high-wage American workers?  *If not, why do you think that Uncle Sam should obstruct Americans who are victimized by, say, unnecessarily high prices of steel or of solar panels from having access to steel and solar panels whose prices are made lower on global markets by foreign-government subsidies?--Donald J. Boudreaux


----------



## nononono (Feb 17, 2018)

................................


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2018)

*Stop "Protecting" Us from Affordable Washing Machines*
More "American Consumers Last" trade policy.


*by Mark J. Perry*


In his latest _Boston Globe_ column, Jeff Jacoby (“Donald Trump protects Americans from affordable washing machines“) explains how Donald Trump’s “_American Consumers Last_” trade policies are an act of economic aggression that victimize US consumers and make America poorer, not more prosperous:

_In his Oval Office statement announcing the tariffs on imported solar cells and washing machines, President Trump said their purpose was to “uphold a principle of fair trade and demonstrate to the world that the United States will not be taken advantage of anymore.”

This is the way protectionists [scarcityists] always talk. They portray foreign sellers as economic aggressors, who “dump” their wares on the US market and “take advantage” of Americans by engaging in “unfair” trade.

Yet the overseas manufacturers have taken advantage of nobody. Samsung and LG don’t force Americans to buy their machines — they encourage them to do so, by offering features and designs that Americans like at prices Americans find attractive. Not a single Samsung or LG washer enters the United States unless a buyer has chosen to import it. The only party engaging in economic aggression here is the White House. Trump’s tariffs will penalize the Korean companies not for doing something wrong, but for supplying Americans with choices Whirlpool wasn’t giving them. Consumers will be the losers, victimized by a government more interested in protecting a peevish company from lively competition than in protecting the gains that lively competition yields._


----------



## xav10 (Feb 26, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Stop "Protecting" Us from Affordable Washing Machines*
> More "American Consumers Last" trade policy.
> 
> 
> ...


So you're a Globalist?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2018)

xav10 said:


> So you're a Globalist?


What does that mean?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 27, 2018)

Why am I not worried that some group of people or the entire world are "moving towards socialism"?

Because I have eyes.

Everywhere I look — every state, country, city, or region in every culture and tongue — everywhere I have ever been or heard about consists of people who daily reveal their love for markets. People the world over love free trade and the fruits thereof. They seek it. They find it even when governments try to stamp it out. It cannot die.

People love to create, exchange, produce, consume, innovate, improve, and seek material and spiritual progress, happiness, and comfort. The remotest place on earth, if humans live there, will have shops and markets and trading of some kind.

Everywhere capitalism has an ounce of oxygen or an inch of space, it explodes with a force untouchable by any do-gooder scheme of violence and control.

Show me a protester, and I will show you his closet full of the fruits of capitalism. Show me an advocate of redistributionism, and I’ll show you her interest-yielding accounts. Show me an unruly mob, and I’ll show you a group of consumers and producers who jump at every chance to engage in peaceful, self-interested trade.--I.  Morehouse


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 1, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What does that mean?


Do you drool a lot? Were you made to wear a helmet on the small yellow bus you rode to school?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 1, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Do you drool a lot? Were you made to wear a helmet on the small yellow bus you rode to school?


Still mad about the Snopes and FEE article that agreed with each other and made you look like a fool for saying otherwise.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

*The Laffer Curve: It's Time to Stop Laughing*
The new tax plan has shown that Arthur Laffer’s analysis was correct.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

The Laffer Curve shows the direct correlation between tax rates and tax revenue. The graph suggests that there is a certain tax rate the government should impose. To better understand the graph, you have to understand where placing the tax rate at either end of the X-axis would mean. If the government imposed a tax rate of 0 percent, the government would not collect any revenue. If the government imposed a tax rate of 100 percent, individuals would no longer work and businesses would no longer produce goods as there would be no incentive to do so.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0118.pdf

The intended effect of cutting taxes is to accelerate economic growth. An unintended consequence of cutting taxes is raising government revenue. The January 2018 Monthly Treasury Statement showed that the U.S. Department of Treasury received $361 billion in tax revenue. In January 2018, the Treasury received $212 billion in individual income taxes, $113 billion in payroll taxes, $13 billion in corporate income taxes, and $23 billion in other taxes. For January, it was the most tax revenue collected in American history.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

Furthermore, taxes received in the first four months of fiscal year 2018 (FY18) are also the most in American history. Thus far, tax revenue for FY18 has come from $603 billion in individual taxes, $372 billion in payroll taxes, $76 billion in corporate taxes, and $81 billion in other taxes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

*President Trump's Predecessors Learned about Steel Tariffs the Hard Way*
The costs of protectionism always outweigh the benefits.
M. Perry


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

The chart above displays a comparison of market returns today. The overall market, measured by the S&P 500, was down by 36 points and by 1.3% today; while the shares of steel-using companies like GM, Ford, and Boeing all fell more than twice that amount, or between 3-4%.

In contrast, US Steel shares soared by nearly 5.8%, which boosted the steelmaker’s market cap value by almost half a billion dollars. The costs of protectionism always outweigh the benefits, and the jobs lost always outweigh the jobs saved, and perhaps that net loss of economic value is also reflected in stock market values — the losses in market value suffered broadly by steel-using industries always outweigh the concentrated gains to the firms in the protected industry.


----------



## xav10 (Mar 3, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The chart above displays a comparison of market returns today. The overall market, measured by the S&P 500, was down by 36 points and by 1.3% today; while the shares of steel-using companies like GM, Ford, and Boeing all fell more than twice that amount, or between 3-4%.
> 
> In contrast, US Steel shares soared by nearly 5.8%, which boosted the steelmaker’s market cap value by almost half a billion dollars. The costs of protectionism always outweigh the benefits, and the jobs lost always outweigh the jobs saved, and perhaps that net loss of economic value is also reflected in stock market values — the losses in market value suffered broadly by steel-using industries always outweigh the concentrated gains to the firms in the protected industry.


Guess what states the newly protected industries are in? Trump is thinking about the electoral college.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Guess what states the newly protected industries are in? Trump is thinking about the electoral college.


I suggest his opponents do the same.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Guess what states the newly protected industries are in? Trump is thinking about the electoral college.


Obama did the same with the auto industry.  The QE thing again.  Trump doing it without.


----------



## xav10 (Mar 3, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Obama did the same with the auto industry.  The QE thing again.  Trump doing it without.


What drugs are you on?


----------



## nononono (Mar 3, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Do you drool a lot? *Were you made to wear a helmet on the small yellow bus you rode to school*?


*Nice to see your true character exposed.....*
*Stooping to a level of sub-human classlessness I see.....*


----------



## nononono (Mar 3, 2018)

xav10 said:


> What drugs are you on?


*Don't read your History do you.....Are you on drugs...?*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 3, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Nice to see your true character exposed.....*
> *Stooping to a level of sub-human classlessness I see.....*


I could never come close to the depths you occupy . . . slugs look down on you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

xav10 said:


> What drugs are you on?


You like YOUR reality better  than reality.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Don't read your History do you.....Are you on drugs...?*


Their too smart to do either.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Nice to see your true character exposed.....*
> *Stooping to a level of sub-human classlessness I see.....*


Drooling usually means I got a good night sleep.  I did ride a short bus to school.  A 1971 VW.  Tan colored though.  We didn't wear helmets back then.  Not even to ride a bike.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Their too smart to do either.


And I'm too smart to use "their" instead of They're


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 3, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 6, 2018)

*Trump's Budget Paves the Road to Fiscal Failure*
If we're not careful, it may be impossible to exit the road to fiscal failure and paternalistic serfdom.

https://fee.org/articles/trumps-budget-paves-the-road-to-fiscal-failure/

*Challenging the Entitlement Premises*

The fact is America is continuing to move in the long-run direction of fiscal unsustainability. *The supposed untouchability of the “entitlement” segment of the federal budget will have to be made touchable. *Nearly 90 years ago, in 1930, the famous “Austrian” economist, Ludwig von Mises, said to an audience of Viennese industrialists during an earlier economic crisis:

_Whenever there is talk about decreasing public expenditures, the advocates of this fiscal spending policy voice their objection, saying that most of the existing expenditures, as well as the increasing expenditures, are inevitable . . . What exactly does ‘inevitable’ mean in this context?

That the expenditures are based on various laws that have been passed in the past is not an objection if the argument for eliminating these laws is based on their damaging effects on the economy. The metaphorical use of the term ‘inevitable’ is nothing but a haven in which to hide in the face of an inability to comprehend the seriousness of our situation. *People do not want to accept that fact that the public budget has to be radically reduced.”*_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 6, 2018)

In addition, the entitlement mindset must be confronted with an articulate and reasoned defense of individual liberty, based on a philosophy of individual rights to life, liberty, and honestly acquired property. Plus, *the ethics of liberty must be shown to be inseparable from the idea of peaceful and voluntary association among people in all facets of life, and that government’s role is to secure and protect such liberty and individual rights, not to abridge and violate them.*

If this is not done, and done successfully, the road to fiscal failure and paternalistic serfdom may be impossible from which to exit.


----------



## Booter (Mar 7, 2018)

I suppose when one works a non-essential military job and contributes nothing to society they are inclined to support spending cuts anywhere but the military.

*The Ugly Truth About the Federal Deficit: It's Not Just Entitlement Spending*
*The key issues of contention in the U.S. deficit debate have been entitlement spending and tax revenue, but both parties are ignoring the real problem: defense spending that far exceeds what is necessary to protect the United States.*
The military burden
The cost of security-related spending dwarfs the net cost of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid combined. The CBO's most recent (post-sequester) estimate of 2013 discretionary security spending was $751 billion. That primarily accounts for military spending but includes spending for related departments such as Homeland Security and Veterans Affairs. That total excludes _mandatory _spending related to benefits for veterans and members of the military, which is projected at $132 billion. Thus, total military and security spending will approach $900 billion, even after the recent budget cuts.

Obviously, some level of military spending is vital for our national security. However, by comparison to any reasonable standard, the U.S. spends far too much. China, which fields the second-most powerful military, plans to spend just $119 billion on the military this year, along with $124 billion on internal security. While these figures may be understated to some extent, Chinese military spending is undoubtedly a fraction of U.S. military spending.

https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/03/12/the-ugly-truth-about-the-federal-deficit-its-not-j.aspx


----------



## nononono (Mar 7, 2018)

Booter said:


> I suppose when one works a non-essential military job and contributes nothing to society they are inclined to support spending cuts anywhere but the military.
> 
> *The Ugly Truth About the Federal Deficit: It's Not Just Entitlement Spending*
> *The key issues of contention in the U.S. deficit debate have been entitlement spending and tax revenue, but both parties are ignoring the real problem: defense spending that far exceeds what is necessary to protect the United States.*
> ...



*Urine Idiot.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 7, 2018)

Booter said:


> I suppose when one works a non-essential military job and contributes nothing to society they are inclined to support spending cuts anywhere but the military.
> 
> *The Ugly Truth About the Federal Deficit: It's Not Just Entitlement Spending*
> *The key issues of contention in the U.S. deficit debate have been entitlement spending and tax revenue, but both parties are ignoring the real problem: defense spending that far exceeds what is necessary to protect the United States.*
> ...


Not surprised you chose the fool.  But it's a nice little trick that the fools pulled on you fools by adding civilian and military pensions and, VA benefits to defense spending of $646 billion to arrive at $900 billion, which is still less than SSA at $960 billion and Medicare at $1.17 trillion.  I've posted the debt clock repeatedly so that you fools aren't misled by fools. #read

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 7, 2018)

Booter said:


> I suppose when one works a non-essential military job and contributes nothing to society they are inclined to support spending cuts anywhere but the military.
> 
> *The Ugly Truth About the Federal Deficit: It's Not Just Entitlement Spending*
> *The key issues of contention in the U.S. deficit debate have been entitlement spending and tax revenue, but both parties are ignoring the real problem: defense spending that far exceeds what is necessary to protect the United States.*
> ...


#wezwillbealongshortlytohelpyoudig


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 9, 2018)

Lying mother fuckers, moonbeam needs to go.
*Cost for California bullet train rises to $77.3 billion...*
The disclosure about the higher costs comes nearly a decade after voters approved a $9-billion bond to build a bullet train system. The original idea was that the federal government would pay about a third of what was then an estimated $33-billion project, with private investors covering another third.

But those assumptions proved faulty on numerous counts. In later business plans the projected price went to $43 billion, somewhere between $98 billion and $117 billion, down to $66 billion, and then $64 billion in 2016. And the funding sources dried up. The federal government only put in $3.5 billion and Republicans have vowed not to add another penny. Private investors have said they would not commit any investment to the project without a guarantee that they can't lose money.

Potentially the biggest single future challenge will involve the mountain passages in Southern California and Northern California. The San Gabriel and Tehachapi mountain crossings will require as much as 36 miles of deep tunneling, the most ambitious underground transportation construction in the nation's history. In the north, the project will have to build a 13-mile tunnel under the Pacheco Pass, just east of Gilroy. There will be other costly tunnels in urban Los Angeles and San Francisco, as well.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2018)

*Entitlements: The "Most Predictable Economic Crisis in History"*
It’s not just libertarians and conservatives who recognize that there is a problem.

https://fee.org/articles/entitlements-the-most-predictable-economic-crisis-in-history/


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Entitlements: The "Most Predictable Economic Crisis in History"*
> It’s not just libertarians and conservatives who recognize that there is a problem.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/entitlements-the-most-predictable-economic-crisis-in-history/


Entitlements....this is why the left wing socialist are having mini strokes about tax reform
Who's gonna pay for entitlements now that the tax bill will allow the people who earned the money to spend the money how they please....
Almost as if they were entitled to that money.
Outrageous !!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Entitlements....this is why the left wing socialist are having mini strokes about tax reform
> Who's gonna pay for entitlements now that the tax bill will allow the people who earned the money to spend the money how they please....
> Almost as if they were entitled to that money.
> Outrageous !!


Ahhhh yes, deficits


----------



## xav10 (Mar 13, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Entitlements....this is why the left wing socialist are having mini strokes about tax reform
> Who's gonna pay for entitlements now that the tax bill will allow the people who earned the money to spend the money how they please....
> Almost as if they were entitled to that money.
> Outrageous !!


Are social security and Medicare entitlements? Is free public education an entitlement?


----------



## xav10 (Mar 13, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Are social security and Medicare entitlements? Is free public education an entitlement?


SSI, Government pensions, etc. So the beef is with welfare programs? Or subsidized school lunches? Food stamps? Why would we resent those so much? I think the government pensions are a little crazy, myself.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2018)

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2018)

xav10 said:


> SSI, Government pensions, etc. So the beef is with welfare programs? Or subsidized school lunches? Food stamps? Why would we resent those so much? I think the government pensions are a little crazy, myself.


I'm sorry, are you under the impression that taxes are voluntary?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 13, 2018)

xav10 said:


> SSI, Government pensions, etc. So the beef is with welfare programs? Or subsidized school lunches? Food stamps? Why would we resent those so much? I think the government pensions are a little crazy, myself.


I stood in line at the grocery store last night behind a couple of big fat tattooed illegals for 10 minutes waiting for them to use their WIC certificates. Boy was I pissed.


----------



## xav10 (Mar 13, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I stood in line at the grocery store last night behind a couple of big fat tattooed illegals for 10 minutes waiting for them to use their WIC certificates. Boy was I pissed.


How did you know they were undocumented? And isn’t big, fat and tattooed just your cup of tea?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 14, 2018)

xav10 said:


> How did you know they were undocumented? And isn’t big, fat and tattooed just your cup of tea?


I am sheriff Joe, I know these things. If they have money for tattoos I don't need to pay for their anchor baby's food.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 16, 2018)

OKLAHOMA CITY -- 

When the GOP took full control of Oklahoma government after the 2010 election, lawmakers set out to make it a model of Republican principles, with lower taxes, lighter regulation and a raft of business-friendly reforms.

Conservatives passed all of it, setting in motion a grand experiment. Now it's time for another big election, but instead of campaigning on eight years of achievements, Republicans are confronting chaos and crisis. Agency budgets that were cut during the Great Recession have been slashed even deeper. Rural hospitals are closing, and teachers are considering a statewide strike over low wages.

"I'm not scared to say it, because I love Oklahoma, and we are dying," said Republican state Rep. Leslie Osborn. "I truly believe the situation is dire."

Oklahoma's woes offer the ultimate cautionary tale for other states considering trickle-down economic reforms. The outlook is so grim that some Republicans are willing to consider the ultimate heresy: raising taxes to fund education and health care, an idea that was once the exclusive province of Democrats.


----------



## nononono (Mar 16, 2018)

xav10 said:


> How did you know they were undocumented? And isn’t big, fat and tattooed just your cup of tea?


*I do believe that's right down your Hermosa & 30th St alley......*
*You wanna be 20 again so you tatted your fat self up....*
*You are the predictable ambulance chaser type !*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 16, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Are social security and Medicare entitlements? Is free public education an entitlement?


I can only hope you're asking rhetorically......


----------



## xav10 (Mar 16, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> I can only hope you're asking rhetorically......


Why? If “entitlements” worry you as things that “left-wing socialists” care about, I thought I’d point some out. Are Medicare and social security left- wing and socialist? You don’t like them?


----------



## nononono (Mar 16, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Why? If “entitlements” worry you as things that “left-wing socialists” care about, I thought I’d point some out. Are Medicare and social security left- wing and socialist? You don’t like them?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 16, 2018)

xav10 said:


> Why? If “entitlements” worry you as things that “left-wing socialists” care about, I thought I’d point some out. Are Medicare and social security left- wing and socialist? You don’t like them?


I’m sorry, did you think paying taxes is voluntary?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 17, 2018)

nononono said:


>


Flying the colors I see eh comrade?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 17, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I’m sorry, did you think paying taxes is voluntary?


You are just one in a class of mentally challenged nutters your turn will come, sit down and wipe the drool off your face.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 17, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are just one in a class of mentally challenged nutters your turn will come, sit down and wipe the drool off your face.


Who told you you were challenging?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 17, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are just one in a class of mentally challenged nutters your turn will come, sit down and wipe the drool off your face.


You seem a little more rational today than normal.
You ok?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 17, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Who told you you were challenging?


I think you people talk to themselves often.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 17, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Who told you you were challenging?


There's your fear and insecurity once again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 17, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> There's your fear and insecurity once again.


I must confess, Rats do initially scare me.  But you shouldn't take any security in that.  Steve the Orkin guy says it's just a numbers game.  So we set up 25 traps in the garage.  The shocking part is he tells me "no bait required"!!  Kinda like in here.  He's the Orkin guy so I play along.  Traps set at about 5 p.m. and I start checking all the traps at 11 pm., nothing.  Then just as I am about to go back in the house, I see something hanging down from my work bench cabinet 'bout 3 to 4 inches long.  Its a Norway's tail.  Mission Accomplished, a nice sized Norwegian is crunched right behind the ears across the neck.  Nailed his buddy the day after.  Haven't had any trouble with fear and insecurity since.  Kinda like in here.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I must confess, Rats do initially scare me.  But you shouldn't take any security in that.  Steve the Orkin guy says it's just a numbers game.  So we set up 25 traps in the garage.  The shocking part is he tells me "no bait required"!!  Kinda like in here.  He's the Orkin guy so I play along.  Traps set at about 5 p.m. and I start checking all the traps at 11 pm., nothing.  Then just as I am about to go back in the house, I see something hanging down from my work bench cabinet 'bout 3 to 4 inches long.  Its a Norway's tail.  Mission Accomplished, a nice sized Norwegian is crunched right behind the ears across the neck.  Nailed his buddy the day after.  Haven't had any trouble with fear and insecurity since.  Kinda like in here.


You really are a giant wuss with your skirt in the air.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You really are a giant wuss with your skirt in the air.


I know.  Them little Rat Bastards are scarier than the NRA.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I know.  Them little Rat Bastards are scarier than the NRA.


The NRA are the vermin that use fear tactics to advance their agenda . . . you are just a scary pussy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The NRA are the vermin that use fear tactics to advance their agenda . . . you are just a scary pussy.


Thatʻs just your fear and insecurity


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 18, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The NRA are the vermin that use fear tactics to advance their agenda . . . you are just a scary pussy.


What's with the language lately?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 18, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What's with the language lately?


I know right?  Fear and insecurity does that to you.


----------



## Booter (Mar 19, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The NRA are the vermin that use fear tactics to advance their agenda . . . you are just a scary pussy.


Biz posted a while back that he is afraid of Totalitarian Environmentalists.  It takes a special kind of weak minded pussy to believe that every aspect of human existence is going to be under government interference, all in the name of environmentalism.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 19, 2018)

Booter said:


> Biz posted a while back that he is afraid of Totalitarian Environmentalists.  It takes a special kind of weak minded pussy to believe that every aspect of human existence is going to be under government interference, all in the name of environmentalism.


Nutters are chock full of fear and paranoia.


----------



## nononono (Mar 19, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Flying the colors I see eh comrade?



*Nah....just flying a Kite with cheese dangling just out of your mental reach.... *


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 19, 2018)

Booter said:


> Biz posted a while back that he is afraid of Totalitarian Environmentalists.  It takes a special kind of weak minded pussy to believe that every aspect of human existence is going to be under government interference, all in the name of environmentalism.


You see me advocating for Population control like your boy Nye?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 19, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Nutters are chock full of fear and paranoia.


In a slightly better mood today.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 19, 2018)

nononono said:


>


Russian flag, nice touch nono, go all the way.


----------



## nononono (Mar 19, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Russian flag, nice touch nono, go all the way.









*Hooo boy....poor Rat.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 23, 2018)

Wall Street, worst week in two years.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 24, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Wall Street, worst week in two years.


What was the worst week prior like?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 24, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What was the worst week prior like?


I'm just a glorified laborer, with all your spare time I'm sure you could come up with the answer.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 24, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm just a glorified laborer, with all your spare time I'm sure you could come up with the answer.


I like your answers better.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I like your answers better.


Because you are an atypical government employee who has become immune to the thought of production . . . aka, you are one lazy ass troll.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Because you are an atypical government employee who has become immune to the thought of production . . . aka, you are one lazy ass troll.


I had hope that you would wake from your stupor, but you are the same sore loser as you were yesterday.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Because you are an atypical government employee who has become immune to the thought of production . . . aka, you are one lazy ass troll.


If you don't know then don't say that you do.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If you don't know then don't say that you do.


#whatfunwouldthatbe?


----------



## Booter (Mar 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You see me advocating for Population control like your boy Nye?


I see you continuing your stupidity by taking something completely out of context from a story was scantly covered in the first place.  You are a text book example of a Nutter.  You are also a sucker as this issue is completely manufactured.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2018)

Booter said:


> I see you continuing your stupidity by taking something completely out of context from a story was scantly covered in the first place.  You are a text book example of a Nutter.  You are also a sucker as this issue is completely manufactured.


AGW = FAKE NEWS
DUMB FUCK


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Mar 28, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> AGW = FAKE NEWS
> DUMB FUCK


Obvi.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2018)

Booter said:


> I see you continuing your stupidity by taking something completely out of context from a story was scantly covered in the first place.  You are a text book example of a Nutter.  You are also a sucker as this issue is completely manufactured.


Malthus and Ehrlich would disagree with you.  Oh and The Gorester too!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2018)

*Paul Ehrlich: 'Collapse of civilisation is a near certainty within decades'*
*https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/cities/2018/mar/22/collapse-civilisation-near-certain-decades-population-bomb-paul-ehrlich*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 28, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> AGW = FAKE NEWS
> DUMB FUCK


You revel in being wrong, anti-American and flaunting your ignorance.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You revel in being wrong, anti-American and flaunting your ignorance.


Awww look, little religious Erhlichian.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You revel in being wrong, anti-American and flaunting your ignorance.


No, I just refuse to let someone else make up my mind for me. I know you need someone to tell you what to do and how to think, that's where we differ.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 28, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> No, I just refuse to let someone else make up my mind for me. I know you need someone to tell you what to do and how to think, that's where we differ.


Where we differ is quite obvious to all who pay attention . . . you ooze what you are everyday in here and beg for attention.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Where we differ is quite obvious to all who pay attention . . . .


Yes it is.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes it is.


Funny how nono has turned into the serious one while you take a turn as court jester.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Funny how nono has turned into the serious one while you take a turn as court jester.


Sucker


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 29, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker


Yeah, court jester may be an upgrade from your cubicle farm job.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 29, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yeah, court jester may be an upgrade from your cubicle farm job.


Jealousy becomes you.
Just because you are overmatched, don't lash out, take some night classes and read a bit, it might give you a chance to match wits with the nutters.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 29, 2018)

The Obama bubble,





TECH BACKLASH GROWS...
_Conservatives angry over NETFLIX hiring Obama aide..._
TESLA shares dive again...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 29, 2018)

*Holy Moly! Look what you pay in state and local taxes*
Andrew Malcolm Mar 29, 2018 8:41 AM





Plenty of room to cut


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 29, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Holy Moly! Look what you pay in state and local taxes*
> Andrew Malcolm Mar 29, 2018 8:41 AM
> 
> 
> ...


Another write-off gone, thanks for reminding me.


----------



## nononono (Mar 29, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Funny how nono has turned into the serious one while you take a turn as court jester.



*Yep......Serious I am Rat.*







*Let's see how funny you think being a " Pussy " is....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 30, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Yep......Serious I am Rat.*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You are a mental midget  . . . you are seriously deranged and emotionally stunted. Childhood trauma does that to the weak, get over it and move on you flake.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 30, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Where we differ is quite obvious to all who pay attention . . . you ooze what you are everyday in here and beg for attention.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 30, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are a mental midget  . . . you are seriously deranged and emotionally stunted. Childhood trauma does that to the weak, get over it and move on you flake.


Lashing out again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 31, 2018)

*L.A. councilman wants city to boycott companies with NRA ties*

A Los Angeles lawmaker wants the city to cut ties with companies that are linked to the National Rifle Assn., saying that its opposition to "common sense gun safety laws" is at odds with the city.

City Councilman Mitch O'Farrell introduced a proposal Wednesday asking city staffers to provide a list of all businesses and groups that have a "formal relationship" with the NRA and lay out options for boycotting them.
*
....................
*
O'Farrell said he also had asked the City Council to hold off on approving an agreement between FedEx and the Harbor Department to operate a warehouse and office space. FedEx has faced pressure from gun control advocates to stop providing discounted shipping for members of the NRA.

"We have a choice — and they have a choice," O'Farrell said, arguing that FedEx could follow the path of other companies such as Delta Air Lines that have ended such discounts or other ties. "They could join in this sensible movement to discourage the proliferation of guns."

The council postponed voting Wednesday on the FedEx agreement, which city officials say could generate up to $155,000 for the port.

A FedEx spokeswoman said the company was looking into the city decision Wednesday.

In a statement last month, FedEx said its corporate stand on gun policies was not in line with the NRA — it "opposes assault rifles being in the hands of civilians" — and stressed that the group is one of hundreds of organizations whose members get such discounts.

"FedEx has never set or changed rates for any of our millions of customers around the world in response to their politics, beliefs or positions," it said in that statement.



Maybe the gun control nutters can use O'Farrel to start their NRRA.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Funny how nono has turned into the serious one while you take a turn as court jester.


Stupidity repeated again & again...


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 31, 2018)

*U.S., South Korea come to agreement on trade deal*

The United States and South Korea have come to an agreement on revisions to the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement, known as KORUS, senior administration officials confirmed on Tuesday. 

South Korea's trade ministry announced changes to the trade pact on Monday during a briefing in Seoul, calling the discussions "heated" but ultimately successful in eliminating "two uncertainties." 

On a conference call with reporters, administration officials said that the countries resolved KORUS changes and agreed to a steel quota for the Koreans, granting them an exemption from the 25 percent tariff imposed by President Donald Trump last week. 

"Subject to steel, Korea will be subject to hard quote – a hard annual quote," an official said. "It will be a product specific quota equivalent to 70 percent of average annual export volume for these steel products, based on a three year average from 2015 – 2017."  

South Korea will not receive an exemption on their aluminum exports, the official added, which will be subject to a 10 percent tariff.  

The changes to KORUS, which officials billed as "a huge win for the American worker," include an extension of a 25 percent tariff on American pick up trucks for another 30 years, a doubling of the cap on U.S. vehicle exports built to U.S. safety standards that can enter Korea from 25,000 to 50,000 vehicles per manufacturer, and the elimination of "burdensome regulations" such as additional environmental testing. 

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-south-korea-come-to-agreement-on-trade-deal/


----------



## Lion Eyes (Mar 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are a mental midget  . . . you are seriously deranged and emotionally stunted. Childhood trauma does that to the weak, get over it and move on you flake.


Looks as if Daffy is repeating verbatim, his own psychological profile produced by his own union shrink....


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Looks as if Daffy is repeating verbatim, his own psychological profile produced by his own union shrink....


He's damaged goods.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 5, 2018)

During the Napoleonic War, English landowners had enjoyed a monopoly in the production of food. At the end of the war, they instituted the corn laws—a form of import control—to protect their domestic monopoly from competition. The laws kept the price of grain high, and since bread was the primary sustenance for most families, the laws created particular hardship for the poor. The issue had been brewing for some time. Charles Villiers had proposed corn law repeal in Parliament every year, and the Anti-Corn Law League was formed in Manchester in 1839. Richard Cobden and John Bright were instrumental in its founding.

Bright and Cobden embarked upon a hectic speaking tour. The climax was a meeting in the Covent Garden Theatre, where Bright railed against the protectors of upper-class privilege:

The law is, in fact a law of the most ingeniously malignant character ... The most demoniacal ingenuity could not have invented a scheme more calculated to bring millions of the working classes of this country to a state of pauperism, suffering, discontent, and insubordination...[2]

Leading Whigs and Tories were convinced of the need for repeal, and on June 25, 1846, a bill for repeal was carried. The elimination of other import duties followed, and a 70-year era of British free trade began; in the popular mind, free trade now signified cheap bread.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 5, 2018)

In his activity in support of free trade, Bright was motivated above all by a concern for the plight of ordinary people. From the same motive, he opposed all the legislation which regulated working conditions in factories. The Factory Act of 1847 was in part a retaliation by the landowners for the corn law repeal: regulation of factories was a means of penalizing manufacturers. Bright was certain that it would make people worse off by reducing the number of hours in which they could earn money.  

Espola will remember a similar case years later as the Lochner vs. New York case of 1905


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2018)

*Economics vs. Politics II*. The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregard the first lesson of economics.”

Politics deals with the same problem by making promises that cannot be kept, or which can be kept only by creating other problems that cannot be acknowledged when the promises are made.
--Sowell


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 23, 2018)

*We easily forget the economic rationale that Marx taught us, namely, that socialism would have to provide unprecedented abundance if it were to sustain social liberation of any kind.* With a few notable exceptions, *leftists no longer find it fashionable to discuss economics at all beyond the now routine rejection of a "command economy"* *and some disingenuous mumbling about the necessity for markets.* But where is there a serious attempt to determine the extent to which any socialism could function without a command economy or to show how a socialist economy could integrate markets? A few left-wing economists, most notably Louis Ferleger and Jay Mandle, tried to raise these questions long before the collapse of the socialist economies, but they were effec- tively shut out of the left-wing press and are still ignored. And we may doubt that the wry remark of Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, two other respected left-wing economists, will cause a wrinkle: *"Leftwing economists— among whom we count ourselves—have thus far failed to come up with a convincing alternative to capitalism."* (Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, letter to the Nation, Nov. 29, 1993; and see also, Louis Ferleger and Jay R.Mandle, A New Mandate: Democratic Choices for a Prosperous Economy, University of Missouri Press, 1994).--Genovese


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 24, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *We easily forget the economic rationale that Marx taught us, namely, that socialism would have to provide unprecedented abundance if it were to sustain social liberation of any kind.* With a few notable exceptions, *leftists no longer find it fashionable to discuss economics at all beyond the now routine rejection of a "command economy"* *and some disingenuous mumbling about the necessity for markets.* But where is there a serious attempt to determine the extent to which any socialism could function without a command economy or to show how a socialist economy could integrate markets? A few left-wing economists, most notably Louis Ferleger and Jay Mandle, tried to raise these questions long before the collapse of the socialist economies, but they were effec- tively shut out of the left-wing press and are still ignored. And we may doubt that the wry remark of Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, two other respected left-wing economists, will cause a wrinkle: *"Leftwing economists— among whom we count ourselves—have thus far failed to come up with a convincing alternative to capitalism."* (Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, letter to the Nation, Nov. 29, 1993; and see also, Louis Ferleger and Jay R.Mandle, A New Mandate: Democratic Choices for a Prosperous Economy, University of Missouri Press, 1994).--Genovese


You've fallen for and into a trap.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 24, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You've fallen for and into a trap.


How eloquent.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)




----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


>


Point being?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Point being?


Obama iz and was a  dummy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Obama iz and was a  dummy.


The graph you posted shows quite the opposite.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The graph you posted shows quite the opposite.


It shows he never hit 3%, the only president evah.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> It shows he never hit 3%, the only president evah.


Gee, what happened just before he took office you disingenuous political hack?

So which is it? I would say ones politics and the questioned asked has much to do with the outlook these days . . .

A decade after the financial crisis hit, 52 percent of Americans say they are still feeling its impact on their pocketbooks, according to a new report by Morning Consult.

Still, large majorities (74 percent) say their financial health is fair, good or excellent, though only 11 percent put themselves in the latter category.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/384830-poll-half-of-americans-still-feeling-impact-of-great-recession


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Gee, what happened just before he took office you disingenuous political hack?
> 
> So which is it? I would say ones politics and the questioned asked has much to do with the outlook these days . . .
> 
> ...


I will give him some cover for hiz first term, but that's all he gets.
This iz trumps economy, get over it.
You elected a bum in 08 and in 12, he was so bad the people would rather have the pussy grabber that  American Hero killing whore you nominated, this iz all your fault, whatever happens.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The graph you posted shows quite the opposite.


Moron....


----------



## Lion Eyes (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Gee, what happened just before he took office you disingenuous political hack?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I will give him some cover for hiz first term, but that's all he gets.
> This iz trumps economy, get over it.
> You elected a bum in 08 and in 12, he was so bad the people would rather have the pussy grabber that  American Hero killing whore you nominated, this iz all your fault, whatever happens.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/17/us-soldier-la-david-johnson-niger-attack


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/17/us-soldier-la-david-johnson-niger-attack


Hey, grouchy old man, iz there a point?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Hey, grouchy old man, iz there a point?


Along your line of thinking . . . who killed them?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Along your line of thinking . . . who killed them?


The bad guys.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The bad guys.


Trump and/or Tillerson?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Trump and/or Tillerson?


Fitting, just goes with you and Hillary's  Anti-American way.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fitting, just goes with you and Hillary's  Anti-American way.


Just going along with your line of thinking.


----------



## nononono (Apr 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Just going along with your line of thinking.




*Whassss sup Gato.....*

*The Democrats are in dire need of Cash.....*

*Send your Hard Earned " Union " compensation to Tom Perez via the DNC.....*

*Many followers of the " DNC " cult are in need of legal defense funding, your *
*donation will be utilized to save their ass.....No appreciation letter will ever*
*be sent and no acknowledgement will be given for the " Cash " donation you*
*WILL send.....!!!!*
*They expect it !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 28, 2018)

*Without “Vulture” Capitalists, Our Economy Would Rot*
Their role isn't pretty, but it's vital.


*by Jairaj Devadiga*


The problem started in the 1990s when farmers began using a drug called diclofenac to treat their livestock. Diclofenac is toxic to vultures, and the contaminated carcasses decimated India’s vulture population. From as many as 80 million vultures in the 1980s, today only few thousand vultures remain in India.

What happened in the absence of vultures? Dogs and *rats stepped in to feed on the carcasses.* Unlike vultures, whose digestive tracts destroy all deadly pathogens, dogs and *rats become carriers*. The incidences of anthrax, plague, and rabies have skyrocketed. More than half the world’s rabies deaths annually occur in India.

The Parsi community had to stop their funeral practices because there aren’t enough vultures to get rid of the corpses, and the bodies were rotting and causing a stench which troubled the residents of nearby localities, not to mention the environmental threats posed by rotting corpses.


Damn Rat Bastards


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 28, 2018)

https://fee.org/articles/without-vulture-capitalists-our-economy-would-rot/?utm_source=ribbon


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 29, 2018)

As Steve Horwitz explains, the vulture capitalists perform a useful function. They try to revive failing businesses, and if they don’t succeed, they sell off the assets of those businesses (land, buildings, machines, and so on). This reallocation of labor and capital from an inefficient, failed business to a new, more efficient business is important for the economy to grow.

Can I get an Amen?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 5, 2018)

California's economy has surpassed that of the United Kingdom to become the world's fifth largest, according to new federal data made public Friday.

California's strong economic performance relative to other industrialized economies is driven by worker productivity, said Lee Ohanian, an economics professor at University of California, Los Angeles and director of UCLA's Ettinger Family Program in Macroeconomic Research. The United Kingdom has 25 million more people than California but now has a smaller GDP, he said.

California's economic juggernaut is concentrated in coastal metropolises around San Francisco, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego.

"The non-coastal areas of CA have not generated nearly as much economic growth as the coastal areas," Ohanian said in an email.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/california-now-worlds-5th-largest-201724211.html


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 5, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Without “Vulture” Capitalists, Our Economy Would Rot*
> Their role isn't pretty, but it's vital.
> 
> 
> ...


The ecology of economics.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> The ecology of economics.


Let the possums live.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 5, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Let the possums live.


All the critters play a role.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 5, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> All the critters play a role.


 . . . but don't have any rights, right?


----------



## tenacious (May 5, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> The ecology of economics.


Actually I don't think there is much disagreement that in a capitalist economy, business are very disposable and someone's loss is someone else's gain...

Where the we likely disagree is if we should let vulture capitalists make money off of things like pushing up the costs of medicine and college loans; or letting Puerto Rico go months without a working electric grid because the vultures are upset they are going to lose money.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 5, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Actually I don't think there is much disagreement that in a capitalist economy, business are very disposable and someone's loss is someone else's gain...
> 
> Where the we likely disagree is if we should let vulture capitalists make money off of things like pushing up the costs of medicine and college loans; or letting Puerto Rico go months without a working electric grid because the vultures are upset they are going to lose money.


Do you ever read what you post before you hit, "post reply"?
Just curious.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 5, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Do you ever read what you post before you hit, "post reply"?
> Just curious.


Are you having comprehension problems again?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> All the critters play a role.


Like rats carry diseases.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Actually I don't think there is much disagreement that in a capitalist economy, business are very disposable and someone's loss is someone else's gain...
> 
> Where the we likely disagree is if we should let vulture capitalists make money off of things like pushing up the costs of medicine and college loans; or letting Puerto Rico go months without a working electric grid because the vultures are upset they are going to lose money.


Oh boy.  Stick to the entertainment business Tenny.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 5, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh boy.  Stick to the entertainment business Tenny.


And your exact disagreement is?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 5, 2018)

Yeah diz, funny cuz you have none, you just wanna be an asshole.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yeah diz, funny cuz you have none, you just wanna be an asshole.


Nice to see you get involved in your major.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> And your exact disagreement is?


That you think I disagreed


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yeah diz, funny cuz you have none, you just wanna be an asshole.


You shouldnʻt blame us for your diagnosis.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 5, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That you think I disagreed


Ok, so your point was? Why are you saying he should sick to the entertainment business?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ok, so your point was? Why are you saying he should sick to the entertainment business?


You are rather emotional today, are you aware you have 5 minutes to correct yourself?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ok, so your point was? Why are you saying he should sick to the entertainment business?


Why do you care?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 5, 2018)

Ricky was right.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ok, so your point was? Why are you saying he should sick to the entertainment business?


So, what you are saying iz T isn't good at his job?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 5, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Do you ever read what you post before you hit, "post reply"?
> Just curious.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 5, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh boy.  Stick to the entertainment business Tenny.


 T's ignorance of econ=you're an asshole?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 5, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> T's ignorance of econ=you're an asshole?


Emotional little things arenʻt they?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 6, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Emotional little things arenʻt they?


I thought you had a point to make, wrong again, I guess I need to quit waiting for you to act like a responsible adult . . . what's it been over 8 years now and still no sign of whether you will ever back one of your statements.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 6, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Emotional little things arenʻt they?


OBVI


Hüsker Dü said:


> I thought you had a point to make, wrong again, I guess I need to quit waiting for you to act like a responsible adult . . . what's it been over 8 years now and still no sign of whether you will ever back one of your statements.


Patience Grasshoppa.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I thought you had a point to make, wrong again, I guess I need to quit waiting for you to act like a responsible adult . . . what's it been over 8 years now and still no sign of whether you will ever back one of your statements.


Your emotions are my back up.


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I thought you had a point to make, wrong again, I guess I need to quit waiting for you to act like a responsible adult . . . what's it been over 8 years now and still no sign of whether you will ever back one of your statements.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Patience Grasshoppa.


Patience and IPD don't mix well.


----------



## nononono (May 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . but don't have any rights, right?



*Nope .....! *
*Watch your back Rodent.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 15, 2018)

*California Set to Become First State to Require Solar Panels on All New Houses*
The cost of homes is expected to rise by almost $10k, on average.

“California is set to become the first state to require solar panels on all newly built single-family houses,” the _Los Angeles Times_reports. Not only will consumers have no choice in the matter, but neither will voters. “The state’s Energy Commission is scheduled to vote Wednesday on the rules, which are expected to pass and take effect in 2020,” the _Times_ explains. “The regulations, which would also apply to new multifamily buildings of three stories or fewer, don’t need the approval of the Legislature.”

The Commission estimates the average cost of a new single-family home will increase by $9,500 but that utility bills will decline by roughly twice as much over the period of a 30-year mortgage. Why not let consumers decide whether the projected future savings justify the immediate up-front costs? Oh, silly me, this is California, progressive paradise, where people can do whatever they want, as long as it’s mandatory.

https://fee.org/articles/california-set-to-become-first-state-to-require-solar-panels-on-all-new-houses/


----------



## tenacious (May 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *California Set to Become First State to Require Solar Panels on All New Houses*
> The cost of homes is expected to rise by almost $10k, on average.
> 
> “California is set to become the first state to require solar panels on all newly built single-family houses,” the _Los Angeles Times_reports. Not only will consumers have no choice in the matter, but neither will voters. “The state’s Energy Commission is scheduled to vote Wednesday on the rules, which are expected to pass and take effect in 2020,” the _Times_ explains. “The regulations, which would also apply to new multifamily buildings of three stories or fewer, don’t need the approval of the Legislature.”
> ...


Drove across the nation of China last year.  Miles and miles of windmills and solar panels.... 
I find it interesting that despite having all options open to them- fossil fuels, nuclear, coal, etc.  that they seem to be going all in on renewable energy.  But of course here in America Republicans are leading us back to am radio and a continued dependence on fossil fuels.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 15, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Drove across the nation of China last year.  Miles and miles of windmills and solar panels....
> I find it interesting that despite having all options open to them- fossil fuels, nuclear, coal, etc.  that they seem to be going all in on renewable energy.  But of course here in America Republicans are leading us back to am radio and a continued dependence on fossil fuels.


I am sure you saw exactly what the CHICOMS wanted you to see.
Wise up. Pinko.


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 15, 2018)

While some governments may be more environmentally conscious and apply strict environmental policies, others are not. It’s important, however, that the whole world reaches some form of common ground. After all, we’re all breathing the same air – more or less. Just so you get a finer picture, * take note of the fact that 29% of the pollution in the San Francisco Bay Area comes from China*, according to a study published in the Environmental Science and Technology.   

*China generates about 70% of its electricity with coal-fired power plants, creating large amounts of particulate pollution. Dust storms crossing China pick up these particles and carry them across the Pacific to the U.S. *.

The researchers were expecting a considerable figure, but nothing prepared them for this shock. Apparently, after analyzing data from the entire six-month survey, Ewing and her team found that the median proportion of Asian lead in the PM2.5 was 29%.  How about that global policy? Wait – there was one, but no one chose to respect it.

https://www.zmescience.com/ecology/environmental-issues/about-29-of-san-franciscos-pollution-comes-from-china-42334/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 15, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Drove across the nation of China last year.  Miles and miles of windmills and solar panels....
> I find it interesting that despite having all options open to them- fossil fuels, nuclear, coal, etc.  that they seem to be going all in on renewable energy.  But of course here in America Republicans are leading us back to am radio and a continued dependence on fossil fuels.


What did the Chinese use to manufacture and maintain all those windmills and and solar panels that only produce renewable power on windy or sunny days?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 15, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am sure you saw exactly what the CHICOMS wanted you to see.
> Wise up. Pinko.


Like all your eggs in one basket?


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 15, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I thought you had a point to make, wrong again, I guess I need to quit waiting for you to act like a responsible adult . . . what's it been over 8 years now and still no sign of whether you will ever back one of your statements.


QUACK!!!!! QUACK QUACK QUACK.........


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 15, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> QUACK!!!!! QUACK QUACK QUACK.........


It’s symptomatic


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2018)

*The Remarkable Fall in China’s Suicide Rate*
Leaving rural conditions for factory work in the cities has led to a plummeting suicide rate, especially for women.


*by Chelsea Follett*
https://fee.org/articles/the-remarkable-fall-in-china-s-suicide-rate/

n recent decades, China’s suicide rate has declined more rapidly than any other country’s. It has fallen from among the world’s highest rates in the 1990s, to among the lowest—below the US and only slightly higher than the UK.

Rural women are responsible for the lion’s share of the decline. Unlike in most countries, Chinese women have a higher suicide rate than Chinese men. In rural areas, women may be two to five times more likely to kill themselves than in cities.

What changed? In short, globalization and labor market opportunities. _The Economist _published a graph showing how the dramatic decline in suicide coincided with more Chinese leaving rural areas to seek urban employment. They used data from Tsinghua University. I have updated the graph with more recent data below.


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 21, 2018)

*Stocks jump as US and China announce progress in trade talks*
By MARLEY JAY 
Published May 21, 2018 Markets Associated Press

Stocks are rising Monday after the U.S. and China appeared to make major progress in trade talks. The Chinese government says it will buy more U.S. goods, including energy and agricultural products, and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin says the U.S. postponed tariffs on up to $150 billion in goods from China. Industrial companies and banks are making some of the biggest gains and technology stocks are also climbing.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 21, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> *Stocks jump as US and China announce progress in trade talks*
> By MARLEY JAY
> Published May 21, 2018 Markets Associated Press
> 
> Stocks are rising Monday after the U.S. and China appeared to make major progress in trade talks. The Chinese government says it will buy more U.S. goods, including energy and agricultural products, and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin says the U.S. postponed tariffs on up to $150 billion in goods from China. Industrial companies and banks are making some of the biggest gains and technology stocks are also climbing.







* 
*
*MILLER: TRUMP SURPASSING ALL EXPECTATIONS...*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The Remarkable Fall in China’s Suicide Rate*
> Leaving rural conditions for factory work in the cities has led to a plummeting suicide rate, especially for women.
> 
> 
> ...


In 2016, there were 44,965 recorded *suicides*, up from 42,773 in 2014, according to the CDC's National Center for Health *Statistics* (NCHS). On average, adjusted for age, the annual *U.S. suicide rate increased* 24% between 1999 and 2014, from 10.5 to 13.0 *suicides* per 100,000 people, the highest *rate*recorded in 28 years.

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/3/23/14988084/white-middle-class-dying-faster-explained-case-deaton


----------



## Lion Eyes (May 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> In 2016, there were 44,965 recorded *suicides*, up from 42,773 in 2014, according to the CDC's National Center for Health *Statistics* (NCHS). On average, adjusted for age, the annual *U.S. suicide rate increased* 24% between 1999 and 2014, from 10.5 to 13.0 *suicides* per 100,000 people, the highest *rate*recorded in 28 years.
> 
> https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/3/23/14988084/white-middle-class-dying-faster-explained-case-deaton


Interesting.
2016....
Have rates declined since Obama left office?


----------



## Booter (May 21, 2018)

The stock market under Trump vs. Obama





Stock prices rose about three times as much under Obama during this period as they did under Trump. And that’s despite the fact that Trump oversaw enormous corporate tax cuts, which more or less _automatically_ boost stock prices. (Stock prices are a claim on the after-tax profits of a firm; by definition, then, lower taxes should increase the after-tax profits of a firm even if that firm does literally nothing to expand or become more competitive.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/rampage/wp/2018/05/01/the-stock-market-under-trump-vs-obama/?utm_term=.800e391975cb


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 21, 2018)

Booter said:


> The stock market under Trump vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> ...


More Fake News From Booty.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 21, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> More Fake News From Booty.


It still rose, just nowhere near the rates Obama achieved. Don't be so sad, your hero hasn't started a recession, yet.


----------



## nononono (May 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It still rose, just nowhere near the rates Obama achieved. Don't be so sad, your hero hasn't started a recession, yet.



*The rates are higher now than they EVER where under the Criminal administration*
*run by Barry Soetoro....The Fake President.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 21, 2018)

Booter said:


> The stock market under Trump vs. Obama
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Itʻs the QE stupid.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It still rose, just nowhere near the rates Obama achieved. Don't be so sad, your hero hasn't started a recession, yet.


Itʻs the QE stupid


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 22, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Itʻs the QE stupid.


Which one?


----------



## Booter (May 22, 2018)

*Harley-Davidson took its tax cut, closed a factory, and rewarded shareholders*

Harley-Davidson is one of a string of companies to announce major share buybacks since the tax bill was passed in December. Apple in early May said it would buy back $100 billion of its shares. The tech conglomerate Cisco in February said it would put an additional $25 billion toward a stock buyback. Troubled megabank Wells Fargo in January announced about $22 billion in buybacks. Pepsi announced a $15 billion buyback, Amgen and AbbVie $10 billion, and Google’s parent company Alphabet $8.6 billion.

Harley-Davidson isn’t the only company to shutter a US plant since the tax cuts were passed in December. The same day Kansas City workers found out their plant was closing, about 900 workers at an Electrolux plant in St. Cloud, Minnesota, found out the facility they were working in would be shutting down too. The Swedish home appliance company will consolidate its freezer production in South Carolina, where Joe Baratta, a representative for International Association of Machinists (IAM) Local 623, told me starting wages are lower.

He described a recent trip to Home Depot. “I see products that we were building here last year that say ‘Made in China’ with the Frigidaire name on it, they’re already in stores,” he said. “It’s a tough pill to swallow to go into every store in town looking at a product and saying, ‘There’s 150 jobs we lost. There’s another 200 jobs we lost.’”

http://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/harley-davidson-took-its-tax-cut-closed-a-factory-and-rewarded-shareholders/ar-AAxD6bK?ocid=ientp

*TRUMP IS A LOSER.*


----------



## Booter (May 22, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Itʻs the QE stupid.


You can make a good return in the stock market regardless of quantitative easing or recessions if you're patient and thoughtful.  I sure did.  That you missed the boat is your problem - stupid is as stupid does.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 22, 2018)

Booter said:


> You can make a good return in the stock market regardless of quantitative easing or recessions if you're patient and thoughtful.  I sure did.  That you missed the boat is your problem - stupid is as stupid does.


You investment gurus crack me up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 22, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Harley-Davidson took its tax cut, closed a factory, and rewarded shareholders*
> 
> Harley-Davidson is one of a string of companies to announce major share buybacks since the tax bill was passed in December. Apple in early May said it would buy back $100 billion of its shares. The tech conglomerate Cisco in February said it would put an additional $25 billion toward a stock buyback. Troubled megabank Wells Fargo in January announced about $22 billion in buybacks. Pepsi announced a $15 billion buyback, Amgen and AbbVie $10 billion, and Google’s parent company Alphabet $8.6 billion.
> 
> ...





Booter said:


> *You can make a good return in the stock market regardless of quantitative easing or recessions if you're patient and thoughtful.*  I sure did.


Your portfolio contain Harley stocks? Apple? Cisco? Wells Fargo? Pepsi? Amgen?  Be patient.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 22, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Which one?


All three rounds for the first 5 years of Obama's two terms.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 23, 2018)

Obama's Big Government Crushed Again: Congress Passes Rollback Of Dodd-Frank
1 hour ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/30965/obamas-big-government-crushed-again-congress-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwj73rX13JvbAhVNtlkKHYueAJYQqUMIKDAA&usg=AOvVaw1sLkjpte0WAcOATCllAf8f&ampcf=1


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 23, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Obama's Big Government Crushed Again: Congress Passes Rollback Of Dodd-Frank
> 1 hour ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/30965/obamas-big-government-crushed-again-congress-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwj73rX13JvbAhVNtlkKHYueAJYQqUMIKDAA&usg=AOvVaw1sLkjpte0WAcOATCllAf8f&ampcf=1


Why do these people Hate America?

The #DoddFrankRollBack would open the doors to banks once again discriminating in how they lend to home buyers. We should be taking steps to move forward, not making the situation worse.
12:48 PM · May 22, 2018


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 23, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Obama's Big Government Crushed Again: Congress Passes Rollback Of Dodd-Frank
> 1 hour ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/30965/obamas-big-government-crushed-again-congress-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwj73rX13JvbAhVNtlkKHYueAJYQqUMIKDAA&usg=AOvVaw1sLkjpte0WAcOATCllAf8f&ampcf=1


“_Before the House voted on the bill, Senator Elizabeth Warren tweeted, “For years, armies of bank lobbyists & executives have groaned about how financial rules are hurting them. But there’s a big problem with their story — banks are making record profits. Congress has done enough favors for big banks — the House should reject the #BankLobbyistAct.””_

Dipshits bailed out the big banks for the first 5 years of Obamaʻs two terms.  Dodd-Frank preserves bail-outs for banks by automatically converting depositors savings and/or bonds to equities in those same banks.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 23, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why do these people Hate America?
> 
> The #DoddFrankRollBack would open the doors to banks once again discriminating in how they lend to home buyers. We should be taking steps to move forward, not making the situation worse.
> 12:48 PM · May 22, 2018


Got to get those votes.
I'm afraid the midterms aren't looking so good for the dems, and 2020 will put them in another tailspin.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 23, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> “_Before the House voted on the bill, Senator Elizabeth Warren tweeted, “For years, armies of bank lobbyists & executives have groaned about how financial rules are hurting them. But there’s a big problem with their story — banks are making record profits. Congress has done enough favors for big banks — the House should reject the #BankLobbyistAct.””_
> 
> Dipshits bailed out the big banks for the first 5 years of Obamaʻs two terms.  Dodd-Frank preserves bail-outs for banks by automatically converting depositors savings and/or bonds to equities in those same banks.


Liberals don't understand economice or they wouldn't be liberals.


----------



## Booter (May 24, 2018)

*Trump May Be The Most Fiscally Reckless President In American History
*
Trump's behavior on everything and anything having to do with the federal budget has become blatantly predictable and painfully obvious. It always includes some combination of:

1. Proposing whatever he wants on revenues and spending regardless of whether it is the right policy for the economy.
2. Making up his own rules of economics, mathematics and budgeting to justify what's being proposed and make them politically palatable.
3. Discrediting the facts when they get in the way of what he wants to do and demeaning those that produce them.
4. Ignoring reality when what actually happens turns out very different from what he swore would occur.
5. Paying no attention whatsoever to the budget deficit and national debt.

Trump's big tax cut demonstrates every ingredient of this witches' brew.
First, the bill's $1.5 trillion revenue loss, debt increase and stimulus was the absolute wrong fiscal policy with the economy so strong.

Second, no amount of Trump insistence and bullying about dynamic scoring was going to make that tax cut revenue neutral.

Third, even when they came from Republican-led groups like the Joint Economic Committee, nonpartisan groups like the Congressional Budget Office and Wall Street, the analyses (and those that did them) showing Trump to be wrong were trashed by the White House.

Fourth, now that the tax cut has been enacted, Trump doesn't seem to care that his promise of a deficit-neutral bill was flat out wrong even though it will cause the budget deficit to reach record heights in good economic times.

But the tax cut is hardly the only example.

*Trump's combination of a big increase in military spending and a very large reduction in revenues meant rapidly growing interest payments both because of higher deficits and debt and fast-rising interest rates. There was also Trump's "skinny budget" that wasn't a budget at all; the two full Trump budgets the White House abandoned seemingly moments after they were released; and the health care debate during which the White House scurrilously criticized CBO for daring to produce highly credible analyses showing the president's numbers were wrong.
*
https://www.forbes.com/sites/stancollender/2018/05/20/trump-may-be-the-most-fiscally-reckless-president-in-american-history/#1ab66b96564a

Making America Great?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump May Be The Most Fiscally Reckless President In American History
> *
> Trump's behavior on everything and anything having to do with the federal budget has become blatantly predictable and painfully obvious. It always includes some combination of:
> 
> ...


Trump is an opioid for his base and a band-aid at best for the rest of us. Temporary relief, then the effects will wear off and reality set in. There will be a reckoning, a sobering up and then we will be left with the aftermath. The scar will be an ugly one.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump May Be The Most Fiscally Reckless President In American History*


Let us know when they turn on the QE spigot.


Hüsker Dü said:


> Trump is an opioid for his base and a band-aid at best for the rest of us. Temporary relief, then the effects will wear off and reality set in. There will be a reckoning, a sobering up and then we will be left with the aftermath. The scar will be an ugly one.


QE always leaves a nasty scar.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump May Be The Most Fiscally Reckless President In American History
> *
> Trump's behavior on everything and anything having to do with the federal budget has become blatantly predictable and painfully obvious. It always includes some combination of:
> 
> ...


How much money has Trump printed or borrowed and given to public employee unions and banks?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 24, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> How much money has Trump printed or borrowed and given to public employee unions and banks?


Elect democrats “Weʻre gonna raise taxes”


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 24, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Elect democrats “Weʻre gonna raise taxes”


They are actually gonna run on that.
Its inexplicable.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump May Be The Most Fiscally Reckless President In American History
> *
> Trump's behavior on everything and anything having to do with the federal budget has become blatantly predictable and painfully obvious. It always includes some combination of:
> 
> ...


Sorry pal, trillion dollar deficits weʻre popular under the last administration.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 24, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> They are actually gonna run on that.
> Its inexplicable.


Bootsie doesnʻt realize what he bolded in his post about “less revenues”.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 24, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Bootsie doesnʻt realize what he bolded in his post about “less revenues”.


The only way to shrink the government's waistline, is to cut the gravy train.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 27, 2018)

*Only 53 US Companies Have Been on the Fortune 500 since 1955, Thanks to the Creative Destruction That Fuels Economic Prosperity*
This high turnover rate of America's most successful businesses is a positive sign.

As consumers, we should appreciate the fact that we are the ultimate beneficiaries of the Schumpeterian creative destruction that drives the dynamism of the market economy and results in a constant churning of the firms who are ultimately fighting to attract as many of our dollar votes as possible. The 500 top winners of that competitive battle in any given year are the firms in the Fortune 500, ranked not by their profits, assets or number of employees, but by what is ultimately most important in a market economy:_ their dollar votes (sales revenues)._
_
https://fee.org/articles/only-53-us-companies-have-been-on-the-fortune-500-since-1955-thanks-to-the-creative-destruction-that-fuels-economic-prosperity/_


----------



## tenacious (May 28, 2018)

Funny how the nutters avoid talking about how Trump is doing in office.  It's always something "be afraid" your taxes are going to go up, pictures of Hillary and really everything else then how Trump and Company are doing?  

Not to be Debbie Downer, but if Trump continues to add $2 Trillion to the debt every year he's in office... somebodies taxes are going to have to go up.    




> *Goldman Sachs: Fiscal outlook for the U.S. 'is not good' as national debt burden grows*
> https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/629841002
> 
> The fiscal outlook for the United States "is not good," according to Goldman Sachs, and could pose a threat to the country's economic security during the next recession.
> ...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Funny how the nutters avoid talking about how Trump is doing in office.  It's always something "be afraid" your taxes are going to go up, pictures of Hillary and really everything else then how Trump and Company are doing?
> 
> Not to be Debbie Downer, but if Trump continues to add $2 Trillion to the debt every year he's in office... somebodies taxes are going to have to go up.


....to pay for the 9 trillion in debt that was added to the debt by 5 years of QE under Obama and democrats.


----------



## tenacious (May 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ....to pay for the 9 trillion in debt that was added to the debt by 5 years of QE under Obama and democrats.


Back to Obama lol.   But yes you're right- Trump and the Republican's are spending faster then Dem's did back when they used government money to bail out the financial sector.  Think about that for a second.

And then ask yourself, we know the 1%'ers got a nice tax cut- but here we are ringing up massive debt and I can't think of one thing it's bought me?  I didn't get a tax cut.  Didn't make my life easier or in any other way improve my standing.  And yet now I'm on the line to help pay back all that debt.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Back to Obama lol.   But yes you're right- Trump and the Republican's are spending faster then Dem's did back when they used government money to bail out the financial sector.  Think about that for a second.


You mean because they employed QE4?  Funny how you swallowed the GS hook......again.


----------



## tenacious (May 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mean because they employed QE4?  Funny how you swallowed the GS hook......again.


I'm sure you know far more about all of that then me Bubs.

What I do know is when the rubber hits the road Republican's are spending our money faster then Dem's did when they save the world economy bailing out the Financial Industry.  Would be nice to hear if you have anything to say about that?  But I think we both know you don't...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I'm sure you know far more about all of that then me Bubs.
> 
> What I do know is when the rubber hits the road Republican's are spending our money faster then Dem's did when they save the world economy bailing out the Financial Industry.  Would be nice to hear if you have anything to say about that?  But I think we both know you don't...


I've posted the debt clock many times. Funny how you people like ignoring the effects of 9 trillion more fiat dollars in U.S. Debt.  Especially the 2 trillion in interest.  Sorry pal.  There is just no way out of the fact that 9 of the current 21 trillion in debt came from the last administration.

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## tenacious (May 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I've posted the debt clock many times. Funny how you people like ignoring the effects of 9 trillion more fiat dollars in U.S. Debt.  Especially the 2 trillion in interest.  Sorry pal.  There is just no way out of the fact that 9 of the current 21 trillion in debt came from the last administration.
> 
> http://www.usdebtclock.org


I'm trying to get my head around your argument.  What year are you saying there was $9 Trillion added to the deficit while Obama was in office?

Also your the economy guy, but think about this.  If Trump were in office for 8 years, at $2 Trillion a year we're looking at $16 Trillion in debt from his administration alone.  He's on track to almost double the nations debt... (i.e. more then Bush & Obama combined)


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I'm trying to get my head around your argument.  What year are you saying there was $9 Trillion added to the deficit while Obama was in office?


No!!  This is why reading is so important.  Open the link and read!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Also your the economy guy, but think about this.  If Trump were in office for 8 years, at $2 Trillion a year we're looking at $16 Trillion in debt from his administration alone.  He's on track to almost double the nations debt... (i.e. more then Bush & Obama combined)


I'm glad to hear you're assuming he'll be in office for 8 years.  But we all know what lousy predictors you are.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No!!  This is why reading is so important.  Open the link and read!!


A bridge too far Brah.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm glad to hear you're assuming he'll be in office for 8 years.  But we all know what lousy predictors you are.


Oh Snap,
Like I said, just lead them where they are dying to go.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Oh Snap,
> Like I said, just lead them where they are dying to go.


His false humility led him to that statement.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 28, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> A bridge too far Brah.


Always has been.


----------



## nononono (May 30, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Harley-Davidson took its tax cut, closed a factory, and rewarded shareholders*
> 
> Harley-Davidson is one of a string of companies to announce major share buybacks since the tax bill was passed in December. Apple in early May said it would buy back $100 billion of its shares. The tech conglomerate Cisco in February said it would put an additional $25 billion toward a stock buyback. Troubled megabank Wells Fargo in January announced about $22 billion in buybacks. Pepsi announced a $15 billion buyback, Amgen and AbbVie $10 billion, and Google’s parent company Alphabet $8.6 billion.
> 
> ...



*Seems like he's doing a Lot of WINNING to a whole bunch of folks !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 30, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Obama's Big Government Crushed Again: Congress Passes Rollback Of Dodd-Frank
> 1 hour ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/30965/obamas-big-government-crushed-again-congress-hank-berrien?amp&ved=0ahUKEwj73rX13JvbAhVNtlkKHYueAJYQqUMIKDAA&usg=AOvVaw1sLkjpte0WAcOATCllAf8f&ampcf=1


Dodd-Frank:  The Devil is in the Details.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 30, 2018)

*Foolishness of the Week*

https://ntknetwork.com/hillary-clinton-wants-to-be-ceo-of-facebook/

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton told Attorney General Maura Healey (D-MA) that she would like to be CEO of Facebook, while receiving the Radcliffe Award at Harvard on Friday.


“If you could be a CEO of any company right now, what would you choose?” Healey asked.

“Facebook,” Clinton quickly answered.


The former secretary of state explained that Facebook “is the biggest news platform in the world.”

“Most people in our country get their news, true or not, from Facebook,” she said. “It really is critical to our democracy that people get accurate information on which to make decisions.”

Apparently Clinton would like to be the one deciding the “accurate information” that Americans see.


----------



## tenacious (May 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I'm trying to get my head around your argument.  What year are you saying there was $9 Trillion added to the deficit while Obama was in office?
> 
> Also your the economy guy, but think about this.  If Trump were in office for 8 years, at $2 Trillion a year we're looking at $16 Trillion in debt from his administration alone.  He's on track to almost double the nations debt... (i.e. more then Bush & Obama combined)


Funny... still nothing on Trumps record breaking additions to the national debt.  Guess I'm not surprised you dodged this bullet bubs...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Funny... still nothing on Trumps record breaking additions to the national debt.  Guess I'm not surprised you dodged this bullet bubs...


It's tough to have a discussion with a lying hypocrite like dizzy or any of the other nutters.


----------



## nononono (May 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's tough to have a discussion with a lying hypocrite like dizzy or any of the other nutters.


*We ask " Tough " questions .... you " Hypocrites " get dizzy, lose sight of the discussion and resort to lies.....*

*That about sums it up.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 31, 2018)

nononono said:


> *We ask " Tough " questions .... you " Hypocrites " get dizzy, lose sight of the discussion and resort to lies.....*
> 
> *That about sums it up.*


You make excuses, avoid any and all questions, fabricate things and babble nonsensical nonsense in a disingenuous, hypocritical, insane ass-clown posse nutter way . . . and?


----------



## nononono (May 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You make excuses, avoid any and all questions, fabricate things and babble nonsensical nonsense in a disingenuous, hypocritical, insane ass-clown posse nutter way . . . and?


*I've never made excuses.*

*The rest of your " mess " is gibberish.*

*Anytime you want to TRY to have an adult conversation *
*without running away crying like a child as you've done above....I'm game.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's tough to have a discussion with a lying hypocrite like dizzy or any of the other nutters.


Those fuckers, don't trust them.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's tough to have a discussion with a lying hypocrite like dizzy or any of the other nutters.


Still waiting for you to back up your Giulliani quotes with a link.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Those fuckers, don't trust them.


I’ole’s Rage!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Funny... still nothing on Trumps record breaking additions to the national debt.  Guess I'm not surprised you dodged this bullet bubs...


You mean he busted through 9 trillion already?  Guess I'm not surprised you don't know the diff between Debt and Deficit


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's tough to have a discussion with a lying hypocrite like dizzy or any of the other nutters.


Not reading makes discussions tough for you.  You've never posted a link to an economic issue.  Please continue


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I’ole’s Rage!!


Today is particularly crazy, someone check the moon.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Today is particularly crazy, someone check the moon.


It was Tuesday.  Close enough.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I'm trying to get my head around your argument.  What year are you saying there was $9 Trillion added to the deficit while Obama was in office?


You mean to the debt?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I'm trying to get my head around your argument.  What year are you saying there was $9 Trillion added to the deficit while Obama was in office?
> 
> Also your the economy guy, but think about this.  If Trump were in office for 8 years, at $2 Trillion a year we're looking at $16 Trillion in debt from his administration alone.  He's on track to almost double the nations debt... (i.e. more then Bush & Obama combined)



*The "Laffer Curve" Was Discovered by a Medieval Islamic Philosopher*
Khaldun, a 14th-century scholar, believed that a just government should only, in accordance with Islamic law, impose low taxes.

https://fee.org/articles/the-laffer-curve-was-discovered-by-medieval-islamic-philosopher/?utm_source=ribbon

The most prominent supporter of low taxes was Ibn Khaldun. Born in 14th-century Tunisia, Khaldun was a prominent scholar and one of the founders of economics and social sciences. Khaldun believed that a just government should only, in accordance with Islamic law, impose low taxes. This stimulates business activity and thus creates wealth, which makes it possible to collect more taxes.

However, rulers tend to increase the tax to benefit themselves. High taxes hurt commerce and trade. When tax rates are raised to pay for a bloated government, it will finally cause the tax base to shrink so much that the government cannot meet its obligations.

*https://fee.org/articles/the-laffer-curve-was-discovered-by-medieval-islamic-philosopher/?utm_source=ribbon*


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The "Laffer Curve" Was Discovered by a Medieval Islamic Philosopher*
> Khaldun, a 14th-century scholar, believed that a just government should only, in accordance with Islamic law, impose low taxes.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/the-laffer-curve-was-discovered-by-medieval-islamic-philosopher/?utm_source=ribbon
> ...


So what you're saying is that Islam may actually be good for something.
Who knew?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I'm trying to get my head around your argument.  What year are you saying there was $9 Trillion added to the deficit while Obama was in office?
> 
> Also your the economy guy, but think about this.  If Trump were in office for 8 years, at $2 Trillion a year we're looking at $16 Trillion in debt from his administration alone.  He's on track to almost double the nations debt... (i.e. more then Bush & Obama combined)


*Questioning the Utility of High Tax Rates *

The modern theory of high taxation is simply that it will ultimately erode the tax base. Khaldun went further and explained that ultimately the government would be bloated and the tax base eroded—at this point the state would often implode under its own weight, leading to a period of chaos and the rise of a new state.

This, in fact, is a key explanation for the rise and fall of historic empires, including the Roman Empire, the first Persian Empire, and numerous other world powers. Often these empires began by imposing low taxes and thrived. With time, as the power of central state grew, so did also taxes—with stagnation and ultimately state failure as the result.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Arthur Laffer started an intellectual tradition of questioning high-tax policies because he knew of the work of Ibn Khaldun many centuries before and built on this tradition. *Knowing the history of free markets is valuable for guiding the present. The ancient free-market intellectual tradition that existed in the Middle East, and independently also arose in China, is not well known today. Yet, it addressed the very same issues that are relevant today, pointing to the damaging effects of high taxation, government attempts to control market exchange, lack of respect for private property, and public debt.*

*Besides Khaldun, there are numerous other Muslim scholars who contributed to free-market economics and whose work deserves a renaissance in the modern world. Al-Mawardi, who was born in the 10th century, believed that public borrowing by the state should only be considered as a last resort and in rare cases.*

*Abu Yusuf, an 8th-century chief judge of Baghdad, who wrote a treatise on taxation and fiscal problems of the state, thought that development projects whose benefit is general should be financed through public revenues. However, projects that benefited specific groups should not be part of public expenditure but rather funded by the particular group itself. Yusuf applied cost-benefit analysis when he wrote: “the authorities must cancel the project of digging any canal whose damage is greater than its benefits.”

*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> So what you're saying is that Islam may actually be good for something.
> Who knew?


The Richest Man in Babylon knew.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It was Tuesday.  Close enough.


I am a smart fucker.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 31, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> So what you're saying is that Islam may actually be good for something.
> Who knew?


How times change.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 31, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> How times change.


The more they stay the same.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (May 31, 2018)

Nice little rhapsody there guys.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 2, 2018)

'Trump Bump' in Economy is Strongest in Deep Blue California
11 hours ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.breitbart.com/california/2018/06/02/trump-economic-bump-is-strongest-in-deep-blue-california/amp/&ved=0ahUKEwi-jbSU8bTbAhVJtlkKHX48BacQqUMIKDAA&usg=AOvVaw3wvtLSK6sSXyWMPYhqRG4V&ampcf=1


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 2, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> 'Trump Bump' in Economy is Strongest in Deep Blue California
> 11 hours ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=http://www.breitbart.com/california/2018/06/02/trump-economic-bump-is-strongest-in-deep-blue-california/amp/&ved=0ahUKEwi-jbSU8bTbAhVJtlkKHX48BacQqUMIKDAA&usg=AOvVaw3wvtLSK6sSXyWMPYhqRG4V&ampcf=1


Strange that a state that knows what it is doing and continues to grow economically is diametrically opposed to Trump.

"The U.S. economy grew in the first quarter at a slightly slower pace than previously estimated, while tax cuts gave a significant boost to corporate profits, according to Commerce Department data released Wednesday."

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-30/u-s-first-quarter-growth-revised-down-to-2-2-on-inventories

Just about every policy Donald Trump imposes to make his America great is opposed by the world's fifth-largest economy. That would be California, which is growing faster and outperforming the U.S. in job growth, manufacturing, personal income, corporate profits and the total return of its bonds. The most populous U.S. state, with 39.5 million people, supplanted the U.K. as No. 5 in the world with an equivalent gross domestic product of more than $2.7 trillion, increasing $127 billion last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.



Trump attributes the prosperity of the U.S. economy during his 17 months as president to his evisceration of environmental regulations and other consumer protections, abandoning the Paris climate accord, aggressively deporting undocumented immigrants, prohibiting people from certain nations (mostly majority Muslim) from emigrating to the U.S., prosecuting sanctuary cities for protecting immigrants, cutting taxes most for corporations and the rich, and appointing a Supreme Court justice who just wrote the 5-4 decision limiting the rights of tens of millions of workers.



Jerry Brown, California's longest-serving governor, takes the opposite approach, and his state thrives.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-05-29/trump-vs-california-state-s-economy-vastly-outpaces-u-s


----------



## nononono (Jun 2, 2018)

*Rodent droppings......*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 3, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Rodent droppings......*


Pearls of reality dropped on the head of the disingenuous, hypocrites and liars that dwell in troll-like form in forums like this.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 4, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Pearls of reality dropped on the head of the disingenuous, hypocrites and liars that dwell in troll-like form in forums like this.


Is reality your friend or foe?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 4, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Is reality your friend or foe?


Are you trying to be stupid or just dumb?


----------



## nononono (Jun 4, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Pearls of reality dropped on the head of the disingenuous, hypocrites and liars that dwell in troll-like form in forums like this.


*Wash your hands and face, sit down at the table and look up " Scared Shitless ".......now look up " Demented Political Supporter "....Now go outside and scream to the heavens for the TRUTH !*


----------



## Booter (Jun 6, 2018)

*Immigration agents arrest 114 at Ohio landscaper

No criminal charges were filed against the company, but the employer is under investigation, authorities said.* Two locations were searched, and Khaalid Walls, an agency spokesman, said "a large volume of business documents" were seized.

In April, agents made about 100 worker arrests at a meatpacking plant in rural Tennessee, another high-profile show of force reminiscent of President George W. Bush's administration. *No criminal charges have been filed against the employer.
*
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/immigration-agents-arrest-114-at-ohio-landscaper/ar-AAyfpHz?ocid=ientp

There are a few different points in this article.  But it's clear to see that that the cheap labor loving conservatives are happy to be rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.  These illegal immigrants drive down wages for all of us.  Fine the shit out of these employers and we wouldn't have nearly the illegal immigrant problem that we have.  But that will never happen with Trump and the cheap labor conservatives in power.  Hell Trump's properties directly benefit from this cheap labor.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Immigration agents arrest 114 at Ohio landscaper
> 
> No criminal charges were filed against the company, but the employer is under investigation, authorities said.* Two locations were searched, and Khaalid Walls, an agency spokesman, said "a large volume of business documents" were seized.
> 
> ...


Or, we could build that great big beautiful wall.


----------



## Booter (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Or, we could build that great big beautiful wall.


That too will not happen as Trump and the cheap labor conservatives have no interest in doing so.  But please continue your state of outrage - SUCKER.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Booter said:


> That too will not happen as Trump and the cheap labor conservatives have no interest in doing so.  But please continue your state of outrage - SUCKER.


Only a snowflake would consider my post outrageous, congratulations.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Only a snowflake would consider my post outrageous, congratulations.


As you are the one that is constantly offended wouldn't the "snowflake" moniker be more apropos for you?


----------



## Booter (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Only a snowflake would consider my post outrageous, congratulations.


Nice punt loser.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> As you are the one that is constantly offended wouldn't the "snowflake" moniker be more apropos for you?


When have I been offended? I would like to see that post.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Only a snowflake would consider my post outrageous, congratulations.





Sheriff Joe said:


> When have I been offended? I would like to see that post.


Gee I wonder where I would get the idea you are easily offended?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Gee I wonder where I would get the idea you are easily offended?


You think that offended me? You obviously have no idea who I am.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You think that offended me? You obviously have no idea who I am.


If you aren't offended why are you calling out names meant to offend?


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You think that offended me? You obviously have no idea who I am.


Paraphrasing Kurt Vonnegut Jr - We all become what we pretend to be.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> If you aren't offended why are you calling out names meant to offend?



It should only offend you if it is true, which in your case it iz.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Paraphrasing Kurt Vonnegut Jr - We all become what we pretend to be.


You are in trouble.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are in trouble.


More like, Urine Trouble.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> More like, Urine Trouble.


Depends


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Depends


Clever little bastard!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Clever little bastard!


I am pretty sure the wacko birds don't appreciate our type of humor.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am pretty sure the wacko birds don't appreciate our type of humor.


I like to think they do.
It would be tough to go through life all wound up like a spring.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am pretty sure the wacko birds don't appreciate our type of humor.


Immature, obvious humor? Great by and for small naughty children, I appreciate a bit more layered humor.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Immature, obvious humor? Great by and for small naughty children, I appreciate a bit more layered humor.


Would that be because you're so much smarter than us?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Would that be because you're so much smarter than us?


I don't know about all that, but I do know you are quite self-conscious about it and perhaps a bit insecure.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I don't know about all that, but I do know you are quite self-conscious about it and perhaps a bit insecure.


I'll take that as a "no".


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Would that be because you're so much smarter than us?


Yes.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> Yes.


That's a relief.
Can you let your boy rat, in on the secret.


----------



## espola (Jun 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> That's a relief.
> Can you let your boy rat, in on the secret.


He is smart enough to see the obvious, even if he is polite enough not to rub your nose in it.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 6, 2018)

espola said:


> He is smart enough to see the obvious, even if he is polite enough not to rub your nose in it.


Thanks for the heads up.
I owe you, again.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Immature, obvious humor? Great by and for small naughty children, I appreciate a bit more layered humor.


Snort


----------



## Booter (Jun 7, 2018)

*Tariffs Hurt Trump's Supporters Especially 
*
Unfortunately for Americans, we are also victims of Trump’s so-called trade war. Toying with trade barriers puts significance sectors of the American economy and workforce at risk, especially among those who trusted Trump the most. If the president wishes to win a victory for the American people, he should repeal his new tariffs immediately.

the three largest American automotive manufacturers, General Motors, Ford, and Fiat Chrysler, all of whom have their headquarters in Detroit, told the Trump Administration that his tariffs would put them at a competitive disadvantage.

Trump promised blue-collar voters his “America first” mantra would empower them, and they bought into it. But the steel and aluminum tariffs do not look out for the hardworking American,  and in his economic obstinance, Trump has betrayed the people who placed the most trust in him.

https://fee.org/articles/tariffs-hurt-trumps-supporters-especially/


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 7, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Tariffs Hurt Trump's Supporters Especially
> *
> Unfortunately for Americans, we are also victims of Trump’s so-called trade war. Toying with trade barriers puts significance sectors of the American economy and workforce at risk, especially among those who trusted Trump the most. If the president wishes to win a victory for the American people, he should repeal his new tariffs immediately.
> 
> ...


Why wouldn't you want the USA to get it's fair share?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 7, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Why wouldn't you want the USA to get it's fair share?


You didn't read the article again I see. Do you even read your own BS or just the headline?


----------



## Booter (Jun 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You didn't read the article again I see. Do you even read your own BS or just the headline?


It's like Sarah Palin is helping with his posts.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 7, 2018)

Booter said:


> It's like Sarah Palin is helping with his posts.


I wish.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You didn't read the article again I see. Do you even read your own BS or just the headline?


Why would I read something booty posts?


----------



## nononono (Jun 7, 2018)

*Isn't Ohio John Kasich territory....Hmmmm.*
*Didn't he state that he balanced the State budget....Hmmmm.*
*Did he do that with Illegals....?*

*Gov John Kasich is the biggest hypocrite aside from all the other*
*Rhino's and Democrats and Crooks and Thieves and.......Poor John.*


----------



## nononono (Jun 7, 2018)

Booter said:


> Nice punt loser.


*Loser.....a two syllable word.*

*Wow BootButt....wow....do you sound those out....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 8, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Loser.....a two syllable word.*
> 
> *Wow BootButt....wow....do you sound those out....*


What are you the nutter version of Barney or do you think you live on Sesame Street?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 19, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you trying to be stupid or just dumb?


You make it look effortless.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 20, 2018)

*Offshore finance serves several purposes, the most salient of which is the efficient allocation of capital. Some of this activity is tax-related, aimed at raising after-tax investment returns. If it were not for offshore jurisdictions, much foreign investment would be vulnerable to double or triple taxation. *Because, under such punitive rates of tax, some of this investment would not take place, the existence of offshore centres has real positive effects on economic activity alongside the (plausibly) negative impact on the tax revenue of individual countries. These welfare gains have been amply documented… Beyond their impact on aggregate investment, research shows that the existence of an OFC is associated with better economic outcomes in neighbouring countries. Contrary to the popular narrative, these jurisdictions are well-governed and peaceful. Who, after all, would wish to use intermediaries in places where investors were regularly expropriated or harassed? …It is difficult to imagine the process of globalisation that has taken place over the last fifty years, bringing hundreds of millions of people out of poverty, happening without the robust financial and legal framework which offshore jurisdictions provide for investment. It would be counterproductive, for both the developing and the rich world, to undermine their essential functions. …*Clamping down on offshore centres…would make societies less productive and prosperous, and this effect would compound over time.--*  Diego Zuluaga


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 20, 2018)

What's changed?

*GREAT AGAIN: Disability Applications Plunge as Economy Strengthens...** 
*
*95% of manufacturers bullish on future, 'record optimism'...** 
*
*Millennials moving out of Mom and Dad's place!*


----------



## nononono (Jun 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What are you the nutter version of Barney or do you think you live on Sesame Street?


*Woof..Woof...!*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 22, 2018)

The European Union started enforcing tariffs Friday on American imports like bourbon, peanut butter and orange juice, part of a growing global trade rift that's likely to intensify over the next few weeks.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 22, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The European Union started enforcing tariffs Friday on American imports like bourbon, peanut butter and orange juice, part of a growing global trade rift that's likely to intensify over the next few weeks.


Fake news.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 26, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The European Union started enforcing tariffs Friday on American imports like bourbon, peanut butter and orange juice, part of a growing global trade rift that's likely to intensify over the next few weeks.


Tell is what that means for the European consumer?


----------



## espola (Jun 26, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Tell is what that means for the European consumer?


They will consume non-American goods such as peanut butter from China, whiskey from Canada, or OJ from Brazil.


----------



## Booter (Jun 26, 2018)

Trump bankrupted casinos and Trump has stated that what was important is that he personally made millions of dollars off those deals.  Trump is looking at his presidency the same way.


----------



## Booter (Jun 26, 2018)

Things are looking pretty bleak right now for U.S. trade policy. Congress could and should step in here, but that does not look likely at the moment. Retaliation by U.S. trading partners might get the administration’s intention, but as noted, the administration may see all the additional tariffs as a win. In the end, the costs of all this to the U.S. economy will become apparent. In the meantime, all Americans will pay a price for whatever it is the administration thinks it is doing.

https://fee.org/articles/got-tariff-fatigue/


----------



## Booter (Jun 26, 2018)

*Tariffs Will Wipe Out the Benefits of Tax Reform*
Yes, the lowering of the corporate tax rate gave businesses a nice profit bump, but new tariffs will probably cost them more than they saved.

So, 25 percent duties assessed on $800 billion of trade, approximately half of which would be U.S. manufacturing inputs and U.S.-manufactured exports comes out to a combined $100 billion hit on the sector’s profits (25 percent of $400 billion). That eclipses the $97 billion gain from the corporate rate reduction.

While this is all bad news for the economy, I wonder whether the tax-reform advocates who held their noses and excused Trump’s trade transgressions because tax reform would make everything right will start to speak out. Paging Larry Kudlow, Steve Moore, and Art Laffer.

https://fee.org/articles/tariffs-will-wipe-out-the-benefits-of-tax-reform/


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 26, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Tariffs Will Wipe Out the Benefits of Tax Reform*
> Yes, the lowering of the corporate tax rate gave businesses a nice profit bump, but new tariffs will probably cost them more than they saved.
> 
> So, 25 percent duties assessed on $800 billion of trade, approximately half of which would be U.S. manufacturing inputs and U.S.-manufactured exports comes out to a combined $100 billion hit on the sector’s profits (25 percent of $400 billion). That eclipses the $97 billion gain from the corporate rate reduction.
> ...


The current admin doesn't do anything for America or the majority of it's people . . . the rich get rich the poor get the shaft. Fascism on the rise.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 26, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The current admin doesn't do anything for America or the majority of it's people . . . the rich get rich the poor get the shaft. Fascism on the rise.


Majority, now that's funny.
HRC knocking the electoral process that elected BJ twice.
You people are too funny.


----------



## Booter (Jun 26, 2018)

Bill Clinton assumed that economic globalization was inevitable. He also believed in the classical theory of free trade: Lower tariffs would result in lower prices, greater exports, and a stronger economy. "it's so wonderful when an economic theory turns out to be right," his Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, would later crow; "The economic benefits of the tariff reductions we negotiated during the Clinton administration represents the largest tax cut in the history of the world."

Source: The Natural, by Joe Klein, p. 79 , Feb 11, 2003


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 26, 2018)

Booter said:


> Bill Clinton assumed that economic globalization was inevitable. He also believed in the classical theory of free trade: Lower tariffs would result in lower prices, greater exports, and a stronger economy. "it's so wonderful when an economic theory turns out to be right," his Treasury Secretary, Lawrence Summers, would later crow; "The economic benefits of the tariff reductions we negotiated during the Clinton administration represents the largest tax cut in the history of the world."
> 
> Source: The Natural, by Joe Klein, p. 79 , Feb 11, 2003


Yes, he also thought it was a good idea to screw an intern in the oval office and was impeached.
Are you hearing yourself?


----------



## Booter (Jun 26, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Yes, he also thought it was a good idea to screw an intern in the oval office and was impeached.
> Are you hearing yourself?


You are still relying on ignorance to support your political position.  Why?


----------



## nononono (Jun 26, 2018)

Booter said:


> You are still relying on ignorance to support your political position.  Why?



*Actually Booty Butt....those are facts that will follow Bent Willy to the Gave.....*

*And speaking of Sick Fucks....while you always go off in a corner and slam*
*your head in vain.....maybe do some REAL Research and question why *
*Bent Willy's " Buddy " paid for barges of cement to fill in tunnels on his*
*" Sicko " Island and then burned it to the ground.....Hmmmmm...*

*You stupid Democrats project so much you could launch a Saturn 5 Rocket...*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 26, 2018)

Booter said:


> You are still relying on ignorance to support your political position.  Why?


It's what they are told, thus all they have.


----------



## Booter (Jun 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's what they are told, thus all they have.


They watch Fox News and Fox News tells them what to think.  Then they come here and act like rabid dogs when they are hit with reality.


----------



## Booter (Jun 27, 2018)

*U.S. cruises toward record-breaking debt on Trump's watch*

In drumming up support for their tax overhaul, congressional Republicans have said the new law would spur enough economic growth to offset a loss in revenue over the next decade. CBO predicts, however, that most of that economic revving will happen in the next several years, with the largest single-year increase occurring in 2022, with GDP growing by a full percentage point. 
After that, GDP growth is expected to be modest, amounting to an average boost of 0.7 percent over a decade.

The effects of the Republican tax law on federal deficits are projected to diminish after 2026, when many of the costly individual tax breaks are set to expire. After that point, revenue is expected to rise again. And a decade out, the tax law would have almost no effect on the economy or the federal deficit, CBO predicts.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/06/26/cbo-federal-deficit-break-records-651929


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2018)

Booter said:


> *U.S. cruises toward record-breaking debt on Trump's watch*
> 
> In drumming up support for their tax overhaul, congressional Republicans have said the new law would spur enough economic growth to offset a loss in revenue over the next decade. CBO predicts, however, that most of that economic revving will happen in the next several years, with the largest single-year increase occurring in 2022, with GDP growing by a full percentage point.
> After that, GDP growth is expected to be modest, amounting to an average boost of 0.7 percent over a decade.
> ...


Who's record is he breaking?


----------



## espola (Jun 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Who's record is he breaking?


grammarly.com


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> grammarly.com


Fuck You, how'd I do?


----------



## Booter (Jun 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Who's record is he breaking?


SUCKER!!!  Trump is breaking his own record everyday.  Trump doesn't act like a real president or know how to be a real president but he really is the president.  Republicans have all branches of government and our government is being run as poorly as ever in the history of our great nation and you are here every day cheering these morons on. 

Good times shitstain, good times.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 27, 2018)

Booter said:


> SUCKER!!!  Trump is breaking his own record everyday.  Trump doesn't act like a real president or know how to be a real president but he really is the president.  Republicans have all branches of government and our government is being run as poorly as ever in the history of our great nation and you are here every day cheering these morons on.
> 
> Good times shitstain, good times.


Its a great time to be an American.


----------



## espola (Jun 27, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Its a great time to be an American.


Coddling those criminals again, I see.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> Coddling those criminals again, I see.


If winning is a crime, I'll do the time.


----------



## espola (Jun 27, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> If winning is a crime, I'll do the time.


What exactly do you think you are winning?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> What exactly do you think you are winning?


Love.
Im winning at love.
Im a giver with great hair, and a charismatic charm.
Even you would love me if you knew me.


----------



## espola (Jun 27, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Love.
> Im winning at love.
> Im a giver with great hair, and a charismatic charm.
> Even you would love me if you knew me.


You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


----------



## nononono (Jun 27, 2018)

Booter said:


> SUCKER!!!  Trump is breaking his own record everyday.  Trump doesn't act like a real president or know how to be a real president but he really is the president.  Republicans have all branches of government and our government is being run as poorly as ever in the history of our great nation and you are here every day cheering these morons on.
> 
> 
> Good times *shitstain*, good times.


*Did you learn that word from personal experience......*
*Proper dieting and Proper wiping will reduce the *
*possibility of " Booty Butt Brake marks in your Chonies "*


----------



## nononono (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


*I think you are shiverin and quiverin at your own cowardice.....*


----------



## nononono (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> What exactly do you think you are winning?


*Fuckin Everything......and you Lemming are pissin and moanin.....*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


The same could be said of you, only include judgmental jackass...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2018)

Booter said:


> SUCKER!!!  Trump is breaking his own record everyday.  Trump doesn't act like a real president or know how to be a real president but he really is the president.  Republicans have all branches of government and our government is being run as poorly as ever in the history of our great nation and you are here every day cheering these morons on.
> 
> Good times shitstain, good times.


Can you please wait until after Trump gets his 2nd SUPREME in place before you throw him in jail?
After that you can do whatever you want with him, Too Funny.
We won, I forget who said that.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


It's a great day for conservatives like us, right E?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Did you learn that word from personal experience......*
> *Proper dieting and Proper wiping will reduce the *
> *possibility of " Booty Butt Brake marks in your Chonies "*


The booty meltdown has just begun.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


You are looking for love in all the wrong places.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jun 27, 2018)

espola said:


> You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


So emotional, yet so cold.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

Booter said:


> *U.S. cruises toward record-breaking debt on Trump's watch*
> 
> In drumming up support for their tax overhaul, congressional Republicans have said the new law would spur enough economic growth to offset a loss in revenue over the next decade. CBO predicts, however, that most of that economic revving will happen in the next several years, with the largest single-year increase occurring in 2022, with GDP growing by a full percentage point.
> After that, GDP growth is expected to be modest, amounting to an average boost of 0.7 percent over a decade.
> ...


You people are predicting the affects of 9 trillion in debt under the previous admin.  Just sayin'.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

Booter said:


> They watch Fox News and Fox News tells them what to think.  Then they come here and act like rabid dogs when they are hit with reality.


Sounds like you've been bit.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It's what they are told, thus all they have.


Actually, you people give us all we need and more.  Please continue your rabid hate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

espola said:


> grammarly.com


Just laughing at you.  That's all.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

Booter said:


> SUCKER!!!  Trump is breaking his own record everyday.  Trump doesn't act like a real president or know how to be a real president but he really is the president.  Republicans have all branches of government and our government is being run as poorly as ever in the history of our great nation and you are here every day cheering these morons on.
> 
> Good times shitstain, good times.


Speaking of suckers.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> So emotional, yet so cold.


Emotional shriveled things aren't they?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

espola said:


> Coddling those criminals again, I see.


Lock her up


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 28, 2018)

espola said:


> You are a hypocrite and a moral coward.  What would I find to love there?


Forgiveness


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 29, 2018)

Trump's tax cuts will add a hefty dose of debt-financed stimulus to the economy. Government agencies and outside analysts estimate the tax cuts will temporarily boost growth in 2018 and 2019, then fade as the national debt mounts.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 30, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Trump's tax cuts will add a hefty dose of debt-financed stimulus to the economy. Government agencies and outside analysts estimate the tax cuts will temporarily boost growth in 2018 and 2019, then fade as the national debt mounts.


Youʻre about 9 trillion dollars too late to point out the hazards of Keynesianism a.k.a.  QE.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 2, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 2, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


The "Vanishing middle class" where are they going?  Again, Youʻre about 9 trillion dollars too late to point out the hazards of Keynesianism a.k.a. QE.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2018)

The wonders of QE.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2018)

It is true that some households benefit from easy money and artificially low interest rates. Their debt expenses have been reduced and they also are enjoying higher asset values.

But those benefits may be fleeting if the end result is a bubble that bursts, as happened in 2008.--Dan Mitchell


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2018)

Writing for the _Washington Times_, my Cato colleague Richard Rahn agrees that central banks are hurting savers, but he augments this analysis by making the very important point that easy-money policies simply don’t work.

Government economic policymakers have been trying to solve a problem of too much government spending, taxing and regulation by inappropriately using monetary policy, which has not and cannot solve the fundamental problems (it is like using a hammer rather than a shovel to dig a hole). *The major central banks have been holding down interest rates, which is actually a massive indirect tax levied on the world’s savers. *Historically, savers would receive about 3 percent interest above the rate of inflation on their safest investments, but now interest rates often do not cover even the low inflation that is occurring in the developed countries. …Many economists expected savers to save less and consume more as a result of low or even negative interest rates… *When businesses and individuals look at the world debt situation and the increased chances of another financial collapse, their rational response is to increase “precautionary” savings, even though they are not receiving interest on them.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 4, 2018)

“I don’t want an educated population, I want oxen."


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> “I don’t want an educated population, I want oxen."


"I want both"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 4, 2018)




----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 4, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> "I want both"


"The world needs ditch diggers too, Danny"


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 4, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> “I don’t want an educated population, I want oxen."


What do you consider educated?
You? E-READER? Fries?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 5, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What do you consider educated?
> You? E-READER? Fries?
> View attachment 2887


Isnʻt it obvious? Lol


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 5, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What do you consider educated?
> You? E-READER? Fries?
> View attachment 2887


Me or Somoza? That was a quote from Anastasio Somoza.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 5, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Me or Somoza? That was a quote from Anastasio Somoza.


Whatever.
Its not very well thought out.
Like Bruddah said, You need both.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2018)

*Tariff Time!
Trump Confirms $34B Levied on China, Possible $516B More*

President Donald Trump confirmed to reporters on Air Force One flight to Montana Thursday that tariffs on $34 billion in Chinese goods will go into effect at the end of the night, another $16 billion in two weeks, and another up to $500 billion more if China refuses to change unfair trade practices


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 6, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Tariff Time!*
> *Trump Confirms $34B Levied on China, Possible $516B More*
> 
> President Donald Trump confirmed to reporters on Air Force One flight to Montana Thursday that tariffs on $34 billion in Chinese goods will go into effect at the end of the night, another $16 billion in two weeks, and another up to $500 billion more if China refuses to change unfair trade practices


Our politicians have been selling us out for decades.
Trump is doing the dirty work.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Our politicians have been selling us out for decades.
> Trump is doing the dirty work.


Yup, especially the chicoms, red bastards.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 6, 2018)

*It’s the economy, stupid!

Pelosi Trashes June Jobs Report…

… Nancy Warns of ‘Brewing Storm’ of Wealth and Opportunity…*
2,008


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Our politicians have been selling us out for decades.
> Trump is doing the dirty work.


"You really think a germaphobe could be near that?" You really are gullible when they tell you what you want to hear.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 6, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "You really think a germaphobe could be near that?" You really are gullible when they tell you what you want to hear.


Yawn.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 6, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Yawn.


To each his own, Trump seemed to enjoy it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 7, 2018)

The world’s most depressing chart?
JULY 7, 2018
Libertarians despair; leftists rejoice.
 
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/07/the_worlds_most_depressing_chart.html


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 11, 2018)

After talks of more tariffs, boom, Dow drops another 200 points. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? If we only had a financial expert in the house, nono? Lil 'joe? What is up? JAP? Grandpa Duck? Salt?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After talks of more tariffs, boom, Dow drops another 200 points. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? If we only had a financial expert in the house, nono? Lil 'joe? What is up? JAP? Grandpa Duck? Salt?


https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwirsZSk-5fcAhXIwVQKHStABiIQFghHMAI&url=https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/238175/stock-market-news-for-november-07-2016&usg=AOvVaw07bNZ0WwyKFLmHxR6SUDKE
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwirsZSk-5fcAhXIwVQKHStABiIQFgg4MAE&url=http://money.cnn.com/2016/11/22/investing/dow-trump-19000-stocks-alltime-highs/index.html&usg=AOvVaw3aWVNcw95ETiI6iILaipET

perspective.

What is the Dow at today?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After talks of more tariffs, boom, Dow drops another 200 points. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? If we only had a financial expert in the house, nono? Lil 'joe? What is up? JAP? Grandpa Duck? Salt?


Trump has the balls to put America first.
Suck it up, douchebag.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After talks of more tariffs, boom, Dow drops another 200 points. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? If we only had a financial expert in the house, nono? Lil 'joe? What is up? JAP? Grandpa Duck? Salt?


So, you are the financial expert to turn to?


----------



## nononono (Jul 11, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After talks of more tariffs, boom, Dow drops another 200 points. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? If we only had a financial expert in the house, nono? Lil 'joe? What is up? JAP? Grandpa Duck? Salt?


*Boom !*

*You're a LIAR !*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 11, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Trump has the balls to put America first.
> Suck it up, douchebag.


He puts Trump first and only, and it seems you are the one with your mouth full of Trump ass.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 11, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> So, you are the financial expert to turn to?


You really are a lost soul.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 12, 2018)

New stimulus analysis shows Obama never understood investment
JULY 11, 2018
A professional investor looks at the Obama record on stimulus spending and comes up with some appalling return-on-investment numbers.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/07/new_stimulus_analysis_shows_obama_never_understood_investment.html


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He puts Trump first and only, and it seems you are the one with your mouth full of Trump ass.


You really are a lost soul.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> You really are a lost soul.


Possibly, but when history looks back I won't be the one making excuses for why I supported a known con man and the most unqualified individual to ever be elected president. By the way, did you even vote in 2016?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 12, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He puts Trump first and only, and it seems you are the one with your mouth full of Trump ass.


Melania or Ivanka? Or both?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 12, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Possibly, but when history looks back I won't be the one making excuses for why I supported a known con man and the most unqualified individual to ever be elected president. By the way, did you even vote in 2016?


Probably more like, why the hell did you support Obama?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Probably more like, why the hell did you support Obama?


If it's a popularity contest, like you seem to favor, Obama is respected and loved worldwide. Trump, is laughed at and disrespected . . . in the middle east where they use to burn our flag and chant down with America, they don't anymore, they just laugh, knowing we are now our own worst enemy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Probably more like, why the hell did you support Obama?


Obama did a good job. For one thing he pulled all the bigots up from outta their holes and exposed them to the light . . . and now Trump is putting them front and center, near and dear to his heart.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 12, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> If it's a popularity contest, like you seem to favor, Obama is respected and loved worldwide. Trump, is laughed at and disrespected . . . in the middle east where they use to burn our flag and chant down with America, they don't anymore, they just laugh, knowing we are now our own worst enemy.


Yes, Obama was so loved that the USA elected Trump.
Keep up the lying.
What a dummy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 12, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Obama did a good job. For one thing he pulled all the bigots up from outta their holes and exposed them to the light . . . and now Trump is putting them front and center, near and dear to his heart.


I thought you couldn't be bigoted towards white people?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I thought you couldn't be bigoted towards white people?


Then you are a fool. Hate has been here since day one and always will be. Hate has also been shown to be a product of ignorance and misunderstanding. Your preferred sources of information have lead you to the misunderstanding, the ignorance is all on you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "You really think a germaphobe could be near that?" You really are gullible when they tell you what you want to hear.


Now you are being disingenuous.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> After talks of more tariffs, boom, Dow drops another 200 points. I wonder if there is a correlation between the two? If we only had a financial expert in the house, nono? Lil 'joe? What is up? JAP? Grandpa Duck? Salt?


Know what a derivative is?  Financial expert?  Hmmmm Fries maybe? lol


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He puts Trump first and only, and it seems you are the one with your mouth full of Trump ass.


So wounded you are.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 13, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Then you are a fool. Hate has been here since day one and always will be. Hate has also been shown to be a product of ignorance and misunderstanding. Your preferred sources of information have lead you to the misunderstanding, the ignorance is all on you.


You ok?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now you are being disingenuous.


Let me know when you catch husker telling the truth please.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 13, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Possibly, but when history looks back I won't be the one making excuses for why I supported a known con man and the most unqualified individual to ever be elected president. By the way, did you even vote in 2016?


I voted in 2016 and every election before that since I turned 18.
I voted for Trump and never voted for John McCain.

When history looks back, you'll be dead, and hopefully your children wont live in a socialist hell hole.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 13, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Let me know when you catch husker telling the truth please.


I'll keep my eyes open, and my head on a swivel.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

*The Questions Stephen Colbert Should Have Asked Democratic Socialist “Rock Star” Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez*
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Stephen Colbert, and millions of Americans leaning toward socialism have no knowledge of the economic problem.

Ocasio-Cortez was an immediate media sensation. _The New York Times_called her “an instant political rock star.” Appearing on the Late Show with Stephen Colbert she was asked to explain her agenda and ideology:

COLBERT: What is your agenda? Because you describe yourself as a democratic socialist, and that’s not an easy term for a lot of Americans. What is the meaning of that for you? What does ‘socialist’ mean to you?

OCASIO-CORTEZ: For me, democratic socialism is about — really, the value for me is that I believe that in a modern, moral and wealthy society, *no person in America should be too poor to live.*

COLBERT: Seems pretty simple.

OCASIO-CORTEZ: Seems pretty simple. *So what that means to me is health care as a human right.* [_applause_] *It means that every child, no matter where you are born, should have access to a college or trade-school education, *if they so choose it. *And I think that no person should be homeless,* if we can have public structures and *public policy to allow for people to have homes and food and lead a dignified life in the United States.* [_applause]

*What Ocasio-Cortez and millions of Americans who support socialism really believe in is spending more of other people’s money. *As they explain the sources of social problems, they falsely conflate government spending with easy solutions.  H.L. Menken warned, “Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.”

_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

*Unasked Questions*
Colbert’s questions didn’t probe Ocasio-Cortez’s simple statements. *He could have pointed, for example, to “progressive” San Francisco. In San Francisco, homelessness is rampant. Some compare conditions in San Francisco to the third-world. The resulting decay of urban living has caused a major medical association convention to cancel.*

*Put San Francisco’s homeless problem in the context of public policy restrictions on development, imposed by “progressive thinkers”: Government restrictions on development have helped push the median price of a home in San Francisco to more than $1.6 million.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

In 1977  economist Thomas W. Hazlett interviewed Nobel laurate F.A. Hayek. Hayek responded to Hazlett’s question about whether socialism was logically possible:

I've always doubted that the socialists had a leg to stand on intellectually. They have improved their argument somehow, but once you begin to understand that prices are an instrument of communication and guidance which embody more information than we directly have, the whole idea that you can bring about the same order based on the division of labor by simple direction falls to the ground. Similarly, the idea [that] you can arrange for distributions of incomes which correspond to some conception of merit or need. If you need prices, including the prices of labor, to direct people to go where they are needed, you cannot have another distribution except the one from the market principle. *I think that intellectually there is just nothing left of socialism.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

Hazlett followed Hayek’s answer with this question: *“Could socialist economies exist without the technology, innovations, and price information they can borrow from Western capitalism and domestic black markets?” *

*Hayek responded: “I think they could exist as some sort of medieval system. They could exist in that form with a great deal of starvation removing excess population.” *

*Today we see that “sort of medieval system” and starvation in Venezuela and North Korea. Now some want to bring that scourge to America. *

Today millions of Americans cheer for trite solutions not understanding that socialist solutions will bring endless misery for themselves and others.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

*The Real Economic Problem*
*
Professor of neurobiology Stuart Firestein, in his book Ignorance: How It Drives Science writes, “Questions are bigger than answers. One good question can give rise to several layers of answers, can inspire decades-long searches for solutions, can generate whole new fields of inquiry, and can prompt changes in entrenched thinking. Answers, on the other hand, often end the process.”*

Firestein asks us to consider “if we are too enthralled with the answers.” He urges us to embrace the “exhilaration of the unknown.” Those cheering for Ocasio-Cortez were clearly enthralled with her glib answers.

*Socialists are full of glib answers*—more spending—but they are short on the willingness to ask questions that lead to further inquiry. Ocasio-Cortez and others might consider if the economic problem is merely a problem of redistributing wealth. Their question might lead them to study Hayek.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

The Magic of Socialism


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2018)

Ocasio-Cortez, Stephen Colbert, and millions of Americans leaning toward socialism have no knowledge of the economic problem. Invincibly ignorant, they assume the problem away by embracing the idea of redistributing other people’s money. 

If you don’t know what the economic problem is, there is no possibility of discovering solutions to the problems you see. With a willingness to explore questions, more knowledge will be discovered. Freedom, not simplistic answers based on coercion, promotes voluntary human cooperation and creates economic progress, raising the well-being of all.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ocasio-Cortez, Stephen Colbert, and millions of Americans leaning toward socialism have no knowledge of the economic problem. Invincibly ignorant, they assume the problem away by embracing the idea of redistributing other people’s money.
> 
> If you don’t know what the economic problem is, there is no possibility of discovering solutions to the problems you see. With a willingness to explore questions, more knowledge will be discovered. Freedom, not simplistic answers based on coercion, promotes voluntary human cooperation and creates economic progress, raising the well-being of all.


Everyone goes to college, healthcare for all, a home for every homeless person, where have I heard this before?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Magic of Socialism


I'm like, they're like, OMG.
She should do well.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Unleash the Potential of Federal Lands*
The federal government owns over a quarter of all U.S. territory, and it's blocking huge possibilities.

*by **Daniel Di Martino*

*Privatization Can Protect the Environment While Empowering Local Communities
*
Many “environmentalist” groups argue that privatizing federal lands would destroy the environment. They assert that companies would buy land, deplete it from all its resources, and leave. But the reality is that despite global deforestation and increased domestic wood production, *the forest cover of the United States has grown every year the last three decades, in part due to the private forestry industry.* This is because ownership is the best incentive for preservation. Owners have an incentive to preserve the resources of their land just as homeowners have an incentive to preserve their homes. 

For instance, farmers rotate their crops to keep the nitrogen levels of the soil and avoid desertification.

*On the other hand, the federal government is not subject to the incentives of private landowners. If the land deteriorates, agencies do not bear the burden but taxpayers do, and costs are too small when dispersed among all citizens for any of them to give it importance. For example, the government has failed to control the wild horse population, leading to overgrazing, but most Americans are not aware of the problem.*
*
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Magic of Socialism


*You'd Be Surprised How Many Government Services Could Be Privately Provided*
The vast majority of things deemed "public goods" and thus must be provided by government simply, well, aren't.


*by Richard M. Ebeling*


One of the great controversies in modern society concerns the necessary and required functions of government. There are few who disagree that if government is to exist then it certainly has the duty and responsibility to secure and protect essential rights of every individual, including the right to life, liberty, and honestly acquired property. *But there are a wide variety of tasks that the private sector could better provide that many think must be supplied by the government.*

*Many of these activities have been subsumed under the general notion of “public goods” that are subject to “free rider” problems. Public goods are often defined as a good or service from the use or coverage of which an individual may receive a benefit, but from which he is not easily excluded even though he does not pay a price or fee to help cover some portion of the cost of making it available.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Magic of Socialism


*Myth 1: Collectivists Care More About the Poor*

No magic wand can ever transform the most wonderful intentions of collectivists into good results. *Milton Friedman observed, “Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it.*”

We can’t measure intentions, but we can see results. *Capitalists have brought billions of human beings out of poverty while collectivists have starved to death millions. Freedom enriches; force impoverishes. “A society that puts freedom first,” wrote Friedman in Free to Choose, “will, as a happy byproduct, end up with both greater freedom and greater equality.”*

In Venezuela, Kurmanaev observes how the façade of good intentions has dissolved:

*What struck me on arriving was how little the Socialist leaders cared about even the appearances of equality. They showed up at press conferences in shantytowns in motorcades of brand new armored SUVs.* They toured tumbledown factories on live state TV wearing Rolexes and carrying Chanel handbags. They shuttled journalists to decaying state-run oil fields on private jets with gilded toilet paper dispensers…

In Venezuela, I saw children abandon schools that had stopped serving meals and teachers trade their lesson books for pickaxes to work in dangerous mines. I saw pictures of horse carcasses on the grounds of the top university’s veterinary school—killed and eaten because of the lack of food.

*Kurmanaev reports, “[T]he so-called Socialist government made no attempt to shield [from cutbacks] health care and education, the two supposed pillars of its program.” As if there could be a benign form of socialism, Kurmanaev adds, “This wasn’t Socialism. It was kleptocracy—the rule of thieves.”*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Myth 2: Those with Good Intentions Solve Problems the Market Can’t*

We get the leaders our beliefs have called forth. In _The Road to Serfdom,_Hayek points out how people blame “the system” for their troubles and “wish to be relieved of the bitter choice which hard facts often impose upon them.” Thus they “are only too ready to believe that the choice is not really necessary, that it is imposed upon them merely by the particular economic system under which [they] live.”

In his book _The Essential Hayek_, the great economic educator Don Boudreaux writes, 

If government remains committed to protecting from the downside of economic change all who clamour for such protection, the powers of government must necessarily expand until little freedom of action is left to individuals.

Boudreaux explains how blocking change creates poverty:

Unfortunately, because economic growth is economic change that requires the temporarily painful shifting of resources and workers from older industries that are no longer profitable to newer industries, the prevention of all declines in incomes cannot help but also prevent economic growth. The economy becomes ossified, static, and moribund. So achieving complete protection of all citizens at all times from the risk of falling incomes means not only being ruled by an immensely powerful government with virtually no checks on its discretion, but also the eradication of all prospects of economic growth. Inevitably, at the end of this road paved with the good intention of protecting all producers from loss lies not only serfdom but also widespread poverty.

Is it flippant to argue the market will sort out our problems? Boudreaux explains why, rather than being flippant, those who promote the entrepreneurial discovery process are placing society on the superhighway to easing hardship:

“Let the market handle it” is to reject a one-size-fits-all, centralized rule of experts. It is to endorse an unfathomably complex arrangement for dealing with the issue at hand. Recommending the market over government intervention is to recognize that neither he who recommends the market nor anyone else possesses sufficient information and knowledge to determine, or even to foresee, what particular methods are best for dealing with the problem.

To recommend the market, in fact, is to recommend letting millions of creative people, each with different perspectives and different bits of knowledge and insights, each voluntarily contribute his own ideas and efforts toward dealing with the problem. It is to recommend not a single solution but, instead, a decentralized process that calls forth many competing experiments and, then, discovers the solutions that work best under the circumstances.

Kurmanaev went to an event held by the Central Bank of Venezuela. He expected to learn how the bank planned to improve the economy. Instead, at 10 am, he found himself at a beach party where vodka and rum flowed. Nelson Merentes, the head of the Bank, was there. Kurmanaev found Merentes “waving maracas and dancing with a bevy of young women in tight denim shorts.”

One anecdote proves little, but in _The Road to Serfdom_ Friedrich Hayek shows why under collectivism the “worst get on top.”

What bigger recipe for disaster could you want? The “worst” planning the lives of other people.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Myth 3: The Economy Prospers Under Socialism*
Kurmanaev observes this about the Venezuelan economy:

*By the end of 2018, it will have shrunk by an estimated 35% since 2013, the steepest contraction in the country’s 200-year history and the deepest recession anywhere in the world in decades. From 2014 to 2017, the poverty rate rose from 48% to 87%, according to a survey by the country’s top universities. Some nine out of 10 Venezuelans don’t earn enough to meet basic needs. Children die from malnutrition and medicine shortages…*

Caracas has long been a dangerous yet vibrant city, but the crisis has transformed it into a zombie movie set. When I moved into my neighborhood of Chacao, in the eastern part of the city, the streets were full of food stalls, cafes and shops run by Portuguese, Italian and Syrian immigrants. Groups of young and old stayed in the streets drinking beer or chatting into the small hours.

But Chacao’s streets are now empty after dark. Most of the streetlights no longer work, and the only people outside after 8 p.m. are homeless kids rummaging through garbage bags.

Initially, socialism seemed to produce a free lunch.

[T]he poor got subsidized food and free housing. The middle class got up to $8,000 of almost-free credit card allowances a year for travel and shopping. And the rich and politically connected siphoned off up to $30 billion a year of heavily subsidized dollars through shell companies.

Professor Boudreaux explains the inevitable collapse of an economy without “private property rights, freedom of contract, the rule of law, and consumer sovereignty”:

*Indispensable to the creation, maintenance, and growth of widespread prosperity is an economic system that uses scarce resources as efficiently as possible to create goods and services that satisfy as many consumer demands as possible. To the extent that the economic system encourages, or even permits, productive resources to be wasted, that system fails to achieve maximum possible prosperity. If, say, large deposits of petroleum beneath the earth’s surface remain undetected because the economic system doesn’t adequately reward the human effort required to find and extract such deposits, then people will go without the fuel, lubricants, plastics, medicines, and other useful products that could have been—but are not—produced from this petroleum.


Atlas is starting to Shrug again!!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Out of the Ashes*
Churchill had it right: "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance and the gospel of envy. Its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery except for those running the government."


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Magic of Socialism


*How Socialists Make Economics the "Dismal Science" in Spite of Rising Prosperity*



*by Kevin Villani*


Eighteenth-century economist Thomas Carlyle called economics a dismal science not just in reaction to economist Tomas Malthus’ view that economic stagnation and collapse due to population growth was inevitable but also to John Stuart Mill's calls for individual liberty (and as a consequence freeing the American slaves) as the way to improve aggregate economic well being. *Economics remains the dismal science, today led by “secular stagnationist” Robert Gordon. But as famed physicist Richard Feynman noted, if a field has science in its name, it probably isn’t!*
*
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Economic Exploitation is Political*

Political economy up to the 17th century was mostly exploitative: slavery, serfdom, mercantilism and imperialism were all forms of exploitation by those with political power and influence—cronies—who could exploit those without it. Wealth and income were redistributed rather than created. A century later in 1776 Adam Smith published the Wealth of Nations, coincidentally the same year as the American Revolution, describing how a market economy works to benefit all based on Mills’ individual liberty. *Almost a century later economist Karl Marx described this “capitalist” system as exploitation of the working classes (the proletariat) by the owners of capital (the bourgeoisie). This remains the dominant narrative, but doesn’t explain increasing prosperity.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Prosperity is Absolute, Envy is Relative*

Analogously, seventeenth-century Newtonian physics described the laws of gravity governing the universe for several centuries, but it could not _explain_ gravity, the force that held us down. Einstein set out to resolve the discrepancy between the Newtonian theory of gravity that implied the speed of light was “relative” with the perhaps most important but largely ignored empirical observation by electromagnetic physicists in 1887 that the speed of light was constant. Literally outside the physics profession from his perch at the patent office, he conducted a thought experiment: a person inside a box hung from a crane whose cable causes it to accelerate upwards would interpret the g-forces of acceleration as being held down by gravity but when viewed from outside the box would be rising. This led to his “special” and later “general” theory of relativity in which gravity and acceleration is the same thing.

*What Marx saw as exploitation was the beginning of generally rising prosperity. Over the past century since Einstein’s relativity the most important but overlooked empirical economic finding is that virtually all aggregate human progress is a direct consequence of Mill's economic liberalism: private market capitalism. The exploitation felt by the lower economic classes is relative to the owners of capital. The corollary empirical observation is that improvements in economic well being are inversely related to the size and scope of government.* In the extreme, socialist systems with state ownership of the means of production stagnate and collapse: in the Einstein thought experiment socialists cut the cable, producing a euphoric sensation of floating until the box crashes to the ground.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*Political Rent-seeking is Exploitative, the Profits of Innovation Just*


In _Knowledge and Power_ (2013) George Gilder describes how and _why_ such concentrations of private capital produce innovative investment providing widespread improvement of material well being: ownership provides the incentive and accumulated entrepreneurial knowledge the ability to innovate. An optimist, Gilder rejects the secular stagnationist limits to innovation.

*That progressive politicians and the administrative state should reject this empirical evidence in favor of the exploitation narrative isn’t hard to understand. Economists and historians are also included among the intellectual elite, “rentiers” rather than producers. Class warriors led by Thomas Picketty focus on the relative distribution of wealth—envy—to maintain the exploitation narrative in support of state redistribution.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 14, 2018)

*The Socialist Free Lunch: Still Good Bait to Elective Totalitarianism*

*Bernie Sanders, the socialist candidate for the 2016 Democratic nomination, attracted strong support from millennials. His message ignored the history of socialism—the 45 million deaths resulting from Mao’s bringing socialism to China, or the 100 million deaths in the Bloodlandsbetween Hitler and Stalin, or the collective memory loss of socialists globally described in the Last Exit to Utopia – in favor of the myth of Scandinavian socialism, in reality the fruits of a globally competitive capitalist economy.*

*Millennials were likely conditioned directly or indirectly for their socialist sympathies from A Peoples History of the United States (1980) by Howard Zinn, who shared the same background and worldview as Sanders, absorbing Marx at an early age and oscillating between socialism, “democratic socialism” and social democracy later in life.* Zinn provides a compelling disturbing history from the perspective of the people inside the box. But he merges the absolute exploitation of e.g. indigenous Indians and imported slaves with the more likely relative exploitation of indentured servitude and other immigrants. He then equates “profit” with the exploitive systems of slavery, servitude, Indian genocide, mercantilism, imperialism and crony capitalism, implicating liberal market capitalism. These two social justice warriors led their young lambs down the _Road to Serfdom_.  

*Charlie Chaplin once told his good friend Albert Einstein that they were the two most famous people in the world but that he was popular because everybody understood exactly what he was doing whereas nobody understood what Einstein was doing. Einstein claimed that had he been able to obtain a university appointment instead of the patent office job he would never have been able to think outside the box and publish his theory of relativity. Same goes for entrepreneurs.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 16, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 16, 2018)

*Backfire Economics: 6 Ways Tariffs Are Hurting the Very People They're Supposed to Help*
Support for Trump’s tariffs is not something generated by a sense of a greater good.


*by Mark J. Perry*

https://fee.org/articles/backfire-economics-6-ways-tariffs-are-hurting-the-very-people-theyre-supposed-to-help/?utm_source=ribbon


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 17, 2018)

*Washing Machine Tariffs Started the Trade War. Result? Largest-Ever Three-Month Increase in Washing Machine Prices*
Trump’s ill-advised trade war is really largely a war on Americans


*by Mark J. Perry*

*Backfire Economics*

As simple economics tells us, the Trump tariffs on washing machines aren’t imposed on foreign appliance producers like Samsung and LG as much as they are imposed on Americans in the form of higher prices for consumers. Likewise, Trump’s ill-advised trade war, which started in January when he approved the tariffs on imported washing machines, is really largely a war on Americans. The February-May 16.4% increase in the CPI for washing machines is just the first of many price increases on U.S. consumers and firms from Trump’s trade war that are guaranteed to lead to net job losses and impoverish, not enrich Americans.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 20, 2018)

*Ms. Diversity-ConArtista: Boston University’s fake-o-nomics darling*
July 18, 2018 07:36 AM by Michelle Malkin


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 25, 2018)

*What Would Happen If Government Didn’t Handle That?*
*Wednesday, July 25, 2018*

If the burden of proving its effectiveness was put on government, rather than liberty, vanishingly little of government would survive, but more market miracles would occur.

https://fee.org/articles/what-would-happen-if-government-didn-t-handle-that/
*
*


----------



## nononono (Jul 25, 2018)

*Wadda mean that was a Palestinian " Glory Hole "..... *


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 27, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Wadda mean that was a Palestinian " Glory Hole "..... *


You continue to ooze fear.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You continue to ooze fear.


You sure that's not your Trump Derangement Syndrome?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 28, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You sure that's not your Trump Derangement Syndrome?


You are scared, you ooze it . . . I hope your "gallows" humor makes you feel better though.


----------



## nononono (Jul 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You continue to ooze fear.



*" No Fear "...she probably quite cute in her birthday suit.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 29, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are scared, you ooze it . . . I hope your "gallows" humor makes you feel better though.


You, Hays, and Ocasio-Cortez make me feel better.


----------



## nononono (Jul 30, 2018)

*The pending debt crisis of the Pension Black Holes is becoming worse*
*with each passing day, the northern California Fires are going to do*
*nothing but worsen that condition on an exponential scale....*
*Watch for Gov Jerry Brown to once again beg for money from the *
*Federal Government like he did just recently after the last fires....*

*I'm really beginning to wonder about these fires and whether they*
*are ALL being set intentionally to create havoc in California to create*
*a Federal funding stream that could potentially stifle the pending *
*financial crisis in this State.....*

*After ALL the shit I've witnessed Democrats do this is not beyond the *
*realm of possibility for them to do this type of Shit. Look what they*
*did in Charlottesville Virginia ......Yes " They " did it, and it's documented.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 30, 2018)

*Coca-Cola Raises Prices On Trump's Favorite Drink Over Tariffs*

Coca-Cola has hiked prices on its carbonated drinks because President Donald Trump’s 10 percent tariff on imported aluminum has made cans for Coke and other sodas more expensive to make.

This increase is just one of a number of price hikes on goods ― including boats, motorcycles, campers, furniture and beer ― bringing the high cost of the tariffs home to American consumers.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/coca-cola-raises-prices-trump-062536447.html


----------



## nononono (Jul 30, 2018)

*Bring the manufacturing home and the Tariffs will go away......*

*Imagine that.*

*Or they can just play fair and they will go away....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 30, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> *Coca-Cola Raises Prices On Trump's Favorite Drink Over Tariffs*
> 
> Coca-Cola has hiked prices on its carbonated drinks because President Donald Trump’s 10 percent tariff on imported aluminum has made cans for Coke and other sodas more expensive to make.
> 
> ...


I thought you liked higher taxes.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 30, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I thought you liked higher taxes.


That notion falls perfectly inline with the totality of your past input here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 30, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That notion falls perfectly inline with the totality of your past input here.


You don’t have the balls to say you’re for higher taxes.  That would align you with Trump.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 31, 2018)

The Trump administration is studying the idea of implementing a big tax break for wealthy Americans by reducing the taxes levied on capital gains, but no decision has been made yet on whether to proceed.

Administration officials said Tuesday that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin prefers deferring to Congress. But he does have his department studying the economic impact of such a change and the legality of proceeding without congressional approval.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The Trump administration is studying the idea of implementing a big tax break for wealthy Americans by reducing the taxes levied on capital gains, but no decision has been made yet on whether to proceed.
> 
> Administration officials said Tuesday that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin prefers deferring to Congress. But he does have his department studying the economic impact of such a change and the legality of proceeding without congressional approval.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The Trump administration is studying the idea of implementing a big tax break for wealthy Americans by reducing the taxes levied on capital gains, but no decision has been made yet on whether to proceed.
> 
> Administration officials said Tuesday that Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin prefers deferring to Congress. But he does have his department studying the economic impact of such a change and the legality of proceeding without congressional approval.


Trending  

Analysis: Here Are the Stunning Tax Hikes Required to Pay For Single-Payer Healthcare's (Minimum) $32.6 Trillion Price Tag 
Guy Benson |


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Aug 3, 2018)

The United States labor market is closing in on full employment in an economic expansion that just began its 10th year, and yet the real hourly wage for the working class has been essentially flat for two years running. Why is that?

Economists ask this question every month when the government reports labor statistics. We repeatedly get solid job growth and lower unemployment, but not much to show for wages. Part of that has to do with inflation, productivity and remaining slack in the labor market.

But stagnant wages for factory workers and non-managers in the service sector — together they represent 82 percent of the labor force — is mainly the outcome of a long power struggle that workers are losing. Even at a time of low unemployment, their bargaining power is feeble, the weakest I’ve seen in decades. Hostile institutions — the Trump administration, the courts, the corporate sector — are limiting their avenues for demanding higher pay.

Looking at the historical relationship between working-class wages and unemployment, wage growth should be rising about a percentage point faster than it is right now. In June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports, wages were growing at a yearly rate of 2.7 percent before inflation.

G.D.P. has sped up and may clock in at around 4 percent in the second quarter of this year, but not enough of that growth is reaching workers. This is, of course, the defining characteristic of high inequality. Since the early 1980s, G.D.P. growth has failed to consistently increase working-class incomes.

Slow productivity growth is another constraint on wages. When companies are able to produce more efficiently, they can absorb higher labor costs without sacrificing profit margins. But such gains have been elusive in this recovery, so businesses are increasing profits at labor’s expense.

More than ever, the dynamics of this old-fashioned power struggle between labor and capital strongly favor corporations, employers and those whose income derives from stock portfolios rather than paychecks.

This is evident in the large, permanent corporate tax cuts versus the small, temporary middle-class cuts that were passed at the end of last year. It’s evident in the recent Supreme Court case that threatens the survival of the one unionized segment of labor — public workers — that still has some real clout.

It’s evident in the increased concentration of companies and their unchecked ability to collude against workers, through anti-poaching and mandatory arbitration agreements that preclude worker-based class actions. And it’s evident in a federal government that refuses to consider improved labor standards like higher minimum wages and updated overtime rules.

Even if workers’ real wages do pick up, their gains may be too short-lived to make a lasting difference. The next recession is lurking out there, and when it hits, whatever gains American workers were able to wring out of the economic expansion will be lost to the long-term weakness of their bargaining clout. Workers’ paychecks reflect workers’ power, and they are both much too weak.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/opinion/wage-stagnation-unemployment-economic-growth.html


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 3, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The United States labor market is closing in on full employment in an economic expansion that just began its 10th year, and yet the real hourly wage for the working class has been essentially flat for two years running. Why is that?
> 
> Economists ask this question every month when the government reports labor statistics. We repeatedly get solid job growth and lower unemployment, but not much to show for wages. Part of that has to do with inflation, productivity and remaining slack in the labor market.
> 
> ...


NY Times, HUH?
Are they still denying the Holocaust?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Aug 3, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> NY Times, HUH?
> Are they still denying the Holocaust?


Are you Q boy?


----------



## espola (Aug 3, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> NY Times, HUH?
> Are they still denying the Holocaust?


When did they do that?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 3, 2018)

espola said:


> When did they do that?


Excuse me, buried,
*Buried by the Times - Wikipedia*
https://*en.wikipedia.org*/wiki/*Buried_by_the_Times*


----------



## espola (Aug 3, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Excuse me, buried,
> *Buried by the Times - Wikipedia*
> https://*en.wikipedia.org*/wiki/*Buried_by_the_Times*


I'll take that as a "never".


----------



## nononono (Aug 3, 2018)

QUOTE="Sheriff Joe, post: 214612, member: 1585"







/QUOTE

*That woman could be kinda pretty, but I'll put *
*money on her that she could eat an apple though a *
*chain link fence.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 4, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The United States labor market is closing in on full employment in an economic expansion that just began its 10th year, and yet the real hourly wage for the working class has been essentially flat for two years running. Why is that?
> 
> Economists ask this question every month when the government reports labor statistics. We repeatedly get solid job growth and lower unemployment, but not much to show for wages. Part of that has to do with inflation, productivity and remaining slack in the labor market.
> 
> ...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 4, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 4, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 4, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 4, 2018)




----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 4, 2018)

Obama says he fears economy could enter 'new normal' of low job growth
Washington Post
Nov 7, 2010 · Without additional government action to spur hiring, President Obama said Sunday that he fears the U.S. economy could enter a "new normal" in which corporate profits are high but the number of new jobs is too low to reduce the nation's 9.6 percent unemployment rate to pre ...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 4, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


That little guy knows his shit, make the ladies look foolish.
Just like you do to the ladies in here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 5, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> That little guy knows his shit, make the ladies look foolish.
> Just like you do to the ladies in here.


I'm afraid I can't take credit for their foolishness.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Aug 7, 2018)

QE-Trump style . . .

President Donald Trump is grossly overstating the extent of U.S. economic and job gains.

In a tweet Monday, he declares that the economy has "never been better" and jobs are at the "best point in history."

In fact, the economy and jobs are nowhere close to historic bests based on several measures. Economists have also warned that U.S. growth is largely fueled by government borrowing, as the federal deficit rises because of his tax cuts, and is thus unlikely to be sustainable after a few quarters.

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/ap-fact-check-trump-falsely-claims-economy-jobs-183130277.html


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> QE-Trump style . . .
> 
> President Donald Trump is grossly overstating the extent of U.S. economic and job gains.
> 
> ...


Haters gonna hate.


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> QE-Trump style . . .
> 
> President Donald Trump is grossly overstating the extent of U.S. economic and job gains.
> 
> ...


Get over it already.  Your bitterness just makes you look paranoid, well or drunk.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 7, 2018)

Multi Sport said:


> Get over it already.  Your bitterness just makes you look paranoid, well or drunk.


I really didn't think they could pitch a fit for 2 years, that's dedication.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 7, 2018)

*LIST: 700 Examples of Good News Arising from Tax Cuts!*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 7, 2018)

Media
*“They’ll live”: Doctors will just have to take a massive pay cut for the US to be more like Canada*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> QE-Trump style . . .
> 
> President Donald Trump is grossly overstating the extent of U.S. economic and job gains.
> 
> ...


Great opportunity for democratic socialist to run on Tax Increases in 2020.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Aug 7, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Media
> *“They’ll live”: Doctors will just have to take a massive pay cut for the US to be more like Canada*



Is this an SNL skit?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> QE-Trump style


Lol!!


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Aug 7, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I really didn't think they could pitch a fit for 2 years, that's dedication.


Its what they do.


----------



## espola (Aug 7, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Haters gonna hate.


Debtors gonna owe.


----------



## espola (Aug 7, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I really didn't think they could pitch a fit for 2 years, that's dedication.


The crook is still in the White House.  I  didn't think the Congress could tolerate that for 2 years.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 7, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Is this an SNL skit?


Poor guy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 8, 2018)

'Teen Vogue' Op-Ed: Abortion Is Actually Hilarious
12 hours ago
*'Teen Vogue' Op-Ed: Abortion Is Actually Hilarious*
*"Yes, abortion can be funny."*
by Amanda PrestigiacomoAugust 7, 2018


Trash magazine "Teen Vogue" published an op-ed in late July that claimed abortion is actually hilarious. This is apparently the new far-leftist tact in normalizing the fatal horror that is abortion — _a message being directed to a large audience of pre-teens and teens, mind you._

"Yes, Abortion Can Be Funny," reads the headline via Twitter. A real hoot!

The piece, posted by pro-abortion Lady Parts Justice League's Solange Azor, explains how to elevate and normalize abortion and combat pro-life arguments through humor, and, more specifically, the group's "comedy" tour, called "Vagical Mystery." (Note: Comedy is in scare quotes for a reason.)

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/34185/teen-vogue-op-ed-abortion-hilarious-amanda-prestigiacomo?amp&ved=2ahUKEwjos5efrN3cAhUCi6wKHdN9DB8QqUMwA3oECAYQEQ&usg=AOvVaw2qtsE0DgooLtzFsujNnUnG


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Aug 8, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> 'Teen Vogue' Op-Ed: Abortion Is Actually Hilarious
> 12 hours ago
> *'Teen Vogue' Op-Ed: Abortion Is Actually Hilarious*
> *"Yes, abortion can be funny."*
> ...


disgusting.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 8, 2018)

*After 19 months of Trump, small businesses the most optimistic in 15 years*
Andrew Malcolm Aug 08, 2018 11:21 AM





Small business jobs are big business


----------



## nononono (Aug 8, 2018)

espola said:


> Debtors gonna owe.


*Thieves will just go on thieving...... *


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 11, 2018)

espola said:


> The crook is still in the White House.  I  didn't think the Congress could tolerate that for 2 years.


Easy.  They did it for 8 years prior.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Aug 11, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *After 19 months of Trump, small businesses the most optimistic in 15 years*
> Andrew Malcolm Aug 08, 2018 11:21 AM
> 
> 
> ...


This says it all.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 12, 2018)

What caused the last depression folks?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 13, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 15, 2018)

*No, 'Medicare for All' Is Still Not Plausible*
Single-payer advocates are crowing that their plan would save money. They're also wrong.

Last week, Left-wing politicians, activists, and columnists gleefully rejoiced that they had unlocked the easy path to single-payer health care in America: *Just cut reimbursement payments to health providers by 40 percent and then raise taxes by $32 trillion over the decade. You know, nothing difficult or controversial*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *No, 'Medicare for All' Is Still Not Plausible*
> Single-payer advocates are crowing that their plan would save money. They're also wrong.
> 
> Last week, Left-wing politicians, activists, and columnists gleefully rejoiced that they had unlocked the easy path to single-payer health care in America: *Just cut reimbursement payments to health providers by 40 percent and then raise taxes by $32 trillion over the decade. You know, nothing difficult or controversial*


Smart Power


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *No, 'Medicare for All' Is Still Not Plausible*
> Single-payer advocates are crowing that their plan would save money. They're also wrong.
> 
> Last week, Left-wing politicians, activists, and columnists gleefully rejoiced that they had unlocked the easy path to single-payer health care in America: *Just cut reimbursement payments to health providers by 40 percent and then raise taxes by $32 trillion over the decade. You know, nothing difficult or controversial*


Another great idea from the left..


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 16, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> By all means let's continue the cycle of the rich getting richer and hence their political influence strengthening allowing them to get laws enacted that once again, make them richer.


https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/15/sec-has-reportedly-served-tesla-with-a-subpoena-after-elon-musks-take.html


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 16, 2018)

Thank you Obama.

*Number of 401(k) millionaires hits record...*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 17, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 17, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


>


Socialism.  Where only government officials get richer and the poor end up dead.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 17, 2018)

The Accountable Capitalism Act Elizabeth Warren unveiled her new idea in an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal.  It is her new bill, called the Accountable Capitalism Act.  Of course, I have said this before, there is no truth in advertising when it comes to legislation. *Whenever Congress passes a bill, the name of the bill is generally the opposite of what the bill actually does. So if they pass a bill called, "Tax Simplification", that means that they just complicated the tax code. But nobody wants to vote for a bill that's called "Tax Complication", so you can't label it "Tax Complication" when that's what we're doing, so you label it Simplification so everybody will like it.* *This is All About Socialism That's what Elizabeth Warren is doing in her Accountable Capitalism Act.  This is not about Capitalism.* This is about Socialism. The idea here is that Capitalism is not accountable, and so this act is going to hold Capitalism accountable. In reality, capitalism holds everybody accountable. Under a Capitalist system, everybody is accountable for their own actions.  If you screw up, then you have to suffer the consequences. If you make a mistake, it's on you.  If your business fails, there's not bail-out. Capitalism is the Ultimate in Accountability So Capitalism is the ultimate in accountability. It's fair and everybody is held accountable for their own decisions and their own actions.  What Elizabeth Warren wants to do is to take that accountability away.  She wants to have the government get in there and take away the accountability inherent in the Capitalist system. The Socialist Un-Accountability Act Not only is the act mislabeled, it is actually the Socialist Un-Accountability Act. It wants to take people who would normally be accountable and make them unaccountable. It's all Socialism wrapped up in a Capitalist bow. What she wants to do is:     * She wants to force corporations with over $1 billion in revenue, regardless of their profit, to appoint at least 40% of their board from the ranks of their workers     * She wants to re-install the stakeholder accountability that existed until the 1980's Warren: Profits have Screwed Up the Country I read the op-ed and I listened to her interview with Kramer on CNBC and according to Elizabeth Warren's revisionist version of American History, corporations cared about their stakeholders, meaning their employees, customers, communities up until the 1980's. Then all of a sudden, in the 1980's, everything changed. All of a sudden, it was all about profits. It was all about maximizing shareholder value.  And that's what screwed up the country.,


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 18, 2018)

This is about Socialism. The idea here is that Capitalism is not accountable, and so this act is going to hold Capitalism accountable. In reality, capitalism holds everybody accountable. Under a Capitalist system, everybody is accountable for their own actions. If you screw up, then you have to suffer the consequences. If you make a mistake, it's on you. If your business fails, there's not bail-out. Capitalism is the Ultimate in Accountability So Capitalism is the ultimate in accountability. It's fair and everybody is held accountable for their own decisions and their own actions. *What Elizabeth Warren wants to do is to take that accountability away. She wants to have the government get in there and take away the accountability inherent in the Capitalist system.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 18, 2018)

The case for liberty is for a social process that is free to discover the best social institutions to enliven and realize human dignity through choice and with love. In order for that to happen, we need what might be called, in the tradition of C.S. Lewis, “mere liberty”: the freedom to own, act, speak, think, and innovate. The exercise of such rights is incompatible with government management of the economy and the social order.--Rob Koerner


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 19, 2018)

In an earlier post, I noted that Senator Elizabeth Warren has introduced legislation designed to federalize the law of corporate social responsibility. Among other flaws with her proposal, a key one is the proposal to preempt state corporate law with a federal statute.

*The U.S. Supreme Court has held repeatedly that the federal securities laws do not preempt state corporate law, but instead place only a limited gloss on the broader body of state law.*[1] A fair rule of thumb is that state law is concerned with the substance of corporate governance, while federal law is concerned with disclosure and a limited number of procedural aspects of corporate governance (such as the solicitation of proxies and the conduct of a tender offer).[2]--Stephen Bainbridge


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 19, 2018)

*The basic case for federalizing corporate law rests on the so-called “race to the bottom” hypothesis. *States compete in granting corporate charters. After all, the more charters the state grants, the more franchise and other taxes it collects. According to the race to the bottom theory, *because it is corporate managers who decide on the state of incorporation, states compete by adopting statutes allowing corporate managers to exploit shareholders. *As the clear winner in this state competition, *Delaware is usually the poster-child for bad corporate governance. Interestingly, the two main corporate failures cited to justify the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, Enron and WorldCom, were not Delaware corporations. (They were incorporated in Oregon and Georgia, respectively.)*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 19, 2018)

Basic economic common sense tells us that investors will not purchase, or at least not pay as much for, securities of firms incorporated in states that cater too excessively to management. Lenders will not lend to such firms without compensation for the risks posed by management’s lack of accountability. As a result, those firms’ cost of capital will rise, while their earnings will fall. Among other things, such firms thereby become more vulnerable to a hostile takeover and subsequent management purges. Corporate managers therefore have strong incentives to incorporate the business in a state offering rules preferred by investors. Competition for corporate charters thus should deter states from adopting excessively pro management statutes. The empirical research bears out this view of state competition, suggesting that efficient solutions to corporate law problems win out over time.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 19, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 20, 2018)

*Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts has one-upped socialists Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: She proposes to nationalize every major business in the United States of America. If successful, it would constitute the largest seizure of private property in human history.*

*Warren’s proposal is dishonestly called the “Accountable Capitalism Act.” *Accountable to whom?you might ask. That’s a reasonable question. The answer is — as it always is — accountable to politicians, who desire to put the assets and productivity of private businesses under political discipline for their own selfish ends. It is remarkable that people who are most keenly attuned to the self-interest of CEOs and shareholders and the ways in which that self-interest influences their decisions apparently believe that members of the House, senators, presidents, regulators, Cabinet secretaries, and agency chiefs somehow are liberated from self-interest when they take office through some kind of miracle of transcendence.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/08/elizabeth-warren-plan-nationalize-everything-woos-hard-left/


----------



## nononono (Aug 22, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> This is about Socialism. The idea here is that Capitalism is not accountable, and so this act is going to hold Capitalism accountable. In reality, capitalism holds everybody accountable. Under a Capitalist system, everybody is accountable for their own actions. If you screw up, then you have to suffer the consequences. If you make a mistake, it's on you. If your business fails, there's not bail-out. Capitalism is the Ultimate in Accountability So Capitalism is the ultimate in accountability. It's fair and everybody is held accountable for their own decisions and their own actions. *What Elizabeth Warren wants to do is to take that accountability away. She wants to have the government get in there and take away the accountability inherent in the Capitalist system.*



*When everyone is held accountable for their OWN actions you then have a society *
*that flourishes.*

*We have a GROWING homeless population because they DO NOT WANT TO BE
ACCOUNTABLE !*

*A Country cannot subsist off of Leeches, it's doomed for failure....*

*The Leeches must be removed from the societal tit and either become self sustaining or*
*they cease to exist.*

*The Pilgrims found that out real fast and changed.....*
*Why should it be any different now !!!!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 22, 2018)

nononono said:


> *When everyone is held accountable for their OWN actions you then have a society *
> *that flourishes.*
> 
> *We have a GROWING homeless population because they DO NOT WANT TO BE*
> ...


We have politicians that would rather bail out a failing company instead of allowing Capitalism to hold them accountable for their actions or lack of.  Warren is one of those self proclaimed smart people that never get it.  I think the three of them dem socialist should live in Venezuela for a year.


----------



## nononono (Aug 22, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> We have politicians that would rather bail out a failing company instead of allowing Capitalism to hold them accountable for their actions or lack of.  Warren is one of those self proclaimed smart people that never get it.  I think the three of them dem socialist should live in Venezuela for a year.


*Warren ( The fake Indian )*
*Cortez ( The Apple biter )*
*Feinstien ( The " China " Thief )*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 23, 2018)

*GREAT AGAIN: TARGET CEO raves about economy: This is best consumer environment I've ever seen...*

_*Texas Exports More Oil Than Imports For First Time...*_


----------



## nononono (Aug 23, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2018)

A woman who woke up from a thirty-year coma in 2018 would be forgiven if she looked around and came to believe our world is falling apart.

Cable news and social media are a steady drumbeat of negativity. There is a sense the world is not right.

Russian collusion. Xenophobia. Antifa. Unite the Right. Stormy Daniels. #MeToo. Mass shootings. The Deep State. It’s a cacophony of angst, outrage, and political anger.

The woman who emerged from her coma would have little or no idea that the world is experiencing an economic miracle, just as most people today do not. *But it’s happening just the same.--J. Miltimore*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2018)

“By 2020, more than half of the world’s population will be ‘middle class,’” the _Post_ reports.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2018)

*Americans Have an Odd View of the Middle Class*
*
Breathless narratives about a “shrinking U.S. middle class” from politicians and media—which often neglect to mention that America’s middle class is shrinking because Americans are getting wealthier—have probably added to the confusion.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2018)

glance at the chart below reveals that the decline in world poverty took place during the _Pax Americana_, a period notable for relative peace that witnessed the defeat of socialism and an unprecedented expansion of freedom and trade. (As oppressive as China’s system may be politically, there’s no question it underwent vast economic liberalization beginning in the 1970s.)







It’s unclear if we’re at the beginning of the _Pax Americana_ or its end. Only time will tell.

Whatever the case, the last 70 years reveal what can be achieved when humans and nations work and trade together.


----------



## nononono (Sep 2, 2018)

*Make*
*America*
*Great*
*Again*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 13, 2018)

https://fee.org/articles/bernie-sanders-stop-bezos-campaign-ignores-several-basic-economic-realities/

What Sanders and all lawmakers should know is that as something becomes more expensive, people buy less of it. Sanders seems to understand this when it suits him. In 2015, he said that the way to reduce carbon pollution is to impose a tax on businesses that pollute. A year later, he said that the way to reduce stock market speculation is to impose a tax on people who speculate.

Connecting the dots, imposing a tax on businesses that hire poor workers will reduce the number of poor workers they hire. Why? Because the workers will be more expensive. *Bernie Sanders has written a law whose purpose is to harm the working poor.

Sanders and Ocasio 2020!!!!*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Sep 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> https://fee.org/articles/bernie-sanders-stop-bezos-campaign-ignores-several-basic-economic-realities/
> 
> What Sanders and all lawmakers should know is that as something becomes more expensive, people buy less of it. Sanders seems to understand this when it suits him. In 2015, he said that the way to reduce carbon pollution is to impose a tax on businesses that pollute. A year later, he said that the way to reduce stock market speculation is to impose a tax on people who speculate.
> 
> ...


Did you hear Bernie didn't even endorse his own kid in the primary because he knew he wouldn't win?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Sep 13, 2018)

*Tax reform 2.0 introduced in House, secures Trump tax cuts*
Karen Townsend Sep 12, 2018 10:01 PM





Trump’s economic boom continues


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 13, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Did you hear Bernie didn't even endorse his own kid in the primary because he knew he wouldn't win?


Link?


----------



## Booter (Sep 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> A woman who woke up from a thirty-year coma in 2018 would be forgiven if she looked around and came to believe our world is falling apart.
> 
> Cable news and social media are a steady drumbeat of negativity. There is a sense the world is not right.
> 
> ...


Sexist!  #Time'sUp


----------



## nononono (Sep 13, 2018)

Booter said:


> Sexist!  #Time'sUp



*Logic is a far reach for you isn't it.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 13, 2018)

Booter said:


> Sexist!  #Time'sUp


You're such a Diva when you're hungry.  Have a snickers.  Better?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Sep 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Link?








* Bernie Sanders won’t endorse his son for Congress, citing “dynasty politics” *

Emily Stewart
6/7/2018
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=http:%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fAAylHTC%3focid%3dsl&title=Bernie+Sanders+won%E2%80%99t+endorse+his+son+for+Congress%2c+citing+%E2%80%9Cdynasty+politics%E2%80%9D&source=http:%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fAAylHTC%3focid%3dsl
http://a.msn.com/01/en-us/AAylHTC?ocid=sf
https://twitter.com/share?url=http:%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fAAylHTC%3focid%3dst&text=Bernie+Sanders+won%E2%80%99t+endorse+his+son+for+Congress%2c+citing+%E2%80%9Cdynasty+politics%E2%80%9D&original_referer=http:%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fAAylHTC%3focid%3dst
https://web.skype.com/share?url=http%3a%2f%2fa.msn.com%2f01%2fen-us%2fAAylHTC%3focid%3dss⟨=en-us&flow_id=a1ecf803-09ea-4e9a-8fa7-37170f1650f2&source=msn


 





© Justin Sullivan/Getty Images Bernie Sanders at a campaign rally in Durham, New Hampshire, in 2016.

Sanders isn’t typically frugal with his endorsements, except for when it comes to Levi Sanders, his son, who’s running in New Hampshire.






Load Error


Father’s Day at the Sanders household could be awkward. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is publicly keeping a distance from his son Levi Sanders’s congressional campaign in New Hampshire. The senator declined to endorse his son when Levi announced his candidacy in February, and he’s still staying out of it; he says it’s for the sake of avoiding “dynasty politics.”

The younger Sanders, 49, is one of multiple Democrats and Republicans running to replace outgoing Democratic Rep. Carol Shea-Porter in representing New Hampshire’s First District. He has styled himself after his father, with his campaign website calling for a system that “represents the 99 percent and not the 1 percent who have never had it so good.”

But whatever Levi Sanders is putting down, Bernie Sanders is not picking up — at least not enough to endorse his only son. When contacted by the Boston Globe about Levi Sanders’s candidacy this week, Bernie provided a statement highlighting his support for a higher minimum wage, infrastructure spending, and free public education. As to whether voters should cast their ballots for him, he wouldn’t say.

“Levi has spent his life in service to low income and working families, and I am very proud of all that he has done,” Sanders said. “In our family, however, we do not believe in dynastic politics. Levi is running his own campaign in his own way.”

Sen. Sanders offered a similarly tepid statement when Levi announced his candidacy, saying, “The decision as to who to vote for will be determined by the people of New Hampshire’s first district, and nobody else.”

Levi Sanders is Bernie Sanders’s son with his ex-girlfriend Susan Campbell Mott. He is his only biological child.

The senator appears on Levi’s campaign website, but what you see is his back as he walks away. Levi’s Twitter photo is an image of him and his father taking a mirror selfie together.

*It’s not like Bernie is afraid of endorsements*
Bernie Sanders is a popular figure in New Hampshire. He won the 2016 Democratic presidential primary there by a wide margin, bringing in 60 percent of the vote compared to Hillary Clinton’s 38 percent. Among potential 2020 presidential candidates, he polls well, even though in a recent poll he’s not the leader.

There are two ways to read his lack of public enthusiasm for his son’s campaign: He really means what he says and thinks dynasty politics is bad, or he’s not particularly impressed with Levi as a candidate.

Sanders hasn’t been particularly frugal with his endorsements. According to Ballotpedia, he endorsed 107 candidates and 33 ballot measures in 2016 and 62 candidates and two ballot measures in 2017. This year, he’s already endorsed two candidates — Randy Bryce in Wisconsin and Ben Jealous in Maryland — and one ballot measure, and he often campaigns for and supports candidates across the country.

His shyness on his son could be what he says. He probably doesn’t want the Sanders clan to wind up like the Clintons, Kennedys, Bushes, or Trumps. But Levi Sanders isn’t the ideal congressional candidate, either, and perhaps the senator doesn’t want to be damaged by tying himself too much to his son should he decide to run for president again in 2020.

New Hampshire political observers told the Boston Globe that Levi Sanders’s campaign isn’t particularly impressive, with former state Sen. Burt Cohen telling the publication nobody is “really considering Levi as an option.” State Rep. Tim Smith told the Globe he doesn’t know anyone “in the New Hampshire Bernie community who is excited about Levi running.”

Levi Sanders doesn’t live in the district he’s running to represent, and while that’s not required, it doesn’t help his cause. He resides in Claremont, in New Hampshire’s Second District, which is about an hour away. Whereas his father excelled in fundraising, Levi has struggled, ending March with just under $11,500 on the books. He’s picked up two endorsements — from New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy and California Rep. Ro Khanna — but not his dad’s.

Vox’s Dylan Matthews, who has a full explainer on Levi Sanders, pointed out that some of the candidate’s past social media activity also raises some questions. On Twitter, he has criticized “identity politics” and said criticisms of “white privilege” turn off working-class voters. He tweeted he didn’t think “working-class families” would care about President Donald Trump using a racial slur and complained that eliminating Confederate flag license plates “hurts people’s rights.”


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Sep 15, 2018)

Hey Obama, Where Did My Ten Trillion Dollars Go?
SEPTEMBER 15, 2018
Exactly what did Obama accomplish with his extraordinary orgy of federal spending?
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/hey_obama_where_did_my_ten_trillion_dollars_go_.html


----------



## nononono (Sep 15, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Hey Obama, Where Did My Ten Trillion Dollars Go?
> SEPTEMBER 15, 2018
> Exactly what did Obama accomplish with his extraordinary orgy of federal spending?
> https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/09/hey_obama_where_did_my_ten_trillion_dollars_go_.html



*The DEEP STATE !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 17, 2018)

https://patriotpost.us/articles/57162-san-franciscos-rank-number-two

The root of San Francisco’s mess can be tied directly to decades of Democrats enacting their leftist policies. San Francisco has the highest rent in the world, coming in at an average of $3,500 a month. The median home price is a whopping $1.5 million, an amount that only 12% of residents can afford.

And the biggest contributor to this obscenely high cost of living is onerous laws. Columnist Rachel Alexander reports, *“Zoning regulations and building codes have increased the cost of housing. Height restrictions waste valuable space. In much of the city, it is illegal to build anything taller than 40 feet.* One resident built a ‘pod’ in his friend’s living room in order to obtain affordable rent, but the city found out and made him move out. Due to the high cost of living, a family making $117,400 annually is considered 'low income.‘ A family making $73,300 is 'very low income.’ *The minimum wage is $15 an hour, but it’s not enough to rent a two-bedroom apartment. In order to live comfortably in San Francisco, an annual salary must be at least $110,000.”*

Exorbitantly high cost of living and yet the city is increasingly becoming a slum. No wonder residents are leaving the city in droves. No U.S. city lost more residents in the last quarter of 2017 than did San Francisco. Here is yet another sad example of a long-time Democrat-controlled city whose residents are suffering — and smelling — the consequences.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 17, 2018)




----------



## Ricky Fandango (Sep 17, 2018)

Nowhere close to our daily gubment mandated gouging in Cali.

This was tweeted in South Carolina as an example of "gouging". lol.


----------



## espola (Sep 17, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Nowhere close to our daily gubment mandated gouging in Cali.
> 
> This was tweeted in South Carolina as an example of "gouging". lol.


According to gasbuddy.com, the average price for regular in South Carolina is about $2.54/gallon.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Sep 17, 2018)

espola said:


> According to gasbuddy.com, the average price for regular in South Carolina is about $2.54/gallon.


Thank's for making my point, sherlock.
You really do care.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Sep 19, 2018)

*WATCH: Students At UCLA Asked How High The Minimum Wage Should Be *


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *WATCH: Students At UCLA Asked How High The Minimum Wage Should Be *


I've always advocated for $50/hr.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Sep 28, 2018)

the-costs-of-inequality-increasingly-its-the-rich-and-the-rest

how-the-rich-use-the-government-to-enrich-themselves.html

why-do-people-vote-against-their-best-interests


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> the-costs-of-inequality-increasingly-its-the-rich-and-the-rest


So much for QE.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> t
> how-the-rich-use-the-government-to-enrich-themselves.html


This means that anyone concerned about addressing inequality should be focusing on the many ways in which *government policy itself actively redistributes money upward.

QE Baby!!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 28, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> why-do-people-vote-against-their-best-interests


We see this all the time. People seemingly voting against their own self-interests: poor people supporting a candidate who is owned by the rich or immigrants who support an anti-immigrant candidate, for example. *What is some of the psychology behind supporting a leader who doesn’t represent an individual’s interests?*
*

Wrong premise Dr.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 29, 2018)

https://www.wsj.com/articles/world-poverty-falls-below-750-million-report-says-1537366273

The World Bank reported that the number of humans living in extreme poverty dropped below 750 million worldwide. The _Wall Street Journal _reported that this is the lowest figure since the World Bank began collecting such data in 1990.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 2, 2018)

OCTOBER 1, 2018
*New York Times finally admits how Obama screwed up the economy in 2016*
By Thomas Lifson
Calling it "The Most Important Least-Noticed Economic Event of the Decade," the New York Times finally acknowledges the degree to which Barack Obama's policies were strangling business investment in his final year in office. During the presidential campaign, acknowledging this "mini recession that many missed" was taboo, of course. And among those "many" who "least-noticed" it was the New York Times. So why is the Times admitting it now? Why, of course, to denigrate the achievements of President Trump in rescuing the economy from the miasma Obama inflicted on it with taxes and regulatory policies.

Neil Irwin writes:

[In 2015 and 2016, t]here was a sharp slowdown in business investment, caused by an interrelated weakening in emerging markets, a drop in the price of oil and other commodities, and a run-up in the value of the dollar.







The pain was confined mostly to the energy and agricultural sectors and to the portions of the manufacturing economy that supply them with equipment. Overall economic growth slowed but remained in positive territory. The national unemployment rate kept falling. Anyone who didn't work in energy, agriculture or manufacturing could be forgiven for not noticing it at all.

Even though the Times and its readers were able to disregard the suffering in the oil patch, on farms, and in the Rust Belt manufacturing strongholds, candidate Trump actively campaigned with these constituencies and won the presidency on his promise to revive them from the suffering inflicted upon them. He knew; he acted; and after he won, he revived them. As Instapundit's Glenn Reynolds quips:

It wasn't invisible – Trump saw it – they just didn't report it because they didn't want to make Obama look bad or hurt Hillary's prospects.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 2, 2018)

*AMAZON raising minimum wage to $15 per hour...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 2, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *AMAZON raising minimum wage to $15 per hour...*


Simple Supply and demand.


----------



## Booter (Oct 2, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Simple Supply and demand.


Thanks to the success of Quantitative Easing which did not blow up the world economy and lead to economic growth and the financial markets being incredibly solid.  The current economic expansion is one of the longest in history.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 2, 2018)

Booter said:


> Thanks to the success of Quantitative Easing which did not blow up the world economy and lead to economic growth and the financial markets being incredibly solid.  The current economic expansion is one of the longest in history.


I could have done more with the 10 trillion the Kenyan stole from us.


----------



## Booter (Oct 2, 2018)

*The No. 1 Lesson of the Lehman Collapse: QE Worked.*
*Doomsayers predicted that the Fed’s bond-buying spree would wreck the U.S. economy. Instead, it made the recovery possible.*

The Fed ended QE in 2014, increased interest rates seven times since 2015 and last year began reducing its $4 trillion balance sheet as debt acquired during the bond-buying program matured. The Fed’s preferred measure of inflation, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Core Price Index, now sits at an annualized rate of 1.98 percent. At the same time, the big and small companies included in the Russell 3000 index saw their net debt to Ebitda ratio — or total debt minus cash divided by earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization — diminished to the lowest on record in 2015. It remains 2.2 percentage points below the Russell 3000 debt ratio of 2000.

It’s doubtful that the economy’s robust health would have occurred without QE. But the academics, billionaires and politicians who denounced the policy as ruinous in a public letter with 23 signatures in 2010 still haven’t acknowledged QE’s role in the recovery and subsequent prosperity. The group, led by Stanford University Professor John Taylor, billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Singer and U.S. House Speaker John Boehner, predicted that the monetary stimulus would provoke runaway inflation, damage the dollar’s special role as the world’s reserve currency and send bond prices plummeting. They were wrong.

The recovery from the death of Lehman proved to be the most dynamic since 1980, with the rebound making the U.S. the only developed economy to attain record GDP by 2015, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The dollar rallied 20 percent, the most of any developed economy’s currency during the past nine years.

After the crash of 1929, it took 25 years for the stock market to recover. The S&P 500, which lost 47 percent of its value in the bear market from September 2008 to March 2009, was at a record by 2013 and is up 327 percent from the recession low, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-09-13/lehman-collapse-lesson-qe-worked


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 2, 2018)

Booter said:


> *The No. 1 Lesson of the Lehman Collapse: QE Worked.*
> *Doomsayers predicted that the Fed’s bond-buying spree would wreck the U.S. economy. Instead, it made the recovery possible.*
> 
> The Fed ended QE in 2014, increased interest rates seven times since 2015 and last year began reducing its $4 trillion balance sheet as debt acquired during the bond-buying program matured. The Fed’s preferred measure of inflation, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Core Price Index, now sits at an annualized rate of 1.98 percent. At the same time, the big and small companies included in the Russell 3000 index saw their net debt to Ebitda ratio — or total debt minus cash divided by earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization — diminished to the lowest on record in 2015. It remains 2.2 percentage points below the Russell 3000 debt ratio of 2000.
> ...


Bloomberg?


----------



## nononono (Oct 2, 2018)

espola said:


> According to gasbuddy.com, the average price for regular in South Carolina is about $2.54/gallon.


*Did you have an " Epiphany " yet and return the items with dimples you *
*stole from the Golf Course near your residence......*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 3, 2018)

Booter said:


> Thanks to the success of Quantitative Easing which did not blow up the world economy and lead to economic growth and the financial markets being incredibly solid.  The current economic expansion is one of the longest in history.


Fantastic!  Finally.  Inequality and the 1 percenters are no more.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 3, 2018)

Booter said:


> *The No. 1 Lesson of the Lehman Collapse: QE Worked.*
> *Doomsayers predicted that the Fed’s bond-buying spree would wreck the U.S. economy. Instead, it made the recovery possible.*
> 
> The Fed ended QE in 2014, increased interest rates seven times since 2015 and last year began reducing its $4 trillion balance sheet as debt acquired during the bond-buying program matured. The Fed’s preferred measure of inflation, the Personal Consumption Expenditures Core Price Index, now sits at an annualized rate of 1.98 percent. At the same time, the big and small companies included in the Russell 3000 index saw their net debt to Ebitda ratio — or total debt minus cash divided by earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization — diminished to the lowest on record in 2015. It remains 2.2 percentage points below the Russell 3000 debt ratio of 2000.
> ...


Suckers

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## Booter (Oct 3, 2018)

*Trump wanted to print money to repay the national debt. That’s bananas*

Donald Trump has made his ignorance of Economics 101 abundantly clear—from his late-night phone calls to ask how the dollar works to his constant confusion over the cause of the US trade imbalance.

Trump: “Just run the presses—print money.”

Cohn: “You don’t get to do it that way. We have huge deficits and they matter. The government doesn’t keep a balance sheet like that.”

There’s a touch of irony in Trump’s proposed shortcut. Not only has the president failed to balance the budget, his massive tax cut and a huge spending bill threaten to push the budget deficit from $665 billion in 2017 to a whopping $1.3 trillion by 2022, according to the Congressional Budget Office (pdf, p.83). By 2028, the CBO says the deficit could rise to $29 trillion—which, as a share of GDP, would be twice the average over the last 50 years. No wonder the siren song of the printing press beckons.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 3, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump wanted to print money to repay the national debt. That’s bananas*
> 
> Donald Trump has made his ignorance of Economics 101 abundantly clear—from his late-night phone calls to ask how the dollar works to his constant confusion over the cause of the US trade imbalance.
> 
> ...


Q.E.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 3, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump wanted to print money to repay the national debt. That’s bananas*
> 
> Donald Trump has made his ignorance of Economics 101 abundantly clear—from his late-night phone calls to ask how the dollar works to his constant confusion over the cause of the US trade imbalance.
> 
> ...


Obama averaged at least a trillion a year.  We already covered this.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 4, 2018)

*Here’s how Amazon’s $15 minimum wage could cause some employees to earn less*
7 hours





Some Amazon employees could lose out on money due to conditions of the company's minimum wage increase. (David Ryder/Getty Images
Amazon announced that it was raising minimum wage for all employees to $15 per hour earlier this week, but The Guardian reported that the increase comes with a catch that could end up costing some employees in the long run.

The $15 minimum wage wasn’t just a straight wage increase–it was a trade off. In exchange for increasing the minimum amount employees can earn, Amazon also took away incentive pay and stock option awards, which are extremely valuable at a company like Amazon.


“This is basically a stealth tax by the employer on its own wage increase,” said Tim Roache, general secretary of the British trade union GMB, according to The Guardian. “If Jeff Bezos — the richest man in the world — really wants to give hardworking staff a pay raise, he should let them keep their share options as well as increasing their hourly rate.”

*How it works*
According to The Guardian, warehouse workers previously got an Amazon share worth nearly $2,000 at the end of each year, and an additional share at the end of every five-year period of employment. Employees could also earn up to 8 percent of their monthly income by way of incentive bonuses.


So while employees who were making significantly less than $15 per hour might love the change, those who were making near $15 or more have a different perspective. Here’s how an Amazon employee explained it to Yahoo Finance:


An employee earning $15.25 an hour who has worked for Amazon for more than three years in Arizona crunched the numbers. Although he is getting a $1 an hour raise, which would equate to as much as $2,080 in additional pay a year, he said he could have earned a few thousands of dollars more from the incentive programs. “Amazon isn’t giving its employees a raise, they’re taking money from us,” he told Yahoo Finance. “It only looks good if folks don’t know the truth.”


*Amazon’s response*
Amazon claims it made the compensation change based on employee feedback, and that workers preferred the “predictability and immediacy of cash.” The company also said everyone will make more money.

“The significant increase in hourly cash wages more than compensates for the phase out of incentive pay and [restrictive stock units],” an Amazon statement read. “We can confirm that all hourly Operations and Customer Service employees will see an increase in their total compensation as a result of this announcement.”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 4, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Here’s how Amazon’s $15 minimum wage could cause some employees to earn less*
> 7 hours
> 
> 
> ...


It has to make cents.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 4, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It has to make cents.


Fuck 15!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 4, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fuck 15!


Good for China!!


----------



## Torros (Oct 4, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Here’s how Amazon’s $15 minimum wage could cause some employees to earn less*
> 7 hours
> 
> 
> ...


People on the left are short sided.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 5, 2018)

Before Amazon started showing billion-dollar profits, there was a joke that the massive public company was in reality a charity run by Wall Street investors for the benefit of American consumers. But that humor revealed a deep misunderstanding of Amazonomics. The internet retailer was never any sort of philanthropy. Instead it was a rapidly growing business that invested every dollar of excess cash back into growing the business even further. It sacrificed short-term profitability for innovation and growth. It was capitalism done right.

Given that wildly successful strategy, we can be confident that Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, the world’s wealthiest person, has coolly calculated that it makes ample business sense for Amazon to raise the minimum wage it pays its U.S. workers to $15 an hour. The logic seems obvious. The boost would give the trillion-dollar retailing giant an edge over rivals such as Walmart and Target in the competition for increasingly scarce workers. It also gives the company a reputational lift — or perhaps a political heat shield — after politicians such as Bernie Sanders have attacked it for its labor practices, including how some employees receive assistance from government safety-net programs.

Hiking the minimum wage makes sense for Amazon and its workers. That doesn’t mean it makes any sense for Washington to follow suit.

http://www.aei.org/publication/a-15-minimum-wage-is-great-for-amazon-it-is-not-great-for-america/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTkRRMU1EVTFOems0TnpZNSIsInQiOiIxTVMrUjRlcUUzNVRcL1dpbEthYW1aRnBIZjFibUlMcnBjMVVKVmtkSFc0Y2FTUzV2dHR6RkUzMmtjNW55Z3U0TFl2S05uUjZpUzNMRERMdlwvTisza09OYVZZXC9JcG1iYmJUck8xSjJxUkxLYUVnZXR3aTFNSk41WUE0U2t3cDNpNiJ9


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 7, 2018)

*Trump’s Legacy Will Be Economic Decline If He Abandons Free Trade*
Trump’s policies could undermine the hard-won global consensus in favor of free trade—and even destroy the global trading system altogether.
*Saturday, October 06, 2018*






https://fee.org/articles/trump-s-legacy-will-be-economic-decline-if-he-abandons-free-trade/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 7, 2018)

*http://www.socalsoccer.com/threads/essential-economics-for-politicians.694/page-100#post-226429*

*SWIFT and the Weaponization of the U.S. Dollar*
The U.S. has used the system as a stick before. Continuing down this path could trigger de-dollarization and an ensuing currency crisis.
*Saturday, October 06, 2018*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 18, 2018)

Seems this economic wave started more than a couple years back.


----------



## Booter (Oct 18, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Q.E.


Printing money is not QE - IDIOT!


----------



## Booter (Oct 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Trump’s Legacy Will Be Economic Decline If He Abandons Free Trade*
> Trump’s policies could undermine the hard-won global consensus in favor of free trade—and even destroy the global trading system altogether.
> *Saturday, October 06, 2018*
> 
> ...


You think Trump is concerned about his legacy?  SUCKER!!!


----------



## nononono (Oct 18, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump wanted to print money to repay the national debt. That’s bananas*
> 
> Donald Trump has made his ignorance of Economics 101 abundantly clear—from his late-night phone calls to ask how the dollar works to his constant confusion over the cause of the US trade imbalance.
> 
> ...



*Man are you stupid.....*
*The " Stupidest " would be your forum Booty Buddy ....Rat the " Pussyman " Rodent....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 18, 2018)

Booter said:


> You think Trump is concerned about his legacy?  SUCKER!!!


Lol!  The article wasnʻt asking a question.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 18, 2018)

Booter said:


> Printing money is not QE - IDIOT!


Too bad you canʻt prove that.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Oct 18, 2018)

Booter said:


> You think Trump is concerned about his legacy?  SUCKER!!!


Of course he's concerned with his legacy, only an idiot would think otherwise.
He just doesn't care what pc left wing ass wipes think....


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 18, 2018)

*Subprime Loans Are Back, Proving We Have Learned Nothing from 2008*
Many are claiming that this time will be different than the last. This should concern just about everyone.

Over the last several weekends, the nonprofit, Boston-based brokerage Neighborhood Assistance Corporation of America (NACA) partnered with big banks and hosted events all across the country, attracting tens of thousands of attendees. These events are meant to help people apply for subprime home loans. If the term “subprime” does not immediately jump out at you, it should. “Subprime” mortgages were a primary culprit of the 2008 financial crisis.

https://fee.org/articles/subprime-loans-are-back-proving-we-have-learned-nothing-from-2008/


----------



## Booter (Oct 19, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Man are you stupid.....*
> *The " Stupidest " would be your forum Booty Buddy ....Rat the " Pussyman " Rodent....*


Trump said it dumbass  - he is your savior idiot!


----------



## Booter (Oct 19, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Of course he's concerned with his legacy, only an idiot would think otherwise.
> He just doesn't care what pc left wing ass wipes think....


You are a bigger sucker than I thought.  Trump is concerned with 1 thing and that is how much more money he will have when he leaves the White House.  Just how much Fox News are you watching?


----------



## Booter (Oct 19, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Too bad you canʻt prove that.


Once again your Econ 101 Pass/Fail class has let you down.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 19, 2018)

Booter said:


> Once again your Econ 101 Pass/Fail class has let you down.


Prove it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 19, 2018)

Booter said:


> You are a bigger sucker than I thought.  Trump is concerned with 1 thing and that is how much more money he will have when he leaves the White House.  Just how much Fox News are you watching?


Sucker


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 19, 2018)

Booter said:


> You are a bigger sucker than I thought.  Trump is concerned with 1 thing and that is how much more money he will have when he leaves the White House.  Just how much Fox News are you watching?


Easy there, it has taken you weeks to gather yourself from your emotional breakdown, your eyes are finally no longer red and puffy.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 19, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Easy there, it has taken you weeks to gather yourself from your emotional breakdown, your eyes are finally no longer red and puffy.


I disagree.
Eyes are watering as we speak.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Oct 20, 2018)

Booter said:


> You are a bigger sucker than I thought.  Trump is concerned with 1 thing and that is how much more money he will have when he leaves the White House.  Just how much Fox News are you watching?


Thought? 
You've never had an original thought or opinion in your life, you koolaid drinking dweeb.
When it comes to sucking, you have way more experience than I you gagging piece of fodder.
Run along now...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 20, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Thought?
> You've never had an original thought or opinion in your life, you koolaid drinking dweeb.
> When it comes to sucking, you have way more experience than I you gagging piece of fodder.
> Run along now...


You, like the plumber, have followed lil 'joe and nono into trollsville. You are nothing but an angry troll, enjoy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 20, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You, like the plumber, have followed lil 'joe and nono into trollsville. You are nothing but an angry troll, enjoy.


None angrier then you people.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 20, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> None angrier then you people.


Like your hero Trump, you accuse people of that of which you are guilty.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 20, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You, like the plumber, have followed lil 'joe and nono into trollsville. You are nothing but an angry troll, enjoy.


Who are you calling angry?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 20, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Like your hero Trump, you accuse people of that of which you are guilty.


Who said I was accusing?


----------



## Multi Sport (Oct 20, 2018)

Booter said:


> You are a bigger sucker than I thought.  Trump is concerned with 1 thing and that is how much more money he will have when he leaves the White House.  Just how much Fox News are you watching?


Sucker..


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You, like the plumber, have followed lil 'joe and nono into trollsville. You are nothing but an angry troll, enjoy.


I love you too, rat.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Like your hero Trump, you accuse people of that of which you are guilty.


Hmmm.
Anyone else see what happened here?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 21, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Hmmm.
> Anyone else see what happened here?


Elegant wordiness.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Oct 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You, like the plumber, have followed lil 'joe and nono into trollsville. You are nothing but an angry troll, enjoy.


You, the Mayor of "trollville", project your inadequacies on anyone with whom you disagree.
Angry, not even.
I'm blessed in so many ways, family, friends, work, where I live...all of these couldn't be better.
The Dodgers are going back to the World Series, the Rams are undefeated, the Waves are on a Roll.
And I've got you to laugh at while pointing out what an ignorant asswipe you are...
You continue to tee it up for so many to easily pummel your asinine posts.
Keep up the good work Daffy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 21, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> You, the Mayor of "trollville", project your inadequacies on anyone with whom you disagree.
> Angry, not even.
> I'm blessed in so many ways, family, friends, work, where I live...all of these couldn't be better.
> The Dodgers are going back to the World Series, the Rams are undefeated, the Waves are on a Roll.
> ...


Life is good.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 22, 2018)

The AP analysis found states that expanded Medicaid under President Barack Obama's health overhaul reported spending their allocations more slowly than states that didn't expand the health insurance program to poor, childless adults.

Why? In states that expanded Medicaid, the insurance program already covers addiction treatment for nearly everyone who is poor and needs it.

The Trump administration has said a recent survey shows efforts are working.

b2e64f2a-d5c8-11e8-a6a1-41eb84ecc04d


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Oct 22, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> You, the Mayor of "trollville", project your inadequacies on anyone with whom you disagree.
> Angry, not even.
> I'm blessed in so many ways, family, friends, work, where I live...all of these couldn't be better.
> The Dodgers are going back to the World Series, the Rams are undefeated, the Waves are on a Roll.
> ...


Good old LE, it's always the same game with you. Years of pissing and moaning, then when called on it you go all soft and fluffy as if everything is rose. Well mi amigo, you wear it on your sleeve and can't wipe it off with one little tissue. Enjoy!


----------



## Lion Eyes (Oct 22, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Good old LE, it's always the same game with you. Years of pissing and moaning, then when called on it you go all soft and fluffy as if everything is rose. Well mi amigo, you wear it on your sleeve and can't wipe it off with one little tissue. Enjoy!


Ahhhh, projecting once again, you ignorant piece of shit.
Pointing out your stupidity is the same old game with me, you're getting your lame ass handed to you daily.
Tee up another one dumb ass....


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 22, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The AP analysis found states that expanded Medicaid under President Barack Obama's health overhaul reported spending their allocations more slowly than states that didn't expand the health insurance program to poor, childless adults.
> 
> Why? In states that expanded Medicaid, the insurance program already covers addiction treatment for nearly everyone who is poor and needs it.
> 
> ...


Fake News.


----------



## Booter (Oct 23, 2018)

*Trump's mystery tax cut puzzles Washington*

The president has spoken twice about a tax plan no one else seems to know anything about. 'I guess I’ll hear about it when I get to work on Monday,' one official said.

Trump said that House Speaker Paul Ryan was involved in crafting the plan. But Ryan’s office shed no light, referring questions back to the White House.

The GOP is already scrambling to avoid criticism for the ballooning debt and deficit under Trump’s watch. The president’s own Treasury Department reported last week that the deficit hit $779 billion in the 2018 fiscal year, the highest level since 2012, following the GOP tax cut bill and a massive spending increase in Congress. Jason Furman, who served as chair of the Council of Economic Advisers under President Barack Obama suggested a 10 percent middle class tax cut would cost roughly $2 trillion over ten years.

And for Republicans making the final sprint to the midterms, *Trump talking about tax cuts – even fanciful ones with no chance of happening – is better than Trump talking about much of anything else.*

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/10/22/trump-new-tax-cut-midterms-925383


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 23, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump's mystery tax cut puzzles Washington*
> 
> The president has spoken twice about a tax plan no one else seems to know anything about. 'I guess I’ll hear about it when I get to work on Monday,' one official said.
> 
> ...



'Fair Share' Reality Check: The Top Three Percent Paid More Than Half of All Federal Income Taxes
Guy Benson


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 23, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump's mystery tax cut puzzles Washington*
> 
> The president has spoken twice about a tax plan no one else seems to know anything about. 'I guess I’ll hear about it when I get to work on Monday,' one official said.
> 
> ...


Sucker


----------



## Booter (Oct 23, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker


LOL - he's your president.  Idiot!


----------



## nononono (Oct 23, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump's mystery tax cut puzzles Washington*
> 
> The president has spoken twice about a tax plan no one else seems to know anything about. 'I guess I’ll hear about it when I get to work on Monday,' one official said.
> 
> ...




*Tax Cuts and CLOSED BORDERS !*

*Now what Booty Butt !*


----------



## Booter (Oct 23, 2018)

*Trump said he would erase America's debt in 8 years. It's now bigger than ever.*

As a candidate, Donald Trump promised to get rid of the entire national debt “over a period of eight years.” When this promise was made, the national debt stood at $19 trillion; it has since risen to $21.7 trillion. In the fiscal year ending September 30, it grew by $779 billion, up 17 percent from $666 billion in fiscal 2017. This year, after the Trump tax cuts take full effect, another $1 trillion worth of government IOUs will be issued.

“The deficit is absolutely higher than anyone would like,” says Kevin Hassett, chairman of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers. “Historically unprecedented,” adds Jason Furman, who occupied Hassett’s position in the Obama administration. He feels that with unemployment virtually non-existent, and the economy growing at annual rate of at least 3 percent, we should be paying down debt, not spilling more red ink over the national ledger. Indeed,* in 2000, the last time the unemployment rate dipped below 4 percent, tax revenues rose 11 percent and the government ran a large budget surplus.*

https://www.weeklystandard.com/irwin-m-stelzer/national-debt-under-trump-rises-to-21-7-trillion

Unlike in 2000 there is an idiot in the White House and not a Clinton.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 23, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump said he would erase America's debt in 8 years. It's now bigger than ever.*
> 
> As a candidate, Donald Trump promised to get rid of the entire national debt “over a period of eight years.” When this promise was made, the national debt stood at $19 trillion; it has since risen to $21.7 trillion. In the fiscal year ending September 30, it grew by $779 billion, up 17 percent from $666 billion in fiscal 2017. This year, after the Trump tax cuts take full effect, another $1 trillion worth of government IOUs will be issued.
> 
> ...


Fake News


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 23, 2018)

Booter said:


> LOL - he's your president.  Idiot!


And he is YOUR President too Bootsie.  Since 2016.  Remember?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 23, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump said he would erase America's debt in 8 years. It's now bigger than ever.*
> 
> As a candidate, Donald Trump promised to get rid of the entire national debt “over a period of eight years.” When this promise was made, the national debt stood at $19 trillion; it has since risen to $21.7 trillion. In the fiscal year ending September 30, it grew by $779 billion, up 17 percent from $666 billion in fiscal 2017. This year, after the Trump tax cuts take full effect, another $1 trillion worth of government IOUs will be issued.
> 
> ...


It's a good thing Clinton had a GOP Congress at that time.  

Oh and BTW, *when your legacy as President is 5 of your 8 years being $ubsidized by three rounds of QE,* *it's easy to see why debt has risen to $21.7 trillion without Trump spending a cent.  When Obama left office interest payments on debt alone was nearly $3 trillion dollars......again thanks to 5 years of QE.  

http://www.usdebtclock.org


*


----------



## Booter (Oct 24, 2018)

*Don't Blame Obama For Doubling The Federal Deficit*

Republicans use a sound bite that the federal debt doubled under Obama. In looking at the numbers that is close to being numerically correct but falls short of being 100%. However when you take into account the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars he inherited the story is quite different.

President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President. The Great Recession is probably the biggest of them as can be seen in the yearly deficit numbers. While all politicians use data to support their positions, the sound bite that the debt doubled under Obama is very misleading.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/01/15/obamas-federal-debt-grew-at-a-slower-rate-than-reagan-h-w-bush-or-w-bush/#1732db4e1917


----------



## Lion Eyes (Oct 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> LOL - he's your president.  Idiot!


"LOL - he's our president. Idiot!"


----------



## Booter (Oct 24, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It's a good thing Clinton had a GOP Congress at that time.
> 
> Oh and BTW, *when your legacy as President is 5 of your 8 years being $ubsidized by three rounds of QE,* *it's easy to see why debt has risen to $21.7 trillion without Trump spending a cent.  When Obama left office interest payments on debt alone was nearly $3 trillion dollars......again thanks to 5 years of QE.
> 
> ...


*Outside the box: Unconventional monetary policy in the Great Recession and beyond*

Researchers face a number of challenges in measuring the effects of quantitative easing and forward guidance, both because the policies varied in their timing and size and because constructing counterfactual outcomes of the financial crisis is difficult. As a result, research tends to focus on changes in yields on Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities, using high frequency data around policy announcements (“event studies”) or time-series analyses of investor preferences (term structure models). While both methods have limitations, Kuttner argues term structure models are better equipped to disentangle the effects of QE and forward guidance, and to measure their cumulative effects on interest rates.

Despite these challenges, a large body of research indicates quantitative easing and forward guidance succeeded in lowering long-term interest rates and supporting economic activity. Several studies show the Fed’s forward guidance lowered expected future short-term interest rates and stabilized medium-term rates even as the economy improved. Estimates from both event studies and term-structure models suggest successive rounds of QE reduced 10-year Treasury yields by about 1½ percent—an effect Kuttner estimates to be comparable to that of a 4½ percentage-point cut in the Federal funds rate.

Forward guidance and quantitative easing will be essential tools for the Fed in future recessions, but policymakers should consider strategies to make the policies more measurable and effective. Kuttner proposes the Fed should deploy QE and forward guidance in a rule-like manner that clearly relates its actions to its dual mandate and economic forecasts. In addition, the apparent importance of portfolio rebalancing in the transmission of QE has implications for the design of asset purchases and the Fed’s communication about how they will be conducted. Finally, policymakers should treat forward guidance and QE as complementary tools rather than substitutes, as research suggests they operate through different channels but work together to reinforce the central bank’s commitment to monetary expansion.

https://www.brookings.edu/research/unconventional-monetary-policy-in-the-great-recession-and-beyond/

Your comments on QE are derived from ignorance and blind partisanship. i.e. Too much Fox News.


----------



## Booter (Oct 24, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> "LOL - he's our president. Idiot!"


Yes, Trump indeed is an Idiot.  But you support him so what does that make you?  I await your foul mouthed crotchety response.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Oct 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> Yes, Trump indeed is an Idiot.  But you support him so what does that make you?  I await your foul mouthed crotchety response.


I support him as much as I supported Obama.
I didn't vote for either one. Didn't give money to their campaigns.
They are both liars. They are both narcissistic. Both have served as our president.
Bless your little heart, you have a nice day....


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 24, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Outside the box: Unconventional monetary policy in the Great Recession and beyond*
> 
> Researchers face a number of challenges in measuring the effects of quantitative easing and forward guidance, both because the policies varied in their timing and size and because constructing counterfactual outcomes of the financial crisis is difficult. As a result, research tends to focus on changes in yields on Treasury bonds and mortgage-backed securities, using high frequency data around policy announcements (“event studies”) or time-series analyses of investor preferences (term structure models). While both methods have limitations, Kuttner argues term structure models are better equipped to disentangle the effects of QE and forward guidance, and to measure their cumulative effects on interest rates.
> 
> ...


You people have been falling for the same word salad in your posted article since the great depression.  Do you even know what a “commitment to monetary expansion” means?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 24, 2018)

Imagine, if you will, that the United States federal government somehow received all of the money it normally would for the entire year on January 1st. The day it would have spent it all and started deficit spending (that is, spending money it simply doesn’t have) could be dubbed “Deficit Day.” This year, 2018, that day falls on October 19th. From this day until the end of the year, the US Federal Government is spending money it doesn’t have to the tune of about $11 billion per day. So what does that mean for the government.  What does it mean for the people?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 24, 2018)

*Politicians' Deceitful Promise*
John Stossel | Oct 24, 2018 12:01 AM

Will you be able to retire? Maybe not.

Will your state pay what its politicians promised? Almost certainly not.

Politicians in Connecticut, New Jersey and Illinois are especially irresponsible when it comes to not funding pension plans, but most every municipality has promised more than it will have.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 24, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 24, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


>


Fake news


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 24, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Politicians' Deceitful Promise*
> John Stossel | Oct 24, 2018 12:01 AM
> 
> Will you be able to retire? Maybe not.
> ...


"The money hasn't been set aside for years and years," says City Journal editor Daniel DiSalvo in my new internet video. "Nobody was paying attention."

His colleague Steve Malanga complains that the media rarely report on the coming crisis.

"To a certain extent, I have sympathy with the media, because the media's looking for what happens next," says Malanga. "This is not something that's going to happen next week."


----------



## Booter (Oct 25, 2018)

*Trump’s bailout for farmers hit by trade war will also benefit Chinese companies*
*American taxpayers are now footing the bill for the president’s failed trade war.*

The president decided to use millions of American taxpayer dollars to bail them out — but that money may also end up helping Chinese-owned and foreign-owned agriculture companies operating in the US.

The US Department of Agriculture told the Washington Post this week that a *Chinese-owned pork producer that operates in the United States, Smithfield Foods, qualifies for a government bailout check, and so does a Brazilian-owned pork producer called JBS.* Both corporations are the two largest pork producers in the country.

The Trump administration cut more than $25 million worth of bailout checks to the agriculture industry in September, just a few months after the president announced a $12 billion aid package for US farmers coping with retaliatory tariffs that foreign countries have imposed on their products. 

But now it’s clear that the tax subsidies won’t just help US farmers — they’ll help their foreign competitors too, and will likely benefit many of the countries Trump is supposedly targeting. 

*The news is the latest twist in the president’s trade war with China, which was supposed to help American workers and businesses but has been hurting them instead. Trump’s trade war is failing, and hurting the US economy, and he doesn't seem to care. *

*https://www.vox.com/2018/10/23/18013734/trump-china-trade-war-steel-tariffs*

TRUMP IS AN IDIOT JUST LIKE THE NUTTERS HERE THAT SUPPORT HIM.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 25, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump’s bailout for farmers hit by trade war will also benefit Chinese companies*
> *American taxpayers are now footing the bill for the president’s failed trade war.*
> 
> The president decided to use millions of American taxpayer dollars to bail them out — but that money may also end up helping Chinese-owned and foreign-owned agriculture companies operating in the US.
> ...


Fake News.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 25, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump’s bailout for farmers hit by trade war will also benefit Chinese companies*
> *American taxpayers are now footing the bill for the president’s failed trade war.*
> 
> The president decided to use millions of American taxpayer dollars to bail them out — but that money may also end up helping Chinese-owned and foreign-owned agriculture companies operating in the US.
> ...


You non-reading nutters crack me up.  "qualifies" and received have different meanings.  Reminds me of the Science Guy article that you people got all spun up about.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 25, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


Oh it's real news alright.  It just isn't saying what Bootsie wants it to say.  He comprehends not.  Nutters lacks attention to detail.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 25, 2018)




----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 25, 2018)

*‘Where Do We Have Tariffs?’ Trump Asks. He’s Got A Point*
EmailGoogle+Twitter






AP Photo/Evan Vucci
25 Oct 2018262

3:34
*Donald Trump threw financial pundits back on their heels this week when he told the Wall Street Journal, “We don’t have tariffs anywhere.”*
The financial press has obsessed over tariffs for most of the year, first declaring that the tariffs were a tax on consumers and would cost Americans jobs. And when those predictions did not pan out–consumer price levels are in line with the Fed’s target and layoffs are at record low levels–carefully looking for and extensively reporting anecdotal evidence of claims not supported by data.



President Trump’s comments to the _Wall Street Journal_, however, went even further.


Ads by Revcontent


https://trends.revcontent.com/click.php?d=lGxQLmG7RJ3vGaArLt2jAUmdQXcAkKrFIJ2ErpAKdVHn%2FDoM%2FcuAf%2BCvZ2VQs95cuEerNY7HsPpUBuWf4jr719lz9F%2F1QemqarsuXIotpY1XVybOD7xhzSswaNvZgdJY2xoLrlwE37fRnXqqE%2BFZL90Heaj2QMWJw0flrYpXqzcmiYPnroSwVVTdKLyVoYFhM1xRSXS4euY7qYST%2FSd7w2OIVdTtrGISMY6g9AT%2FwMudI4fG1qWcH7UokheGTsMKjdYgTEweBJZpd5BQ16b0%2BzUWf0mIjR1nEd9oTc94ydZOpmhpu1L5AoiHnW7yqVnfPvzlwOagFuvB1UCaAsicABrJ5DwJqPgspdmZzVSbs4o56lmAXXF1cra7YShW2qvcxAi3ABbme6jx1uQYJOj5Czy6FQWfiZ%2Fso48MsFl71wVi3UAdY%2BtVvi8XjoCNJJNeg8vzqEBzisvmp%2BICvQJPKMG21KXBo2gpWl1e0%2Bv01AYx5YHsoFlSOB7Z96mMQJX%2BnVAAJ8Sphi6hBzfs27a1D3okHx6pItb%2FVIXQMIahxSTMQ32nnv7UgRr5yQ%2FbRH0kcjfk1PXm7JVZMq7pX8WB648ZNLELBzpe0sl%2FnS7hQBO0RHAAerWiDy8RBdXUKgoLTvsT2bJgueOsjNU8kO%2BK2k2luTUHU4jdJNYzUJPv7eZDz1f55ucQ2ePxJv5J9rHcY%2FWDPjKvJX8VNkW%2BIGm5FyNONc2fO8hYdbg9G5coSdy81NARF4Pc%2B%2BvBJrQqxx%2ByXJqASdmpci5BMx6ru4biMYDaJR2qgShlspBUtxqP6dReYEasmFE8lub9o0C6f5gI2hD6defSVSXX0n3Ju3uNcg%3D%3D&viewed=true

“We don’t even have tariffs,” he said in the interview. “I’m using tariffs to negotiate. I mean, other than some tariffs on steel—which is actually small, what do we have? … Where do we have tariffs? We don’t have tariffs anywhere.”

That might sound shocking but Trump is mostly right on this.

The claim that we don’t have tariffs anywhere is an exaggeration–but only a small one. The U.S. has imposed tariffs on just under $300 billion of imports. Forty-seven billion, or around 15 percent, of those tariffs are on the steel and aluminum tariffs, which Trump mentioned. The bulk of the rest is aimed at just one country, China. The remainder are on individual products, such as solar panels and washing machines. A bit here and there for specific violations of U.S. anti-dumping laws. For almost all other imports and all other trading partners, Trump has not increased tariffs at all.


The total dollar value of goods the Trump administration has imposed tariffs on is small when compared to the $2.9 trillion of imported goods and service the U.S. took in last year. The new tariffs range from 10 percent to 25 percent on around 10 percent of all of our imports. Call it a 1 percent to 2.5 percent import tariff, at least in the short term. That’s not exactly disruptive. It’s certainly not a screeching halt to global trade.

Subtract out China and the U.S. has raised tariffs on less than 2 percent of our imports. The new Trump tariff “wall” amounts to a fraction of a percent hike in tariffs on the rest of the world. Vanishingly small.

In other words, Trump has not built a wall around the U.S. economy. This is not the protectionist presidency that haunts the pages of the financial press.

Importantly, since the biggest part of the tariffs are aimed at just one country, the medium term impact is likely to be minimal everywhere except China. Many corporations will have to extricate supply chains from China to avoid the higher costs imposed by tariffs but these are short-term problems.

That’s the view of the Federal Reserve. In the minutes of its most recent meeting, the Fed said that its “projection for the medium term was not materially changed, in part because the recently enacted tariffs on Chinese goods and the retaliatory actions of China were judged to have only a small net effect on U.S. real GDP growth over the next few years.”

The most serious hiccup for U.S. companies is likely not directly from U.S. tariffs at all but from China’s reaction. Sales to China will shrink as its trade deficit contracts, its economy slows, and its retaliatory tariffs raise prices for its own consumers. China will not be as big of a market for U.S. goods as some U.S. global corporations hoped–unless it relents to the demands of the Trump administration to give up its predatory trade practices.

In fact, some U.S. tariffs may be too low to accomplish Trump’s goals. The U.S. Mexico Canada Trade Agreement tightens the rules of origin for auto manufacturing but because the tariff for not meeting the new rules is so low, many automakers may just ignore it and keep on shipping jobs to cheaper labor markets


----------



## Booter (Oct 26, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You non-reading nutters crack me up.  "qualifies" and received have different meanings.  Reminds me of the Science Guy article that you people got all spun up about.


Izzy the Nutter - look what you have been reduced to.  Defending Tariffs and the related bailouts to the farmers.  You are indeed cracked up.


----------



## espola (Oct 26, 2018)

Ricky Fandango said:


>


More "free thinking"?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 26, 2018)

Booter said:


> Izzy the Nutter - look what you have been reduced to.  Defending Tariffs and the related bailouts to the farmers.  You are indeed cracked up.


So there are people that despise Trumps tax cuts, meaning they like more taxes.  Then those same people despise tariffs, not grasping that tariffs are a form of taxation.  Wait for it.  Those people do not have a need for intellectual consistency.  I wasn't defending tariffs that haven't been paid to Smith Foods, but rather definitions of words that make you intellectually inconsistent at best and dumb at worst.  It's times like this that you remind me of Espola.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 26, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So there are people that despise Trumps tax cuts, meaning they like more taxes.  Then those same people despise tariffs, not grasping that tariffs are a form of taxation.  Wait for it.  Those people do not have a need for intellectual consistency.  I wasn't defending tariffs that haven't been paid to Smith Foods, but rather definitions of words that make you intellectually inconsistent at best and dumb at worst.  It's times like this that you remind me of Espola.


T-D-S
Q-E-D


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2018)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2018)

*The Federal Reserve Is Hillary Clinton’s Secret Weapon*

*https://mises.org/blog/federal-reserve-hillary-clinton’s-secret-weapon*

Say what you want about Donald J. Trump, but he is correct about one thing: the Federal Reserve has, with near certainty, been holding interest rates down for political purposes — namely, to aid Hillary Clinton in getting elected president of the United States.

In September’s first presidential debate, Mr. Trump said:

We have a Fed that’s doing political things. … The Fed is [being awfully] political by keeping the interest rates at this level. And believe me: The day Obama goes off, and he leaves [office], and goes out to the golf course for the rest of his life to play golf, [is the day that] they raise interest rates. … The Fed is being more political than Secretary Clinton.

The Federal Open Market Committee's (FOMC) September meeting minutes, released on Wednesday, have proven Mr. Trump’s assertion to be true. As the 2016 election season draws to a close, the Fed has suddenly become more bullish on the prospect of raising interest rates — and this precipitous change-of-heart has come despite there being few notable signs of hope in the US’s economic data.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 27, 2018)

*The U.S. Government Led a Program That Forcibly Sterilized Thousands of Peruvian Women*

The program is said to have led to the forced sterilization of over 200,000 women in the late 1990s.
*
Friday, October 26, 2018*


Nevertheless, forced sterilizations in the name of *"improving" or shrinking the global population have long been an element of progressive politics in the US*, as is well-documented in Angela Franks's 2005 book _Margaret Sanger's Eugenic Legacy: The Control of Female Fertility_.

https://fee.org/articles/the-us-government-led-a-program-that-forcibly-sterilized-thousands-of-peruvian-women/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2018)

*a.k.a. QE......

The Cantillon Effect: Because of Inflation, We’re Financing the Financiers
Not to mention actively harming the living standards of low-income earners.

Sunday, October 28, 2018
https://fee.org/articles/the-cantillon-effect-because-of-inflation-we-re-financing-the-financiers/
*
*A Regressive Tax?

In the modern financial system, the current realization of the Cantillon Effect looks quite similar to a regressive tax.* The first to benefit are often corporations with plenty of investors, whether publicly traded or financed through private equity. Next, raw goods benefit from increased prices, including already heavily subsidized industries such as steel and aluminum. Technology also benefits, for it is utilized as an intermediate good for many companies. Even within the raw goods and technology sectors, the quickest corporations to turn investments into production—larger corporations like Amazon or Microsoft, which have the infrastructure to expand—benefit disproportionately.

On the consumer side, people investing most of their savings in the stock market benefit from increased investment bidding up prices. *On the other hand, individuals living from paycheck to paycheck, or even those who just have a savings account in a bank, lose money to price increases.*

Nonetheless, policymakers neglect these effects in an effort to reign in the economy without considering the consequences of their actions. Often, they justify surprise inflation by claiming it will “help the poor.” However, any inflationary monetary policy regime suffers from the ramifications of the Cantillon Effect.

*In fact, even a price-stable economy requires money injection to counter the deflationary effects of growth.* This money injection may keep prices for real goods stable, but asset prices continue to rise. It’s true that most economists accept a low level of inflation as fine—healthy, even. *But when our current expansionary system, however well-intentioned, ends up exacerbating inequalities in the marketplace under the pretense of egalitarian stability, we ought to examine its true consequences more thoroughly.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2018)

Yes, there are no limitations to the mind, but there are also no limits to how many limitations we can impose on the mind that misguide us in the process of better understanding of economics.--Géza Kovács-Dobák


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 28, 2018)

*The Case of NAFTA*

One tangible example where the *limits of economic models *allegedly collided with reality but were nevertheless accepted as "evidence" in public policy debates involved models to simulate the effects of NAFTA, the North American Free Trade Agreement.

*Many times, models are accused of leaving out externalities because of economists’ pro-free market bias, which is not necessarily incorrect to advocate for but results in half-true assumptions and half-complete models.* NAFTA is a good case study. In recent years, we have seen a rising skepticism toward the deal and a generalized dissatisfaction because of firm and output losses, which was topped by Donald Trump being elected president of the United States. Even today, economists warn of the serious implications of Trump leaving NAFTA or the fact that he actually left TPP, but these economists were reluctant to warn against the serious implications of having these deals in the first place and only saw the benefits of their model-based calculations.

*Even economist Joseph Stiglitz argued in his Nobel Prize-winning lecture that the information symmetry we base our general models on is outdated, and the neoclassical paradigm of the past isn't viable in today's economy and can lead to faulty policy implications and recommendations that arise from their unrealistic assumptions.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 28, 2018)

Brah, why you messing with these people?
They are, in now way interested in the truth.


----------



## nononono (Oct 29, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Trump said he would erase America's debt in 8 years. It's now bigger than ever.*
> 
> As a candidate, Donald Trump promised to get rid of the entire national debt “over a period of eight years.” When this promise was made, the national debt stood at $19 trillion; it has since risen to $21.7 trillion. In the fiscal year ending September 30, it grew by $779 billion, up 17 percent from $666 billion in fiscal 2017. This year, after the Trump tax cuts take full effect, another $1 trillion worth of government IOUs will be issued.
> 
> ...



*How's cubicle life......you sure can toe the line.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2018)

Booter said:


> *Don't Blame Obama For Doubling The Federal Deficit*
> 
> Republicans use a sound bite that the federal debt doubled under Obama. In looking at the numbers that is close to being numerically correct but falls short of being 100%. However when you take into account the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars he inherited the story is quite different.
> 
> ...


If you knew the difference between deficit and debt you would know that deficits were not doubled.  But debt nearly was.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Brah, why you messing with these people?
> They are, in now way interested in the truth.


As usual, Iʻm not messing with them.  But the truth is.  Hence Iʻoleʻs hate campaign.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 30, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> As usual, Iʻm not messing with them.  But the truth is.  Hence Iʻoleʻs hate campaign.


You know she always iz always like this at this time of the month.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

*Richard Dawkins, Biological Complexity, and the Market*
The complexity of the supply chains and market processes that make socks mundane to most people in the world today is nearly all unseen and, hence, unappreciated.
*Monday, August 13, 2018*





*
*
From page 130 of Richard Dawkins’s excellent 1995 book, _River Out of Eden_:

So, any new mutation is likely to have not just one effect but several. Though one of the effects may be beneficial, it is unlikely that more than one will be. This is simply because most mutational effects are bad. In addition to being a fact, this is to be expected in principle: if you start with a complicated working mechanism—like a radio, say—there are many more ways of making it worse than of making it better.

The importance of the principle to which Dawkins here refers cannot be overstated—and it applies across nearly all of existence, including human society. As complicated as is a radio, a jumbo jet, a horse, or a human body, human society is vastly more complex.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

Think of today’s global economy. In it, literally _billions _of people—each with unique preferences, talents, and knowledge—each makes countless decisions daily, mostly tiny, and mostly as adjustments in response to the flow of results of (“feedback” from) the on-going decision-making of others. *The complexity of the global economy is mind-boggling, and yet it works amazingly well—so well that we take it for granted and notice only its failure to satisfy the ideal that we have in our heads.--* Don Boudreaux


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

Ponder the seemingly simple socks on your feet. You didn’t make them. You’d have no idea how to begin to make them. Who grew the cotton? Who shipped the cotton from farm to factory? Who insured these commercial enterprises? Who designed the socks? (Yes, they are designed, as you’ll notice if you examine them with some attention.) Who supplied the funds to enable the retailer to stock the socks before you voluntarily chose to purchase them? You did none of these things. No single person did more than a tiny fraction of these things. And yet there they are, on your feet. Socks. You barely give them a first thought, much less a second thought.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

The complexity of the supply chains and market processes that make socks mundane to most people in the world today is nearly all unseen and, hence, unappreciated. We can and do talk about the likes of “the textile industry,” “the retail industry,” and “consumer demand.” But these terms too easily give us the impression that we can know enough about the phenomena to which they refer. We cannot. And so we easily become fatally conceited. *We demand that government intervene in this way and that into—markets put a tariff on this product, impose a minimum wage in that country, prevent price hikes for those commodities.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

Ignored by the many people who clamor for simple and simplistic government ‘solutions’ to economic problems—some real, most imaginary—*is the enormous complexity of the market processes into which they wish to intrude the heavy and awkward (and always grasping) hand of the state.

In other words, NO on G!!

NO on 10!!!!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

As with Dawkins’s radio, there are many more ways of making the economy worse than there are of making it better. Therefore, the wise course is to devolve decision-making down to as low as level as possible. *Let each person survey his or her immediate economic surroundings and, using his or her unique knowledge and perspective, adjust.* If that person adjusts in a mistaken way, the harm will be localized and he or she has a powerful incentive to get it right on subsequent tries. Private property and contract rights encourage this localized decision-making.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

But state intervention is not localized; it’s systemic and large-scale. *The chances that the state will get it right are slim; the unintended, unseen ill-consequences of such intervention are always almost certain to swamp whatever benefits such intervention brings.*

Finally, note, however, this important difference between a radio and human society: the radio is the result _both_ of human action _and_ of human design. Someone designed, planned, and built (or arranged to be built) the radio. In contrast, no one designed, planned, or built human society. *Society (and the economy which is part of society) is indeed the result of human action, but it emphatically is not the result of human design. This fact about society is yet one more reason why attempts to engineer society or the economy are destined to fail—and if the engineering attempt is massive, to fail calamitously.

NO ON G!!
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 4, 2018)

*Economics Is the Best Mythbuster in History*
History proves economics' power to bust countless popular myths.
*Thursday, September 27, 2018*







*Donald J. Boudreaux*

https://fee.org/articles/economics-is-the-best-mythbuster-in-history/?utm_medium=related_widget

But upon taking my first economics course, I learned that the popular explanations I’d long accepted were bogus. “We didn’t have energy shortages in the ’60s,” Dr. Francois told me one afternoon during her office hours. “Were oil companies less greedy ten years ago than they are now? Of course not. *And if we really are running out of oil, that’s all the more reason the government should let the price rise, because letting the price rise will give those greedy oil companies stronger incentives to drill for more.”* Dr. Francois concluded: “I promise you, Mr. Boudreaux, if we get rid of these price controls, we’ll get rid of these shortages.”

History has proven her to be correct.


If you get the concept you vote NO on 10.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 5, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

Finally, the wide scope of the Fed’s activities in financial markets—including not only bank supervision and its roles in the payments system but also the interaction with primary dealers and the monitoring of capital markets associated with the making of monetary policy—*has given the Fed a uniquely broad expertise in evaluating and responding to emerging financial strains.*

*Later that year, the housing bubble burst.*

*Of course, the Fed failed to prevent the current crisis – and, as I argued in Meltdown, itself bears much responsibility for what went wrong. Did that make the political class reexamine the Fed’s claims about its wondrous abilities? To the contrary, in the wake of thecrisis the Fed was given still more regulatory authority.*

*It seems to be a general rule: no matter how badly regulators fail, every crisis brings calls to empower them further. There appears to be nothing regulators could do to make the public consider the excluded possibility that mere “regulation” of a flawed system doesn’t make the system at root any less flawed.--  Tom Woods*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

Our talking heads who thoughtlessly call for “more regulation” as a panacea are attributing quasi-magical powers to people who in the real world tend to be unworthy of these exaggerations. As Robert Higgs puts it, “Had they been given even greater powers,budgets, and staffs, what enchantment would have transformed the regulators into smart, dogged champions of the public interest, rather than the time-serving drones and co-conspirators with the regulated firms that they have always been?” *-- Tom Woods
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

The case of Bernie Madoff comes readily to mind. Madoff ran a scheme in which wealthy if gullible individual and institutional investors wound up losing $50 billion.

Madoff, his clients thought, was extraordinarily skilled at beating the market. In fact, all hewas doing was taking later clients’ money and using it to pay earlier clients, a scheme that required the addition of a greater and greater number of new clients over time – the definition of a Ponzi scheme.

The immediate and predictable response ran as follows: the Madoff fiasco shows what happens when you cut funding and personnel for the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which (critics said) suffered under George W. Bush. Additional regulators and more funding would solve the problem.

Back on planet Earth, George W. Bush hadn’t cut funding or personnel for anything at all – SEC funding increased at an 11.3 percent annualized rate, as compared to 6.8 percent under Bill Clinton, and its staff grew at 1.0 percent per year, as compared with negative 1.2 percent under Jimmy Carter. So we have to entertain another theory: perhaps for all its employees and wealth, the government had simply failed. The SEC had been warned about Madoff for at least ten years, and perhaps as many as sixteen. Madoff even boasted of his family ties at the SEC. Even though it had the largest budget and largest staffin its history, it still failed to act. By contrast, Harry Markopolos, one of Madoff’scompetitors, simply examined the options strategy Madoff told his clients he was using and concluded that his alleged results had to be fraudulent. (An alert competitor has a powerful incentive to be a good regulator.)

Well, it may have taken them at least a decade of warnings, but at least the SEC finallywised up and nabbed him, right? Actually, the SEC had nothing to do with it. Madoff’sown sons turned him in after he came to them and explained what he had done. And he felt compelled to approach them with the real story in the first place only because his financial situation had begun to deteriorate so badly. Catching him had nothing to do with the SEC at all.

The very existence of the SEC lowers investors’ natural alertness – e.g., if such-and- such investment outlet were in fact a criminal Ponzi scheme, people assume the SEC would have done something about it. A private certification agency that made an error of this magnitude would be finished, never to be heard from again. Would you, dear reader, continue to rely on it? Meanwhile, other institutions would quickly gain market share atthe incompetent firm’s expense. The SEC, on the other hand, is going to get more money.

As it turns out, spending and personnel have increased dramatically, not just on the SEC, but throughout the whole arena of financial regulation: the 12,190 people in Washington, D.C., alone who are charged with overseeing American financial marketswould probably have something to say about the “unregulated” American financial system.Adjusted for inflation, spending on the regulatory agencies in charge has tripled since“deregulation” began in 1980. Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff came up

with a tally of 115 regulatory agencies for financial services; are we supposed to believe things would improve with 116?
--Tom Wood


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

According to Gerald O’Driscoll, a former vice president of the Dallas Fed, *“The idea that multiplying rules and statutes can protect consumers and investors is surely one of the great intellectual failures of the 20th century. Any static rule will be circumvented or manipulated to evade its application.”*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

Regulators failed to identify the growing problems in the U.S. economy that culminated in the crash. To the contrary, we were told things were fine and that the economy was robust. For one thing, regulators made the mistake of relying heavily on the risk assessments of a small cartel of government-approved ratings agencies that were not subject to competition. Beyond that, they either grossly misread the condition of the housing market or they simply misled the public. Alan Greenspan said in 2005 thatconditions in the housing market were actually “encouraging.” Ben Bernanke, who became chairman of the Fed the following year, declared that “our examiners tell us thatlending standards are generally sound and are not comparable to the standards that contributed to broad problems in the banking industry two decades ago. In particular, realestate appraisal practices have improved.” *Bernanke admitted that a “slower growth in house prices” may be possible, but then added that he would simply lower interest rates if that were to occur.--T. Wood*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

*One of the reasons deregulation is viewed with so much skepticism and even hostility is that disasters of various kinds have been falsely, even laughably, blamed on deregulation. *For Americans over a certain age, deregulation recalls the presidency of Ronald Reagan, and in particular the sad story of the Savings and Loan institutions (S&Ls), in which 747 of those institutions failed at a cost of over $160 billion, most of which was paid by means of a federal government bailout. In the days before Reagan and his crazy deregulation spree, the story runs, everything worked fine. Then Reagan was elected, and he repealed all the laws. Society reverted to barbarism. Wolves ran free in the streets.

What actually happened was rather less cartoonish. First, so-called deregulation of theS&Ls began under Jimmy Carter, not Reagan. I say “so-called” because, as with most measures trumpeted as “deregulation,” it was not really deregulation:* all throughout the process of alleged deregulation, the S&Ls’ deposits continued to be covered under government deposit insurance. Deregulation means the removal of government involvement and control. Does this sound like the removal of government involvement and control?* To the contrary, it gave us the worst of both worlds – *now the government- guaranteed institution was permitted to take greater risks while taxpayers remained on the hook for any losses. Not exactly the free market at work.*

*Under the government-established rules, the S&Ls could charge 6 percent on 30-year mortgage loans, and could offer depositors 3 percent. Since most depositors had nowhere else to go, they had to content themselves with a mere 3 percent return.* But with the advent of the money-market mutual fund, ordinary people suddenly had the chance to earn higher returns than S&Ls could pay, and began pulling their money out of S&Ls in droves. Consequently, the S&Ls wanted permission to offer higher interest returns for depositors, so “deregulation” allowed them to do so. *Had the original government requirements remained in place, the S&Ls would have gone under then and there.*

A consensus began to form that in order to save the S&Ls, their government- established loan and deposit interest-rate requirements, as well as the kind of loans they could make, had to be modified in light of the impossible conditions under which these institutions were then being forced to operate. The S&Ls needed to be permitted to engage in riskier investments than 30-year mortgages at 6 percent. *(Notice: it’s the free market’s fault when the government modifies the government-established rules of a government-established institution, while deposits continue to be guaranteed by the government. Got it?)*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

Maybe the S&Ls should have gone under in 1980. Perhaps they really did have an impossible business model. There is no non-arbitrary basis for deciding one way or the other, since the S&Ls were never genuinely subject to a market test. *The government husbanded and cartelized the S&Ls, and stood ready to bail them out after that. Yet the string of failures continues to be blamed on “deregulation” and the market.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

http://p.cboyack.libertyclassroom.netdna-cdn.com/vod/cboyack.libertyclassroom/deregulationbook/deregulationbogeyman.pdf


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

(1) When Alan Greenspan flooded the economy with newly created money and brought interest rates down to destructively low levels, thereby distortingentrepreneurial calculation as well as consumers’ home purchasing decisions, was that the fault of the free market? Do you think the Fed’s creation of cheapcredit out of thin air makes market participants more careful or less careful in how they allocate borrowed funds?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

(2) When Long Term Capital Management was bailed out in 1998, and AlanGreenspan made clear that the Fed’s assistance would be forthcoming were heunable to lean on his friends in the financial industry, was that a “free market”phenomenon? Do you think the Fed thereby encouraged more or less risk- taking among other major market actors?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

(3) The Financial Times spoke in 2000, in the wake of the dot-com boom, of an increasing concern that the so-called “Greenspan put” was injecting into the economy “a destructive tendency toward excessively risky investment supported by hopes that the Fed will help if things go bad.” “All the insane dot-cominvestment we’ve seen, all this destruction of capital, all the crazy excesses of thepast few years wouldn’t have happened without the easy credit accommodated by the Fed,” added financial consultant Michael Belkin. Did the free marketcause that? Do lending standards decline for no particular reason, or could this phenomenon have a teensy bit to do with (a) government regulation aimed atincreasing “homeownership” and (b) loose monetary policy by the Fed?

All three questions--Tom Wood


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2018)

WOODS: *Let’s start off with a couple of explanations that we’ve heard for the financial crisis and housing bust that are just not true, but which have seeped into the consciousnessof the public *to the point where it’s hard to dislodge them.

*The key one is that people were being sold mortgage packages that they just didn’tunderstand. They were being scammed by bankers *who were tricking them into mortgages that they couldn’t afford. The poor public was put upon by these predatory lenders, and of course it all came to this bad result. What’s wrong with that explanation?

WALLISON: *Well, of course that happened in some cases, probably a limited number of cases.* I was on the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, and one of the things I asked isthat, well you know, there’s been a lot of talk about predatory lending causing thisproblem; let’s have some numbers on this. *Why don’t you find out how much of these loans were predatory? And of course, they couldn’t find out.*

*The answer really is that there was much more predatory borrowing going on than predatory lending. More people were taking out loans that they knew they couldn’t afford,because they were so cheap.* These mortgages were being offered so inexpensively to people that they took them out even though when the mortgages reset so they were going to become more expensive, they couldn’t pay them. They hoped that by the time themortgages reset, they would be able to pay them, but by that time there was a financialcrisis, mortgages had fallen in value, homes had fallen in value, they couldn’t refinance themortgages, and they defaulted. *So I think the real answer is that there was much more predatory borrowing going on than predatory lending in the financial crisis.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 9, 2018)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function. Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird without wings.


And without property rights both would not exist.  In fact, the existence of both have violated property rights through monetary policies like Tariffs, QE, and the affordable care act.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 9, 2018)

espola said:


> "Some observers mistakenly consider the Federal Reserve to be a private entity because the Reserve Banks are organized similarly to private corporations."


Oh look!!!  A clue.


----------



## espola (Nov 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh look!!!  A clue.


What is your point of bringing this up after such a long delay?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 9, 2018)

espola said:


> What is your point of bringing this up after such a long delay?


Despite the obvious, he fancies himself clever.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 9, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Despite the obvious, he fancies himself clever.


No one more clever than you Iʻole


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 9, 2018)

espola said:


> What is your point of bringing this up after such a long delay?


Itʻs timeless.


----------



## nononono (Nov 9, 2018)

espola said:


> What is your point of bringing this up after such a long delay?


*Speaking of " Delay "....*
*Why the " Delay " returning the items you STOLE from the Golf Course *
*near your residence....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 18, 2018)

Dan Mitchell:  I periodically explain that labor and capital are the two factors of production and that our prosperity depends on how efficiently they are allocated.

But I probably don’t spend enough time highlighting how they are complementary, meaning that workers and capitalists both benefit when the two factors are combined. Simply stated, workers become more productive and earn more when investors buy machines and improve technology.

*In other words, the Marxists and socialists are wrong when they argue that workers and capitalists are enemies. Heck, look around the world and compare the prosperity of workers in market-oriented nations with the deprivation of workers in statist economies.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 27, 2018)

*Jack Ma, China's richest man, is Communist Party member...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Jack Ma, China's richest man, is Communist Party member...*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 27, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


Looks like communism works.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Looks like communism works.


But only when Capitalism works.  Never the other way around.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Nov 27, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But only when Capitalism works.  Never the other way around.


Those Chinese people are kinda sneaky.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 27, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Those Chinese people are kinda sneaky.


Agree.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 30, 2018)

*The Fed refuses to do business with the safest bank on earth — and depositors pay the price
*
http://www.aei.org/publication/the-fed-refuses-to-do-business-with-the-safest-bank-on-earth-and-depositors-pay-the-price/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWkRabU9EUTBNVFJtTUdOaiIsInQiOiJ5YTVBbWhQOVwva002S1hyUjd6MnJLRzNPZXJjWkhYbFA2WHVXa2doSmszYitReW5Rbm9rZG5nN1VSZVwvdHBXK1FcL2RnMVdCZ295SjlGMEd4YWhSUkxmTkJWN2Z2UERTdGhIMVdaTisrNlVPXC9aSEUyWHY3ZzR4OFVqemxNUjNndGEifQ==
..................

If you deposit $1 dollar in a bank account, the bank can deposit that dollar at the Fed and earn 2 percent while the bank pays you, on average, somewhere between 0.09 percent and 1.22 percent, depending on the type and maturity of the account. In theory, competition for deposits among banks should have put pressure on the rates banks pay depositors and pushed them closer to the IOER, but after ten years under the Fed IOER regime, this has not happened.

One reason competition has failed is that the IOER rate is only paid to banks. While there are a handful of nonbank institutions that are legally permitted to have master accounts at the Fed, the Fed only pays interest on banks’ reserve balances.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 30, 2018)

*Republicans have a big new economic idea. It’s terrible
*
http://www.aei.org/publication/republicans-have-a-big-new-economic-idea-its-terrible/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWkRabU9EUTBNVFJtTUdOaiIsInQiOiJ5YTVBbWhQOVwva002S1hyUjd6MnJLRzNPZXJjWkhYbFA2WHVXa2doSmszYitReW5Rbm9rZG5nN1VSZVwvdHBXK1FcL2RnMVdCZ295SjlGMEd4YWhSUkxmTkJWN2Z2UERTdGhIMVdaTisrNlVPXC9aSEUyWHY3ZzR4OFVqemxNUjNndGEifQ==
.................

Yet just as Cass overplays the downside of globalization, he underplays the potential disruption for workers from automation, including the impact machines have already had on the job market. Economist Daron Acemoglu has done some of the best work on the potential impact of technology on jobs. He doesn’t think all the jobs will disappear, but warns that “the future level of employment and labor share may be lower in the future than the past.” Just as with globalization — not to mention the Industrial Revolution — there might well be lots of losers as AI spreads throughout the economy, at least for a time. *And when you obsess about protecting existing jobs rather than helping workers adjust to change through education and a work-encouraging safety net, you give aid and comfort to modern Luddites who would ban ride-sharing and kiosks at fast-food restaurants. Neither jobs nor the communities they’re located in are protected over the long run if shielding them from globalization and technological advance means an uncompetitive private sector that eventually sheds workers or doesn’t expand as much as it would have otherwise.*

Perhaps some future populist president will rage against the machines like the current one does trade agreements. If so, Cass might have just provided the blueprint for such attacks.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2018)

*Why Single-Payer Health Care Delivers Poor Quality at High Cost*

American's directly pay for only 10.5% of their health care costs.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 5, 2018)

*The Best Argument Against Minimum Wage Laws: You Don't Own Other People*

https://fee.org/articles/the-best-argument-against-minimum-wage-laws-you-dont-own-other-people/

But as economically sound as the unemployment argument against minimum wages may be, it ignores a previous and much more important one: *you don’t own other people*

*You Own Your Labor because You Own Yourself*
We think of the basis of what used to be called “the liberal tradition” as being the fundamental rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Governments are ostensibly instituted among men “to secure these rights.” But these rights are pillars, not the foundation of a free society, according to the essay Jefferson himself said established the “general principles of liberty and the rights of man, in nature, and in society,” as Americans of his time understood them.

Rather, these rights proceed, said John Locke, from the self-evident, inherent human condition of self-ownership. In Chapter V of his second treatise on civil government, he wrote,

Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his.

Proponents of minimum wage laws focus all the attention on the buyers of labor services and none on the sellers. In their zeal to curtail the rights of the former, they run roughshod over those of the latter, never asking themselves who owns the labor in question.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

espola said:


> If a big economic collapse occurs, what would you do with a closet full of gold coins or bullion?  You can't eat it, you can't wear it, you can't burn it for heat or to move a car or generate electricity...  Anyone who would accept it in trade for useful items would be relying entirely on its symbolic value.





Laced said:


> That just shows that the "intrinsic value" of commodity money is not so "intrinsic" after all. Value comes from demand and faith.





Bruddah IZ said:


> You are confusing fiat money which has intrinsic value that relies on supply and faith/ignorance with commodity money that you can trade for silver with a certificate like the one you see in post #7.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

Laced said:


> Another question for you BIZ.
> 
> Is the value of fiat money affected by more than supply and demand?


If it is fiat money why would it be affected by other than the supply and demand for fiat money?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

Laced said:


> Another question for you BIZ.
> Does the velocity of circulation affect the value of money?


No.  The supply of money determines the value of money, more accurately known as interest rates, and thus the velocity of circulation.  Remember, interest rates are prices.  The lower the price of money, the higher the demand for money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

Laced said:


> Another question for you BIZ.
> 
> If so, a vigorous market by itself would create inflation, doesn't it?


An inflation in the money supply reduces interest rates like it did during 5 years of QE and during the crisis build up.  With more people qualifying for cheap money, vigorous competition drives home prices up due to an inflation of the money supply.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

Laced said:


> If so, does it really matter if it's fiat money or commodity money?


Of course.  Fiat money is much cheaper than commodity money.  Commodity money ceases to be commodity money when there is nothing to back up the commodity money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

Laced said:


> Another question for you BIZ.
> Whether it's fiat money or commodity money, what are free market checks against inflation? And how do they work?


Currently, there are no free market checks against the inflation of the fiat money supply.  Commodity money no longer exist.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 7, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?


Yes


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

Booter said:


> Printing money is not QE - IDIOT!


Printing money to replace older paper money ,taken out of circulation, is not QE.  Creating new money, without removing any of the current money in circulation, to “stimulate” the economy is QE....or fiat money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

espola said:


> The Federal Reserve was established by Congress.  The members of its board are appointed by the President with approval of Congress.  Many of its functions overlap with other government bodies, such as the Treasury.  The only way it could be eliminated is by an act of Congress and approval of the President.
> 
> Congress was wise when it established the Fed to make it as independent as possible from political influence by Congress and the President.  Its Governors are appointed for terms of 14 years and cannot be removed except "for cause", and none ever has been.  The Fed also funds itself by  charging fees to its banking customers, returning its surplus every year to the Treasury, so it can't be blackmailed by threats to cut its funding.  Don't confuse that independence with its existence as part of the US Government.


21 trillion in debt.  Who’s confused?


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes


Ignoramus.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

espola said:


> Ignoramus.


Oh right.  Your net worth argument.


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 21 trillion in debt.  Who’s confused?


Relevance?


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh right.  Your net worth argument.


What is my "net worth argument"?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

espola said:


> Relevance?


Yes.


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.


As I suspected, you have nothing.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 8, 2018)

espola said:


> As I suspected, you have nothing.


Let's hear Magoo's "relevant" argument...


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Let's hear Magoo's "relevant" argument...


The 2-year-old post Izzy responded to was about the independence of the Federal Reserve.  Izzy's post was not relevant to that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

espola said:


> As I suspected, you have nothing.


You know better than that.  You posted the personal networth worksheet to show that a home is an asset.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

espola said:


> The 2-year-old post Izzy responded to was about the independence of the Federal Reserve.  Izzy's post was not relevant to that.


Wrong.  You responded to the post about what an asset is.


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You know better than that.  You posted the personal networth worksheet to show that a home is an asset.


???


----------



## espola (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Wrong.  You responded to the post about what an asset is.


???


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?





Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes





espola said:


> Ignoramus.





Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh right.  Your net worth argument.





espola said:


> What is my "net worth argument"?


----------



## legend (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes


You see, Husker , you don't understand things on a deeper level the way Iz does.

You know how the Mueller investigation is about HRC?  He can explain.

Also, when a bank wants to loan you money and you show them your real estate (that you don't rent out) and your artwork and your automobiles, they don't count those as "assets" because they don't earn money. Right, Iz?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> You see, Husker , you don't understand things on a deeper level the way Iz does.
> 
> You know how the Mueller investigation is about HRC?  He can explain.
> 
> Also, when a bank wants to loan you money and you show them your real estate (that you don't rent out) and your artwork and your automobiles, they don't count those as "assets" because they don't earn money. Right, Iz?


Right.  That’s “collateral” for the loan.


----------



## legend (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Right.  That’s “collateral” for the loan.


Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?

Your answer to the above question was yes. So you don't call "collateral for a loan" 
an "asset?" Once again, your knowledge runs so deep about everything. I am amazed!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> Are you saying something isn't an asset unless it is bringing in profit on an ongoing basis?


Do you know what a balance sheet is?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> Your answer to the above question was yes. So you don't call "collateral for a loan"
> an "asset?" Once again, your knowledge runs so deep about everything. I am amazed!


Now you know the difference between an asset and collateral for a loan.  I hope.


----------



## legend (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now you know the difference between an asset and collateral for a loan.  I hope.


You poor thing. You speak about economics here, while not knowing that your home (if you own it), which does not  "bring in profit on an ongoing basis," is an asset. Did you also know that a house you may own is not only an "asset," (a simple fact which you seem not to understand), but is also an "asset" that can be used as collateral for a loan?
Pop quiz: can you name a type of collateral which is not an asset?


----------



## nononono (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do you know what a balance sheet is?


*This soon to be schooled "Legend of a Troll " doesn't know*
*his " Asset " from a Three dollar hat...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> You poor thing. You speak about economics here, while not knowing that your home (if you own it), which does not  "bring in profit on an ongoing basis," is an asset. Did you also know that a house you may own is not only an "asset," (a simple fact which you seem not to understand), but is also an "asset" that can be used as collateral for a loan?
> Pop quiz: can you name a type of collateral which is not an asset?


Yes.  If you own a home outright and it does not cash flow.  It is not an asset.  You continue to pay insurance, property tax, mello roos/HOA fees (if applicable), electricity, water/sewage, maintenance, etc. which makes your home a liability because money comes out of your pocket to maintain ownership and longevity of your home.  Of course you can use your home as collateral for a loan (i.e. home equity LOC) but when you do so you add to the aforementioned expenses that come out of your pocket, a liability,  as opposed to going in to your pocket which makes it an asset.  Now since you're so sure that homes are an asset I will say that they are most definitely an asset for your bank if you still owe them money.  Therefore, the house that you live in cannot be an asset for both you and the bank unless your house is also being rented out to room mates that pay all or some of the aforementioned expenses.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Now you know the difference between an asset and collateral for a loan.  I hope.


I had hoped.


----------



## legend (Dec 8, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  If you own a home outright and it does not cash flow.  It is not an asset.  You continue to pay insurance, property tax, mello roos/HOA fees (if applicable), electricity, water/sewage, maintenance, etc. which makes your home a liability because money comes out of your pocket to maintain ownership and longevity of your home.  Of course you can use your home as collateral for a loan (i.e. home equity LOC) but when you do so you add to the aforementioned expenses that come out of your pocket, a liability,  as opposed to going in to your pocket which makes it an asset.  Now since you're so sure that homes are an asset I will say that they are most definitely an asset for your bank if you still owe them money.  Therefore, the house that you live in cannot be an asset for both you and the bank unless your house is also being rented out to room mates that pay all or some of the aforementioned expenses.


OK, I will go slow here. The value of your house as an asset, whether you owe money on it or not, is the equity value less the costs (e.g. mortgage, maintenance, etc.)...although most wouldn't consider costs such as electricity and water, etc., to reduce the asset value. 

 The fact that you have expenses to maintain the asset may reduce the asset's value, but does not make it a "liability," it remains an "asset." 

So let's say you bought a house for $1m and, due to CA real estate being what it is, it is now worth $3m on the market. 

Let's say you have a loan of $800K on the house. The bank has an "asset" which is a secured loan of $800K against the collateral which is now worth $3m. But you, the "owner" of the house, has an asset worth $2.2m, i.e. the $3m value less the $800K you owe on it. Only you can sell the house, not the bank (unless the bank forecloses on you).

So contrary to what you say above, the house you live in is definitely an asset to you and the loan on it is an asset to the bank.

This is the MOST BASIC stuff about economics and budgets and value...indicating perfectly what I have been saying about you and economics...you know absolutely nothing.


----------



## nononono (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> You poor thing. You speak about economics here, while not knowing that your home (if you own it), which does not  "bring in profit on an ongoing basis," is an asset. Did you also know that a house you may own is not only an "asset," (a simple fact which you seem not to understand), but is also an "asset" that can be used as collateral for a loan?
> Pop quiz: can you name a type of collateral which is not an asset?


*You deemed your puny brain as a tangible asset that could be used as collateral....
Upon further examination your puny brain appears to be over encumbered with
useless information that is not " Intellectual Property " but just regurgitated 
information derived from worthless bodies that spew nonsense like this thing
called Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez ....

You'll need a couple of cosigners with Tangible Intellectual assets for this Dept
to proceed with the process you so desire....

Meanwhile I suggest you make a list of your " Hard " assets that can be pledged 
as collateral and held in a secure location deemed safe by both parties....
Although you will assume any and all losses occurring from the theft of YOUR 
" Hard " assets ....You can purchase an insurance policy to cover the " Hard "
assets for a nominal fee from our associated Insurance  Dept...*

*Pop Quiz: A chicken's got a brain " This " big yet it knows when to come in
out of the rain....are you a Turkey or a Chicken ?

I think you're a...........











*


----------



## nononono (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> OK, I will go slow here. The value of your house as an asset, whether you owe money on it or not, is the equity value less the costs (e.g. mortgage, maintenance, etc.)...although most wouldn't consider costs such as electricity and water, etc., to reduce the asset value.
> 
> The fact that you have expenses to maintain the asset may reduce the asset's value, but does not make it a "liability," it remains an "asset."
> 
> ...



*Please come in out of the rain......you're going to drown in foolishness.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

legend said:


> OK, I will go slow here. The value of your house as an asset, whether you owe money on it or not, is the equity value less the costs (e.g. mortgage, maintenance, etc.)...although most wouldn't consider costs such as electricity and water, etc., to reduce the asset value.
> 
> The fact that you have expenses to maintain the asset may reduce the asset's value, but does not make it a "liability," it remains an "asset."
> 
> ...


The equity value of your house does not put money in your pocket until you sell it and therefore equity value is not an asset.  Borrowing against your homes equity does not change that fact.  It only increases the assets of your lender.  The fact that you have expenses to maintain the banks assets as a condition of their $800k loan to you are contractual (PMI, taxes, HOA/mello roos) and increases your liability for the benefit of the banks asset, your home.  Yes it does remain an asset, but at this point notice the direction in which the money flows for 30 years.  It's not toward you and you are okay with it because you want to build equity.  But I know how tempting it is to think that you own that equity.  You don't.  You have access to it at a cost. 

So contrary to what you say above, the house you live in is definitely a liability to you and the loan is an asset to the bank when you consider who pays the bank.

In your example you have a loan of $800k.  What was the purchase price?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 8, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Please come in out of the rain......you're going to drown in foolishness.*


I always run in to these convoluted explanations when people forget which way the money flows monthly.


----------



## legend (Dec 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The equity value of your house does not put money in your pocket until you sell it and therefore equity value is not an asset.  Borrowing against your homes equity does not change that fact.  It only increases the assets of your lender.  The fact that you have expenses to maintain the banks assets as a condition of their $800k loan to you are contractual (PMI, taxes, HOA/mello roos) and increases your liability for the benefit of the banks asset, your home.  Yes it does remain an asset, but at this point notice the direction in which the money flows for 30 years.  It's not toward you and you are okay with it because you want to build equity.  But I know how tempting it is to think that you own that equity.  You don't.  You have access to it at a cost.
> 
> So contrary to what you say above, the house you live in is definitely a liability to you and the loan is an asset to the bank when you consider who pays the bank.
> 
> In your example you have a loan of $800k.  What was the purchase price?


Dude, 3 strikes you're out. maybe take a class or something. In my example (which is over your head), my asset value ($2.2m) is worth far more than the bank's asset value (a payable $800K loan earning a mortgage interest rate). Do you really not know this stuff? And yet you cite articles and shoot off your mouth like you know what you're talking about? 
I had a feeling you were a nutcake in a cubicle...now you've proven it.


----------



## espola (Dec 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The equity value of your house does not put money in your pocket until you sell it and therefore equity value is not an asset.  Borrowing against your homes equity does not change that fact.  It only increases the assets of your lender.  The fact that you have expenses to maintain the banks assets as a condition of their $800k loan to you are contractual (PMI, taxes, HOA/mello roos) and increases your liability for the benefit of the banks asset, your home.  Yes it does remain an asset, but at this point notice the direction in which the money flows for 30 years.  It's not toward you and you are okay with it because you want to build equity.  But I know how tempting it is to think that you own that equity.  You don't.  You have access to it at a cost.
> 
> So contrary to what you say above, the house you live in is definitely a liability to you and the loan is an asset to the bank when you consider who pays the bank.
> 
> In your example you have a loan of $800k.  What was the purchase price?


Hilarious.


----------



## espola (Dec 9, 2018)

legend said:


> Dude, 3 strikes you're out. maybe take a class or something. In my example (which is over your head), my asset value ($2.2m) is worth far more than the bank's asset value (a payable $800K loan earning a mortgage interest rate). Do you really not know this stuff? And yet you cite articles and shoot off your mouth like you know what you're talking about?
> I had a feeling you were a nutcake in a cubicle...now you've proven it.


Don't expect him to admit it.  He is either really, truly that ignorant, or is just acting stubborn to impress loser joe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

legend said:


> Dude, 3 strikes you're out. maybe take a class or something. In my example (which is over your head), my asset value ($2.2m) is worth far more than the bank's asset value (a payable $800K loan earning a mortgage interest rate). Do you really not know this stuff? And yet you cite articles and shoot off your mouth like you know what you're talking about?
> I had a feeling you were a nutcake in a cubicle...now you've proven it.


I do know this stuff.  It’s pretty easy.  What is your interest rate?  If I assume a 4.5% interest rate which is about right today, the bank has a loan to you that will cost you just over 659k over the next 30 years.  Your total payment on an 800k loan is just over 1.4 million.  Notice who pays and who gets paid?  So assuming you can sell your house for 2.2 million in 30 years, you will have labored for 30 years to gain 800k in equity.  That’s 26k a year of equity compared to 48k a year in payments.  See the difference?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

espola said:


> Don't expect him to admit it.  He is either really, truly that ignorant, or is just acting stubborn to impress loser joe.


Shhhh.  Pour yourself another cup.  Wiggle your onychomycosis toes and say “there’s no place like home”......when the bank still owns it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 9, 2018)

espola said:


> Don't expect him to admit it.  He is either really, truly that ignorant, or is just acting stubborn to impress loser joe.


Hey.


----------



## legend (Dec 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I do know this stuff.  It’s pretty easy.  What is your interest rate?  If I assume a 4.5% interest rate which is about right today, the bank has a loan to you that will cost you just over 659k over the next 30 years.  Your total payment on an 800k loan is just over 1.4 million.  Notice who pays and who gets paid?  So assuming you can sell your house for 2.2 million in 30 years, you will have labored for 30 years to gain 800k in equity.  That’s 26k a year of equity compared to 48k a year in payments.  See the difference?[/QUOT
> 
> In my example, i sold the house for $3m, remember? The $2.2m was the equity value of my ASSET, after I netted out the "LIABILITY" of the loan amount.
> 
> So the bank made 659K on its loan over 30 years, and I made $1.4m after paying off the bank and recovering my down payment. My house is an ASSET. In So Cal it's most people's most valuable asset.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 9, 2018)

Your best reply to date.


----------



## messy (Dec 9, 2018)

So the bank made 650K and the homeowner made 1.4m? And it’s not an asset to the house buyer? Who made about 45K per year on the house? And if the house was $1m, the house buyer only paid $200K down and the money collected interest while he made the mortgage payments? And Izzy says not an asset. LOL!!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I do know this stuff.  It’s pretty easy.  What is your interest rate?  If I assume a 4.5% interest rate which is about right today, the bank has a loan to you that will cost you just over 659k over the next 30 years.  Your total payment on an 800k loan is just over 1.4 million.  Notice who pays and who gets paid?  So assuming you can sell your house for 2.2 million in 30 years, you will have labored for 30 years to gain 800k in equity.  That’s 26k a year of equity compared to 48k a year in payments.  See the difference?





legend said:


> In my example, i sold the house for $3m, remember? The $2.2m was the equity value of my ASSET, after I netted out the *"LIABILITY" of the loan amount. *
> 
> So the bank made 659K on its loan over 30 years, and I made $1.4m after paying off the bank and recovering my down payment. My house is an ASSET. In So Cal it's most people's most valuable asset.


Lol!  Okay.  Baby steps.  At least you finally admitted that your loan was a liability *(bolded above)* prior to the sale which was not in your example.  An assessment of "$3m value less the $800K you owe on it" was made but no sale was made for $3 million in *bold below.*  If you had sold the house you nor the bank would have an asset and you would no longer be liable to the lender having paid off the loan.  I addressed outright ownership of the home itself with the ongoing liabilities/expenses that go with continued ownership to include property taxes regardless of loan repayment.  Your example also did not include an actual purchase price or a down payment that you $uspiciously and unspecifically mention here.  A purchase price that is higher than your loan amount is not unusual.  However, it does affect the amount of property tax and PMI that you pay unless your down payment eliminated the need for PMI through a 20% downpayment.  




legend said:


> OK, I will go slow here. The value of your house as an asset, whether you owe money on it or not, is the equity value less the costs (e.g. mortgage, maintenance, etc.)...although most wouldn't consider costs such as electricity and water, etc., to reduce the asset value.
> 
> The fact that you have expenses to maintain the asset may reduce the asset's value, but does not make it a "liability," it remains an "asset."
> 
> ...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

messy said:


> So the bank made 650K and the homeowner made 1.4m? And it’s not an asset to the house buyer? Who made about 45K per year on the house? And if the house was $1m, the house buyer only paid $200K down and the money collected interest while he made the mortgage payments? And Izzy says not an asset. LOL!!!


Izzy said since you didn't say what your interest rate (the price of money), purchase price and, downpayment is in your evolving example.....


Bruddah IZ said:


> ......a 4.5% interest rate which is about right today, the bank has a loan to you *that will cost you just over 659k over the next 30 years. * *Your total payment on an 800k loan is just over 1.4 million.* *Notice who pays and who gets paid?*  So assuming you can sell your house for 2.2 million in 30 years, you will have labored for 30 years to gain 800k in equity.  *That’s 26k a year of equity compared to 48k a year in payments.*  See the difference?


*So how long did you own the home in your example before you flipped it for a profit?*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

messy said:


> So the bank made 650K and the homeowner made 1.4m? And it’s not an asset to the house buyer?


Not anymore.  It's now a "profit" that has no equity.  You have 1.4 million to use to actually buy an asset this time.  I would recommend lending it out to someone like you that will either repay you quickly or pay you over time without you having to labor as much if any, for cash flow like you did previously.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

messy said:


> And if the house was $1m, the house buyer only paid $200K down and the money collected interest while he made the mortgage payments? And Izzy says not an asset. LOL!!!


As a lender I would be happy to collect 48k worth of your wages a year while I labored not.   You're happy to make a profit in 30 years and I'm happy to make a profit immediately off my asset, your liability with a mutual agreement.  I'm happy to be your buyers lender as well.


----------



## legend (Dec 9, 2018)

*


Bruddah IZ said:



			As a lender I would be happy to collect 48k worth of your wages a year while I labored not.   You're happy to make a profit in 30 years and I'm happy to make a profit immediately off my asset, your liability with a mutual agreement.  I'm happy to be your buyers lender as well.
		
Click to expand...

Again, showing your financial knowledge. Poor guy. You'd rather loan money at 4.5% (the interest being ordinary income) than own an asset that appreciates 5% per year and then sell it as a capital asset. Any year you choose to sell it you capture the gain...not the bank, dummy.  Game, set and match. 
Go take a class. Or maybe start investing in a diverse portfolio and watch your "assets" grow. You can learn that way!
*


----------



## espola (Dec 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> As a lender I would be happy to collect 48k worth of your wages a year while I labored not.   You're happy to make a profit in 30 years and I'm happy to make a profit immediately off my asset, your liability with a mutual agreement.  I'm happy to be your buyers lender as well.


Can the bank sell the house?  No.

Can the bank sell the mortgage?  Yes.

Which is the asset?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

legend said:


> *
> Again, showing your financial knowledge. Poor guy. You'd rather loan money at 4.5% (the interest being ordinary income) than own an asset that appreciates 5% per year and then sell it as a capital asset. Any year you choose to sell it you capture the gain...not the bank, dummy.  Game, set and match.
> Go take a class. Or maybe start investing in a diverse portfolio and watch your "assets" grow. You can learn that way!*


Actually I would rather lend it out for more than 4.5%.  But you made a down payment and I gave you credit for reducing the probability that you would walk away from that kind of down payment.  It helps me sleep easier knowing that I gave you a payment that you can afford and are not likely to default on.  Besides I have about a thousand AAA loans like yours that I sell to big investors in one shot as a Mortgage Backed Security (MBS) so I can rinse and repeat. Your's was the 1000th loan.  Tomorrow I close another 100 loans and in about two weeks I sell another 1000 loans in the form of an MBS to investors so I can make at least 100 times what you made.  I like those kinds of assets better.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

espola said:


> Can the bank sell the house?  No.


But they can and do sell the loan, thousands of them at a time.



espola said:


> Can the bank sell the mortgage?  Yes.


Good boy



espola said:


> Which is the asset?


Answer based on the above.  Now tell your students that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)




----------



## espola (Dec 9, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But they can and do sell the loan, thousands of them at a time.
> 
> Good boy
> 
> Answer based on the above.  Now tell your students that.


What answer?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

espola said:


> What answer?


Your answer.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 9, 2018)

Crickets


----------



## legend (Dec 10, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Crickets


You have proven in our dialogue that you know nothing about economics and financial value, thereby  surrendering any more opportunities to debate economics with anyone. As I suggested, get your head out of these old books and videos and start investing in things and learn how the world actually works for people who pay taxes, invest money, operate companies, etc.
You talk like a college sophomore from 1962.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 10, 2018)

legend said:


> You have proven in our dialogue that you know nothing about economics and financial value, thereby  surrendering any more opportunities to debate economics with anyone. As I suggested, get your head out of these old books and videos and start investing in things and learn how the world actually works for people who pay taxes, invest money, operate companies, etc.
> You talk like a college sophomore from 1962.


You were the only one debating.  Mostly with yourself.  Go watch the Big Short again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2018)

*We easily forget the economic rationale that Marx taught us, namely, that socialism would have to provide unprecedented abundance if it were to sustain social liberation of any kind.* With a few notable exceptions, *leftists no longer find it fashionable to discuss economics at all beyond the now routine rejection of a "command economy"* *and some disingenuous mumbling about the necessity for markets.* But where is there a serious attempt to determine the extent to which any socialism could function without a command economy or to show how a socialist economy could integrate markets? A few left-wing economists, most notably Louis Ferleger and Jay Mandle, tried to raise these questions long before the collapse of the socialist economies, but they were effec- tively shut out of the left-wing press and are still ignored. And we may doubt that the wry remark of Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, two other respected left-wing economists, will cause a wrinkle: *"Leftwing economists— among whom we count ourselves—have thus far failed to come up with a convincing alternative to capitalism."* (Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, letter to the Nation, Nov. 29, 1993; and see also, Louis Ferleger and Jay R.Mandle, A New Mandate: Democratic Choices for a Prosperous Economy, University of Missouri Press, 1994).--Genovese


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 11, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *We easily forget the economic rationale that Marx taught us, namely, that socialism would have to provide unprecedented abundance if it were to sustain social liberation of any kind.* With a few notable exceptions, *leftists no longer find it fashionable to discuss economics at all beyond the now routine rejection of a "command economy"* *and some disingenuous mumbling about the necessity for markets.* But where is there a serious attempt to determine the extent to which any socialism could function without a command economy or to show how a socialist economy could integrate markets? A few left-wing economists, most notably Louis Ferleger and Jay Mandle, tried to raise these questions long before the collapse of the socialist economies, but they were effec- tively shut out of the left-wing press and are still ignored. And we may doubt that the wry remark of Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, two other respected left-wing economists, will cause a wrinkle: *"Leftwing economists— among whom we count ourselves—have thus far failed to come up with a convincing alternative to capitalism."* (Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, letter to the Nation, Nov. 29, 1993; and see also, Louis Ferleger and Jay R.Mandle, A New Mandate: Democratic Choices for a Prosperous Economy, University of Missouri Press, 1994).--Genovese


Wait until this kook is running the democrat party.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Wait until this kook is running the democrat party.


I’m waiting for her to make it mandatory for politicians to pay their interns.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 11, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I’m waiting for her to make it mandatory for politicians to pay their interns.


She is just a young republican.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 11, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *We easily forget the economic rationale that Marx taught us, namely, that socialism would have to provide unprecedented abundance if it were to sustain social liberation of any kind.* With a few notable exceptions, *leftists no longer find it fashionable to discuss economics at all beyond the now routine rejection of a "command economy"* *and some disingenuous mumbling about the necessity for markets.* But where is there a serious attempt to determine the extent to which any socialism could function without a command economy or to show how a socialist economy could integrate markets? A few left-wing economists, most notably Louis Ferleger and Jay Mandle, tried to raise these questions long before the collapse of the socialist economies, but they were effec- tively shut out of the left-wing press and are still ignored. And we may doubt that the wry remark of Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, two other respected left-wing economists, will cause a wrinkle: *"Leftwing economists— among whom we count ourselves—have thus far failed to come up with a convincing alternative to capitalism."* (Nancy Folbre and Samuel Bowles, letter to the Nation, Nov. 29, 1993; and see also, Louis Ferleger and Jay R.Mandle, A New Mandate: Democratic Choices for a Prosperous Economy, University of Missouri Press, 1994).--Genovese


----------



## messy (Dec 11, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You were the only one debating.  Mostly with yourself.  Go watch the Big Short again.


I don’t need to watch a movie to learn about economics. I live life. You know, make a few bucks, pay taxes, invest. Or maybe you don’t know. You couldn’t figure out the assets vs. liabilities thing and that’s as basic as it gets. BTW, your commentary on mortgage-backed-securities was more stuff showing you’re around the bend. Keep reading up and watching YouTube videos about John Maynard Keynes and Ken Galbraith...it’s working for you here on the forum. It’s like you’re playing fantasy football but with economic ideas that you don’t know anything about. LOL!!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 11, 2018)

messy said:


> I don’t need to watch a movie to learn about economics. I live life. You know, make a few bucks, pay taxes, invest. Or maybe you don’t know. You couldn’t figure out the assets vs. liabilities thing and that’s as basic as it gets. BTW, your commentary on mortgage-backed-securities was more stuff showing you’re around the bend. Keep reading up and watching YouTube videos about John Maynard Keynes and Ken Galbraith...it’s working for you here on the forum. It’s like you’re playing fantasy football but with economic ideas that you don’t know anything about. LOL!!!


Lol!  Yup.  Pretty basic.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

*Who is receiving loans from the Fed today? Who is the Fed paying interest to? Are there any conflicts about how these payments are determined? Are there any checks and balances on the size of these payments? The Federal Reserve Act actually forbids the Fed from buying some of the troubled assets they purchased in 2008. Yet they did it anyway.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I don’t need to watch a movie to learn about economics.


The movies is about finance not economics.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> You couldn’t figure out the assets vs. liabilities thing and that’s as basic as it gets.


Does the bank or anyone else pay your loan for you?


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Does the bank or anyone else pay your loan for you?


Now that I have tried to help you with the definition of an "asset" (but I think you still don't get it. do you still believe an asset must be "income-producing?"), I can tell you also that, in most loan situations, the bank is actually the "lender" and the "borrower" pays the loan back to the bank. So asking if the bank pays the loan on behalf of the borrower yet again shows a shocking level of ignorance about mundane finance. 

There is nothing to be ashamed of when your own little world does not involve any sophisticated financial matters. Your embarrassment should come from your daily bombastic treatises on finance and economics, all of which are cut-and-pasted from books and YouTube and almost always prove that you have never operated, yourself, in the financial or real estate or business sectors.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> BTW, your commentary on mortgage-backed-securities was more stuff showing you’re around the bend.


You were lost.  I get it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I Keep reading up and watching YouTube videos about John Maynard Keynes and Ken Galbraith...it’s working for you here on the forum.


I don't watch those guys.  I just watch the Keynesians at the Fed.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Now that I have tried to help you with the definition of an "asset" (but I think you still don't get it. do you still believe an asset must be "income-producing?"), I can tell you also that, in most loan situations, the bank is actually the "lender" and the "borrower" pays the loan back to the bank. So asking if the bank pays the loan on behalf of the borrower yet again shows a shocking level of ignorance about mundane finance.


Just wanted to make sure you were clear on the direction of cash flows, from your account to the bank.  My beliefs have nothing to do with what an asset is.  If you're a borrower that's just the way it is.  You pay the lender for the use of money.  BTW, you never stated what the purchase price and interest rate was in your example.  I wonder why?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> There is nothing to be ashamed of when your own little world does not involve any sophisticated financial matters. Your embarrassment should come from your daily bombastic treatises on finance and economics, all of which are cut-and-pasted from books and YouTube and almost always prove that you have never operated, yourself, in the financial or real estate or business sectors.


Very few people understand finance and economics. That's why you speak of them as if they are the same thing.  We'll get you there.  In your example of the home sale, what did you do with the profits?


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Just wanted to make sure you were clear on the direction of cash flows, from your account to the bank.  My beliefs have nothing to do with what an asset is.  If you're a borrower that's just the way it is.  You pay the lender for the use of money.  BTW, you never stated what the purchase price and interest rate was in your example.  I wonder why?


Sure i did. Go back and re-read it.

Hey, did you know this? The bank's "asset value" of its loan is the loan amount plus the interest rate. The bank does not participate in any increase in asset value of the house. So if the house triples in value over thirty years (i.e. about average in So Cal, although mine is about 4x in 20 years), the borrower gets all that increased value and the bank gets none of it! I can sell a house for $3m that I only put $200,000 down on, plus my mortgage payments. The bank only gets back its $800,000 loan, plus the interest payments it previously received! So who has the more valuable asset over 30 years? Do you even understand the question? LOL.


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Very few people understand finance and economics. That's why you speak of them as if they are the same thing.  We'll get you there.  In your example of the home sale, what did you do with the profits?


I think I might start charging you for these lessons. My profits were capital gains, so i paid some taxes on them and put the rest in stocks and/or bonds and/or more real estate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Sure i did. Go back and re-read it.
> 
> Hey, did you know this? The bank's "asset value" of its loan is the loan amount plus the interest rate. The bank does not participate in any increase in asset value of the house. So if the house triples in value over thirty years (i.e. about average in So Cal, although mine is about 4x in 20 years), the borrower gets all that increased value and the bank gets none of it! I can sell a house for $3m that I only put $200,000 down on, plus my mortgage payments. The bank only gets back its $800,000 loan, plus the interest payments it previously received! So who has the more valuable asset over 30 years? Do you even understand the question? LOL.


I do.  Do you know what an ammortization schedule is?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I think I might start charging you for these lessons. My profits were capital gains, so i paid some taxes on them and put the rest in stocks and/or bonds and/or more real estate.


..or more real estate?  Rental property or primary residence.  Okay capital gains.  Why didn't you reinvest your capital gains in to more real estate given the current market volatility?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Sure i did. Go back and re-read it.


 Nope


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Hey, did you know this? The bank's "asset value" of its loan is the loan amount plus the interest rate. The bank does not participate in any increase in asset value of the house.


And the bank prefers it that way.  You insure the loan for them through PMI or a 20% down payment.  You insure the home, you pay the property taxes, and maintain the home.  All they do is come up with the cash.


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And the bank prefers it that way.  You insure the loan for them through PMI or a 20% down payment.  You insure the home, you pay the property taxes, and maintain the home.  All they do is come up with the cash.


Whatever works for you. A bank pays 80% and I pay 20% of an "asset" (do you yet know that it's an asset? or is it still not an "asset" in your book?) and I get 100% of the increase in value and they get 0% of the increase in value. Must be ok for the bank, or they wouldn't do it. Much better for me. So if you look at the mortgage I have paid on my house, plus the rental value I save for living in it, over the past 20 years, if I sold it tomorrow my deal is soooo much better than the bank's deal it's not even funny. All your conclusions are wrong. How is such a thing possible? You must keep your money under a mattress.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Whatever works for you. A bank pays 80% and I pay 20% of an "asset" (do you yet know that it's an asset? or is it still not an "asset" in your book?) and I get 100% of the increase in value and they get 0% of the increase in value.


No you don't.  Your agent won't let you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Must be ok for the bank, or they wouldn't do it. Much better for me. So if you look at the mortgage I have paid on my house, plus the rental value I save for living in it, over the past 20 years, if I sold it tomorrow my deal is soooo much better than the bank's deal it's not even funny.


Not gonna happen without an interest rate and purchase price to start with.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> All your conclusions are wrong.


What conclusions? I don't conclude without a purchase price and interest rate.  Neither does your bank.


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No you don't.  Your agent won't let you.


I think what may cause you to be so wrong all the time is you don't keep it simple. If you did, you would reach different conclusions.
As far as paying taxes to the government and fees to banks and real estate agents and all that, don't worry about it so much. You'll make more money that way; I promise.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I think what may cause you to be so wrong all the time is you don't keep it simple. If you did, you would reach different conclusions.
> As far as paying taxes to the government and fees to banks and real estate agents and all that, don't worry about it so much. You'll make more money that way; I promise.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I think what may cause you to be so wrong all the time is you don't keep it simple. If you did, you would reach different conclusions.
> As far as paying taxes to the government and fees to banks and real estate agents and all that, don't worry about it so much. You'll make more money that way; I promise.


Not without a purchase price and interest rate.


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not without a purchase price and interest rate.


wouldn't matter. you've made clear you couldn't afford it. don't trouble yourself with the analyses. go back to your JK Galbraith YouTube videos.


----------



## espola (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Sure i did. Go back and re-read it.
> 
> Hey, did you know this? The bank's "asset value" of its loan is the loan amount plus the interest rate. The bank does not participate in any increase in asset value of the house. So if the house triples in value over thirty years (i.e. about average in So Cal, although mine is about 4x in 20 years), the borrower gets all that increased value and the bank gets none of it! I can sell a house for $3m that I only put $200,000 down on, plus my mortgage payments. The bank only gets back its $800,000 loan, plus the interest payments it previously received! So who has the more valuable asset over 30 years? Do you even understand the question? LOL.


Not only that - if the bank forecloses on the asset house for any reason and then sells it off at auction, any money gained from the auction beyond the balance on the loan (plus the inevitable list of fees and expenses) goes to the borrower, not the bank.


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

espola said:


> Not only that - if the bank forecloses on the asset house for any reason and then sells it off at auction, any money gained from the auction beyond the balance on the loan (plus the inevitable list of fees and expenses) goes to the borrower, not the bank.


You mean if you buy a house that you can’t afford? And you can’t even sell it when you get in trouble because you’re under water on it? After reading your posts, i can understand you being concerned about that. You don’t have a clue. You’d better not buy one, pal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> wouldn't matter. you've made clear you couldn't afford it. don't trouble yourself with the analyses. go back to your JK Galbraith YouTube videos.


Purchase price and interest rate doesnʻt matter?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> wouldn't matter. you've made clear you couldn't afford it. don't trouble yourself with the analyses. go back to your JK Galbraith YouTube videos.


No trouble at all.  It's hardly an analysis.  Especially if we have a purchase price and interest rate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

espola said:


> Not only that - if the bank forecloses on the asset house for any reason and then sells it off at auction, any money gained from the auction beyond the balance on the loan (plus the inevitable list of fees and expenses) goes to the borrower, not the bank.


Clueless.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I think what may cause you to be so wrong all the time is you don't keep it simple.


I can't dumb it down for you anymore than I already have.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> If you did, you would reach different conclusions.


Especially if you provided a purchase price and interest rate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> As far as paying taxes to the government and fees to banks and real estate agents and all that, don't worry about it so much. You'll make more money that way; I promise.


You and espola are two peas in a pod.


----------



## Torros (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> Whatever works for you. A bank pays 80% and I pay 20% of an "asset" (do you yet know that it's an asset? or is it still not an "asset" in your book?) and I get 100% of the increase in value and they get 0% of the increase in value. Must be ok for the bank, or they wouldn't do it. Much better for me. So if you look at the mortgage I have paid on my house, plus the rental value I save for living in it, over the past 20 years, if I sold it tomorrow my deal is soooo much better than the bank's deal it's not even funny. All your conclusions are wrong. How is such a thing possible? You must keep your money under a mattress.


You assume that the housing market will continue at the current rate. When the bubble burst how good will your deal look compared to that of the banks?


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Torros said:


> You assume that the housing market will continue at the current rate. When the bubble burst how good will your deal look compared to that of the banks?


I assume nothing. The FACT is that for as long as you or I have been alive, owning real estate in so cal has been much better than secured loans at 5%.


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I can't dumb it down for you anymore than I already have.


The problem is that every single thing you say is incorrect. Have you ever owned a house?


----------



## Torros (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I assume nothing. The FACT is that for as long as you or I have been alive, owning real estate in so cal has been much better than secured loans at 5%.


So many holes in what you just posted.

Just so I'm clear. You claim that if someone in So Cal purchased a home in 91 and sold it in 94 that they did better then 5%?


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Torros said:


> So many holes in what you just posted.
> 
> Just so I'm clear. You claim that if someone in So Cal purchased a home in 91 and sold it in 94 that they did better then 5%?


Duh, the stock market is worse than loaning at 5% too, if you invested in ‘07 and sold in ‘09. You can join the class I’m going to give Iz.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> The problem is that every single thing you say is incorrect. Have you ever owned a house?


No.  The bank still has the primary lien on it via a DOT and Promissary note.  Am I confusing you?


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  The bank still has the primary lien on it via a DOT and Promissary note.  Am I confusing you?


I’m sorry you are unable to pay off your mortgage. Save up, you can do it


----------



## messy (Dec 13, 2018)

messy said:


> I’m sorry you are unable to pay off your mortgage. Save up, you can do it


Or sell. Unless you have financial problems, you can almost always sell real estate at a nice profit


----------



## Torros (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Or sell. Unless you have financial problems, you can almost always sell real estate at a nice profit


Are really this stupid or are you just trying to act like it? 

So, just sell? Like in my example I gave you of buying in 91 and selling in 94? So by selling you lock in your losses, as in no profit. As in less then 5%.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> Are really this stupid or are you just trying to act like it?
> 
> So, just sell? Like in my example I gave you of buying in 91 and selling in 94? So by selling you lock in your losses, as in no profit. As in less then 5%.


If you noticed, I said “unless you have financial problems...” you don’t sell a house that’s underwater because you need the money unless you have financial problems.  I should say ALMOST everybody makes more money on houses than on making loans at 5%. i guess not you and Iz. Maybe it’s that “uneducated white male” Trump demographic, right?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> I’m sorry you are unable to pay off your mortgage. Save up, you can do it


Itʻs a liability for me and an asset for the bank just like in your example.  Thatʻs how home loans work.  Any questions?


----------



## Torros (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> If you noticed, I said “unless you have financial problems...” you don’t sell a house that’s underwater because you need the money unless you have financial problems.  I should say ALMOST everybody makes more money on houses than on making loans at 5%. i guess not you and Iz. Maybe it’s that “uneducated white male” Trump demographic, right?


So answer the question. Between 91 and 94 did your real estate portfolio make you money or lose you money? Your such an idiot. You should have stuck with your original screen name.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> So answer the question. Between 91 and 94 did your real estate portfolio make you money or lose you money? Your such an idiot. You should have stuck with your original screen name.


What's the original screen name?


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> So answer the question. Between 91 and 94 did your real estate portfolio make you money or lose you money? Your such an idiot. You should have stuck with your original screen name.


Why are you so obsessed with the one period in the last 30 years that real estate dipped? Did you get hurt by it?


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2018)

espola said:


> Hilarious.


*You may term it " Hilarious " , but your remark displays ignorance.*


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2018)

legend said:


> Dude, 3 strikes you're out. maybe take a class or something. In my example (which is over your head), my asset value ($2.2m) is worth far more than the bank's asset value (a payable $800K loan earning a mortgage interest rate). Do you really not know this stuff? And yet you cite articles and shoot off your mouth like you know what you're talking about?
> I had a feeling you were a nutcake in a cubicle...now you've proven it.


*How much did you pay under the table for the inflated appraisal....*


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> You assume that the housing market will continue at the current rate. When the bubble burst how good will your deal look compared to that of the banks?


*Messy is " messy " with his financial " valuations ".....*
*His logic is why the housing market took a leaping shit in 07 - 08...*
*Messy = Barney Frank Logic*
*Pulling out " estimated " value and then owning an over encumbered  *
*piece of real estate or letting the bank take the risk upon repossession*
*before or after a sale was one of the key failings...*


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Why are you so obsessed with the one period in the last 30 years that real estate dipped? Did you get hurt by it?


*Can I come and dig a 30 by 40 and 60 foot deep hole in your yard ....?*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> I’m sorry you are unable to pay off your mortgage. Save up, you can do it


It's okay if you're confused.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Duh, the stock market is worse than loaning at 5% too, if you invested in ‘07 and sold in ‘09. You can join the class I’m going to give Iz.


I can't wait.


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Or sell. Unless you have financial problems, you can *almost* always sell real estate at a nice profit



*You ALWAYS pay one way or another " messy " financial human....*
*Not to mention the fact that YOUR new Governor ( You Voted For ! ) *
*and his Communist/Democrats in the Northern Mexican Cartel located*
*in Sacramento are going to re appraise ALL of the property you own *
*after Jan 8th 2019.......And you'll pay even more !*
*Then they are going to tax ALL Labor ( YES ALL LABOR ! ) at a rate*
*that will suffice to temporarily shore up the unfunded State Pension *
*plans in California....Yes, Good ol Jerry Brown handed off one of the most*
*toxic items ever to the incoming Idiot from " Poop " Town by the sea....*


*Barney Frank almost got away with it...!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> I assume nothing. The FACT is that for as long as you or I have been alive, owning real estate in so cal has been much better than secured loans at 5%.


False


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> False


That's right, i could be wrong. You have to pick the right areas to buy in. I shouldn't judge based on my own experiences.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> That's right, i could be wrong. You have to pick the right areas to buy in. I shouldn't judge based on my own experiences.


then again, how many individuals have the opportunity to loan secured money at 5%? easier to buy real estate with the bank's money!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> That's right, i could be wrong. You have to pick the right areas to buy in. I shouldn't judge based on my own experiences.


No, I like judging by your own experiences.  But all you've provided is a fake loan amount, fake capital gains, and fake down payment.  No purchase price or interest rate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> then again, how many individuals have the opportunity to loan secured money at 5%? easier to buy real estate with the bank's money!


Agree.  The bank loves that mind set.  That's how they make money.  They know that the time value of money is where they easily bypass your capital gains.   

I amortized your fake loan of 800k at 5% for 30 years.  If I am the bank I am excited.  70 to 75% of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest for the first 6 years of your loan.  59 to 69% of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest for the next 6 years.  You don't get to 5% until roughly the 28th year of a 30 year loan.  The bank puts yours and others monthly payments back to work as soon as they get it every month.  The bank has 1000's of borrowers in the hopper that are willing to borrow our interest payments from the bank the day after you make your mortgage payment.  And the process begins again!!  Can your asset do that monthly?  Questions?


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Agree.  The bank loves that mind set.  That's how they make money.  They know that the time value of money is where they easily bypass your capital gains.
> 
> I amortized your fake loan of 800k at 5% for 30 years.  If I am the bank I am excited.  70 to 75% of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest for the first 6 years of your loan.  59 to 69% of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest for the next 6 years.  You don't get to 5% until roughly the 28th year of a 30 year loan.  The bank puts yours and others monthly payments back to work as soon as they get it every month.  The bank has 1000's of borrowers in the hopper that are willing to borrow our interest payments from the bank the day after you make your mortgage payment.  And the process begins again!!  Can your asset do that monthly?  Questions?


Of course while the 100% of my house is appreciating  that I only paid 20% down on, I am capturing all that equity and the rest of my money is working for me elsewhere and growing. 

Again, as an individual I can buy houses, I can’t be a bank. So the only choice here is to buy the real estate...and make a lot of money!


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No, I like judging by your own experiences.  But all you've provided is a fake loan amount, fake capital gains, and fake down payment.  No purchase price or interest rate.


I have made several real estate transactions, but using the house I’ve been in for 20 years, it was 885K in 1997, now valued at about $4m, interest rate is 3.5% and I have refi’d a couple of times. None of that is fake. I sold a house recently that I bought with 960K cash in 2012 and sold for 1.7m in 2016. Tell me how the banks did better than I did.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Again, as an individual I can buy houses, I can’t be a bank.


You can be a lender.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You can be a lender.


too rich for my blood. i'd rather buy houses.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> I have made several real estate transactions, but using the house I’ve been in for 20 years, it was 885K in 1997, now valued at about $4m, interest rate is 3.5% and I have refi’d a couple of times. None of that is fake.


So what was the purchase price?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> too rich for my blood. i'd rather buy houses.


That makes no sense and doesn't sound like it is too rich for you.  Unless the 960k cash purchase is fake too.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Of course while the 100% of my house is appreciating  that I only paid 20% down on, I am capturing all that equity


The equity actually belongs to the bank but you can borrow it from them if you like.  Of course that's probably why you were able to re-fi for cash out or lower interest rate.  In the mean time the bank is getting monthly income from you that they can use immediately without your permission.  Your equity can't do that.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That makes no sense and doesn't sound like it is too rich for you.  Unless the 960k cash purchase is fake too.


i am not a guy who is going to lend money to others. not my thing. give me real property for my money; not a promissory note and DOT.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> i am not a guy who is going to lend money to others. not my thing. give me real property for my money; not a promissory note and DOT.


Even if the price is right?


----------



## nononono (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> That's right, i could be wrong. You have to pick the right areas to buy in. I shouldn't judge based on my own experiences.



*Hey " Messy " Financial experience.....You should read the below post..........Again.*



Bruddah IZ said:


> Agree.  The bank loves that mind set.  That's how they make money.  They know that the time value of money is where they easily bypass your capital gains.
> 
> I amortized your fake loan of 800k at 5% for 30 years.  If I am the bank I am excited.  70 to 75% of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest for the first 6 years of your loan.  59 to 69% of your monthly mortgage payment goes to interest for the next 6 years.  You don't get to 5% until roughly the 28th year of a 30 year loan.  The bank puts yours and others monthly payments back to work as soon as they get it every month.  The bank has 1000's of borrowers in the hopper that are willing to borrow our interest payments from the bank the day after you make your mortgage payment.  And the process begins again!!  Can your asset do that monthly?  Questions?



*Hey " Messy " Financial experience.....You should read the above post..........Again.*


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Even if the price is right?


I don’t know any individuals who do residential real estate lending. Weird concept. Again, you should try dealing with real life. Pretend you’re someone with money to invest (I know it’s a stretch)...and nobody is asking you to be their mortgage co....because they’re not. Now what would you do?


----------



## Torros (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Why are you so obsessed with the one period in the last 30 years that real estate dipped? Did you get hurt by it?


You really are ignorant. It was just not one period, just one I used as an example.

Do you recall the 70s and early 80s? Do you recall 18% mortages? How much of a profit would you be making if you sold your home three years after you purchased it?

Kinda funny how you are presenting yourself. All the crying your party does about the 2% and you are probably in the 1%. You do realize that most cannot do what you and that many people have lost their asses in real estate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> I don’t know any individuals who do residential real estate lending. Weird concept. Again, you should try dealing with real life. Pretend you’re someone with money to invest (I know it’s a stretch)...and nobody is asking you to be their mortgage co....because they’re not. Now what would you do?


You're in a different cocoon.  By choice.  And that's fine.  That's why you don't know any private lenders.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> You really are ignorant. It was just not one period, just one I used as an example.
> 
> Do you recall the 70s and early 80s? Do you recall 18% mortages? How much of a profit would you be making if you sold your home three years after you purchased it?
> 
> Kinda funny how you are presenting yourself. All the crying your party does about the 2% and you are probably in the 1%. You do realize that most cannot do what you and that many people have lost their asses in real estate.


How did they lose their asses in real estate? Predatory lending practices that Republicans don’t want to curb? Teaser rates that they get duped into taking by the banks?


----------



## Torros (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> How did they lose their asses in real estate? Predatory lending practices that Republicans don’t want to curb? Teaser rates that they get duped into taking by the banks?


When you answer the questions I posed you will find your answer. And please try to stay on point without going off the rails. What do teaser rates have to do with a 17% interest rate back in the late 70s? 

Do the math and then let me know how well your investment would have worked out for you back then.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> How did they lose their asses in real estate?


An increase in the money supply is what set the stage for all kinds of moral hazard and asymmetrical information in the housing market.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Predatory lending practices that Republicans don’t want to curb?


Not just the Republicans but the Democrats as well.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Teaser rates that they get duped into taking by the banks?


Duped in to thinking their buying an asset.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Duped in to thinking their buying an asset.


You don’t know what an asset is. Sometimes assets appreciate and sometimes they depreciate. Real estate is the best asset to have.


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> An increase in the money supply is what set the stage for all kinds of moral hazard and asymmetrical information in the housing market.


If you didn’t sell the house you’d be good now!


----------



## messy (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> When you answer the questions I posed you will find your answer. And please try to stay on point without going off the rails. What do teaser rates have to do with a 17% interest rate back in the late 70s?
> 
> Do the math and then let me know how well your investment would have worked out for you back then.


Why do you lick these brief little eras when things went “off the rails?” Why would you buy a house at a 17% mortgage? Try to make sense.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

Torros said:


> When you answer the questions I posed you will find your answer. And please try to stay on point without going off the rails. What do teaser rates have to do with a 17% interest rate back in the late 70s?
> 
> Do the math and then let me know how well your investment would have worked out for you back then.


In the 70’s we werenʻt subsidizing debt like we are now.  Not surprising that messy finds private lending a weird concept when in the 70’s,  if you were a saver then you were easily a lender.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> You don’t know what an asset is. Sometimes assets appreciate and sometimes they depreciate.


The bank doesnʻt care about that.  They get paid regardless.  Does your “asset” do that?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Real estate is the best asset to have.


Especially if youʻre the lender.  They get paid every month by the borrower who also buys default insurance (PMI) for the lender as a part of their monthly payment.  Does your asset do that?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> If you didn’t sell the house you’d be good now!


Not as good as the bank is.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 14, 2018)

messy said:


> Why would you buy a house at a 17% mortgage?


Because of the inverse relationship between interest rates and home prices.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Because of the inverse relationship between interest rates and home prices.


No. I think it’s because the buyer is a dummy.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not as good as the bank is.


You’re not the bank. Banks are institutions. Simple rule is you do great in real estate...but don’t live above your means.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Especially if youʻre the lender.  They get paid every month by the borrower who also buys default insurance (PMI) for the lender as a part of their monthly payment.  Does your asset do that?


Once again you don’t understand. The lender is an institution. The buyer isn’t. Your only choice is to be a buyer. Or not, so stay poor while you read your backwards-ass economics analyses. Try actually doing things.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> No. I think it’s because the buyer is a dummy.


People buy more homes when money is cheap,  less homes when money is expensive.  The housing industry responds to higher interest rates by lowering home prices.  Questions?


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Torros said:


> When you answer the questions I posed you will find your answer. And please try to stay on point without going off the rails. What do teaser rates have to do with a 17% interest rate back in the late 70s?
> 
> Do the math and then let me know how well your investment would have worked out for you back then.


I bought my first house in Poway in 1976 for $42,000.  I sold it in 1993 for  $160,000.  When we first moved in, we hadx beeen paying $120/month rent for a 2-bedroom place, and our house payments were about $400 (including compulsory payments to an escrow account for insurance and property tax).


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The bank doesnʻt care about that.  They get paid regardless.  Does your “asset” do that?


The bank can lose money if they foreclose on a property and sell it for less than the remaining principal on the loan.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Especially if youʻre the lender.  They get paid every month by the borrower who also buys default insurance (PMI) for the lender as a part of their monthly payment.  Does your asset do that?


PMI is not always required.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> No. I think it’s because the buyer is a dummy.


And you can deduct the interest on your taxes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> The bank can lose money if they foreclose on a property and sell it for less than the remaining principal on the loan.


That’s why they get you to pay for their PMI so that they don’t lose money if that happens.  Dude there is no way you’re a real estate guy.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Why do you lick these brief little eras when things went “off the rails?” Why would you buy a house at a 17% mortgage? Try to make sense.


We had an adjustable mortgage that got up to over 20% once.  We were able to refinance after a couple of years to a loan below 10%, and an even lower rate than that when we refinanced in a deal that got some cash out of the equity.  My experience from all that was that if you are holding an asset with positive equity and a good credit record then lenders will fight each other to give you money.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And you can deduct the interest on your taxes.


You better check with t on that.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That’s why they get you to pay for their PMI so that they don’t lose money if that happens.  Dude there is no way you’re a real estate guy.


Hilarious.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> People buy more homes when money is cheap,  less homes when money is expensive.  The housing industry responds to higher interest rates by lowering home prices.  Questions?


No questions. Advice. Pull your head out of your sophomoric readings and actually engage in commerce. Real estate and otherwise. You will learn much more that way.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> How did they lose their asses in real estate? Predatory lending practices that Republicans don’t want to curb? Teaser rates that they get duped into taking by the banks?


Watch this Einstein:


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> We had an adjustable mortgage that got up to over 20% once.  We were able to refinance after a couple of years to a loan below 10%, and an even lower rate than that when we refinanced in a deal that got some cash out of the equity.  My experience from all that was that if you are holding an asset with positive equity and a good credit record then lenders will fight each other to give you money.


That’s the ticket! Why is it that we Dems understand how to do this and those guys don’t?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> PMI is not always required.


Smart lenders no when that is.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Watch this Einstein:


Another guy who got hurt, posting YouTubes! Perfect.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> PMI is not always required.


True.  When would that be?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> You better check with t on that.


I did.  When can you deduct your interest....still.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> No questions. Advice. Pull your head out of your sophomoric readings and actually engage in commerce. Real estate and otherwise. You will learn much more that way.


You will learn more if you do both.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> We had an adjustable mortgage that got up to over 20% once.  We were able to refinance after a couple of years to a loan below 10%, and an even lower rate than that when we refinanced in a deal that got some cash out of the equity.  My experience from all that was that if you are holding an asset with positive equity and a good credit record then lenders will fight each other to give you money.


That’s right.  They’re always happy to ammortize another loan for you people who ignore the time value of money.  The bank is in the lending business instead of the real estate business for a reason.  And it’s not so you can make more money than they do.  Just in case you RE gurus haven’t noticed.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Smart lenders no when that is.


No PMI required on our first house, and only 2 years of PMI on the second - the refi lender did not require it.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That’s right.  They’re always happy to ammortize another loan for you people who ignore the time value of money.  The bank is in the lending business instead of the real estate business for a reason.  And it’s not so you can make more money than they do.  Just in case you RE gurus haven’t noticed.


Did you intend that to make sense to anyone but yourself?


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Another guy who got hurt, posting YouTubes! Perfect.


I didn't get hurt jackass...
I still have my home in Camarillo that I bought in 1991
It's appraised for at least 4 times what I purchased it for...
Merry Christmas Einstein.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> I didn't get hurt jackass...
> I still have my home in Camarillo that I bought in 1991
> It's appraised for at least 4 times what I purchased it for...
> Merry Christmas Einstein.


You mean you didn’t sell it in ‘94? I think you may have some ideas to offer to some of your cronies on here. Or maybe Iz can convince you to be a “bank” and not a homeowner. LOL


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You will learn more if you do both.


Are you a bank, or a real property owner, or both? I’ve never met a guy who is an individual mortgage lender! I’ve met some bank presidents and owners, but they are not “banks.” I’m curious as to how you evaluate our choice to be a bank or a property buyer.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> You mean you didn’t sell it in ‘94? I think you may have some ideas to offer to some of your cronies on here. Or maybe Iz can convince you to be a “bank” and not a homeowner. LOL


Busy erasing all doubt...are you and ratboy related?


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> I didn't get hurt jackass...
> I still have my home in Camarillo that I bought in 1991
> It's appraised for at least 4 times what I purchased it for...
> Merry Christmas Einstein.


Do you agree with Izzy's definition of asset?


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> Do you agree with Izzy's definition of asset?


Good question. Did you know your house is not an asset? And that you should be a bank instead?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Are you a bank, or a real property owner, or both? I’ve never met a guy who is an individual mortgage lender! I’ve met some bank presidents and owners, but they are not “banks.” I’m curious as to how you evaluate our choice to be a bank or a property buyer.


Time value of money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Are you a bank, or a real property owner, or both? I’ve never met a guy who is an individual mortgage lender! I’ve met some bank presidents and owners, but they are not “banks.” I’m curious as to how you evaluate our choice to be a bank or a property buyer.


Time value of money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Good question. Did you know your house is not an asset? And that you should be a bank instead?


You guys don’t qualify to be a lender.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> You mean you didn’t sell it in ‘94? I think you may have some ideas to offer to some of your cronies on here. Or maybe Iz can convince you to be a “bank” and not a homeowner. LOL


Or both.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> Did you intend that to make sense to anyone but yourself?


Yes.  Questions?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> No PMI required on our first house, and only 2 years of PMI on the second - the refi lender did not require it.


Do you know why?


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do you know why?


Negotiations.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Good question. Did you know your house is not an asset?


It’s an asset for sure.  For the bank.  You have at least 12 opportunities a year to reconcile that fact as money flows from your account to the bank so that they can lend it out again.  Does your “asset” do that?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> Negotiations.


Lol! Yes.  The bank says do this or you’re not getting the loan.


----------



## espola (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol! Yes.  The bank says do this or you’re not getting the loan.


We were given options.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> Do you agree with Izzy's definition of asset?


Your monthly payments agree with Izzy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

espola said:


> We were given options.


Ye$ you were.  Which one did you take for them?  I’m sure they appreciated it.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Time value of money.


Are you a bank, or a real estate owner? Which one are you? Second time I have asked.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Are you a bank, or a real estate owner? Which one are you? Second time I have asked.


Third time I've answered both.  Aren't you both?  Did you negotiate with your bank like espola did?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

Actually, I don’t own the home yet.  It’s still a liability.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

Like yours


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Actually, I don’t own the home yet.  It’s still a liability.


As I suspected. You’re neither. Did you ever see The King of Comedy? Are you Rupert Pupkin the economist?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> As I suspected. You’re neither. Did you ever see The King of Comedy? Are you Rupert Pupkin the economist?


Did he deny that his home was a liability until he paid off his loan from the bank?  Seen it hundreds of times.  But there is no way that a savy RE guy doesn't know about the function of PMI or tax deductible interest.


----------



## Torros (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Why do you lick these brief little eras when things went “off the rails?” Why would you buy a house at a 17% mortgage? Try to make sense.


Still waiting for you to answer the questions. Answering questions with questions is not an answer.

Just in case you didn't know, these "little eras" happen about every 12 years or so. Also, you were the one who posted like an idiot that it's a "fact" that you always make money in real estate in So Cal. Don't blame me for your ignorance.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Did he deny that his home was a liability until he paid off his loan from the bank?  Seen it hundreds of times.  But there is no way that a savy RE guy doesn't know about the function of PMI or tax deductible interest.





Torros said:


> Still waiting for you to answer the questions. Answering questions with questions is not an answer.
> 
> Just in case you didn't know, these "little eras" happen about every 12 years or so. Also, you were the one who posted like an idiot that it's a "fact" that you always make money in real estate in So Cal. Don't blame me for your ignorance.


it’s a fact that it’s almost impossible not to make money owning so cal real estate. Sorry if you got caught playing over your head. Sounds like you must have. I have bought and sold several times since the late 80s. Read up, Torros. Learn about location. Don’t buy things you can’t afford to hold. Learn from your mistakes. You’ll do great! Maybe you and Iz should team up and buy a cool little cottage in San Pedro. It’s gonna happen next. Don’t buy a condo. I may go in with you!


----------



## Torros (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> it’s a fact that it’s almost impossible not to make money owning so cal real estate. Sorry if you got caught playing over your head. Sounds like you must have. I have bought and sold several times since the late 80s. Read up, Torros. Learn about location. Don’t buy things you can’t afford to hold. Learn from your mistakes. You’ll do great! Maybe you and Iz should team up and buy a cool little cottage in San Pedro. It’s gonna happen next. Don’t buy a condo. I may go in with you!


Still no answer? Predictable.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Torros said:


> Still no answer? Predictable.


I believe your questions were, effectively, if I bought high and sold low did I lose money? Yes I would have! I didn’t think you were serious in asking such a stupid question. Like I said, go find a nice property and buy it. But only if you can afford to hold it. You will make money. Choose wisely. I can help you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> it’s a fact that it’s almost impossible not to make money owning so cal real estate. Sorry if you got caught playing over your head. Sounds like you must have. I have bought and sold several times since the late 80s. Read up, Torros. Learn about location. Don’t buy things you can’t afford to hold. Learn from your mistakes. You’ll do great! Maybe you and Iz should team up and buy a cool little cottage in San Pedro. It’s gonna happen next. Don’t buy a condo. I may go in with you!


Bring your 25% down payment with you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> I believe your questions were, effectively, if I bought high and sold low did I lose money? Yes I would have! I didn’t think you were serious in asking such a stupid question. Like I said, go find a nice property and buy it. But only if you can afford to hold it. You will make money. Choose wisely. I can help you.


At least you’re talking about buying an asset now.


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Bring your 25% down payment with you.


Or 20%, but you can split it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Or 20%, but you can split it.


Rental?


----------



## messy (Dec 15, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Rental?


Down payment. 20%. Normal and customary for a residential home mortgage. But only for the 30 years that I’ve been buying houses in LA County. Maybe you know different.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 15, 2018)

messy said:


> Down payment. 20%. Normal and customary for a residential home mortgage. But only for the 30 years that I’ve been buying houses in LA County. Maybe you know different.


Investment properties are usually more than 20%.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 16, 2018)

Unless you an T are moving in together


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 16, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Unless you an T are moving in together


 That way you can buy 20% worth of equity.  Lol.


----------



## nononono (Dec 16, 2018)

messy said:


> I don’t know any individuals who do residential real estate lending. Weird concept. Again, you should try dealing with real life. Pretend you’re someone with money to invest (I know it’s a stretch)...and nobody is asking you to be their mortgage co....because they’re not. Now what would you do?









*Your neck is stretched.....*


----------



## nononono (Dec 16, 2018)

messy said:


> Why do you lick these brief little eras when things went “off the rails?” Why would you buy a house at a 17% mortgage? Try to make sense.



*Hypothetical OC home purchase in early 1980's = $ 50,000.00 @ 17 % x 30 years = $256,622
Current OC Speculative Value of same home paid off in 2010 = $ 650,000.00 to $ 875,000.00

If someone was able to purchase and retain three homes at the above purchase price thru 
that time period and paid them off thru the conventional system they would have at the
minimum approx $ 1.2 million financial value at present + all the rental income from 2010 
forward til now. That is just a simple example " Messy "....

So buying a house then when the interest " was " 17 % would still be a HUGE gain.
Buying one now @ 17 percent would only happen due to ( I Guess ) Double Rotten credit.

If someone purchased three homes in the 1980's and paid them off in 5 years the " Extra "
value can be discerned with the above numbers. Purchasing a Home right now on the 
bubble is not a smart purchase in my opinion at all.
Renting is a viable option until the market drops, then purchase if a value increase is 
anticipated on the horizon. Which I do not see in the near future.
Purchasing Retail property is another whole animal that factors in many many different
values and costs.....
Still the same basic principal is applied.*


----------



## nononono (Dec 16, 2018)

messy said:


> it’s a fact that it’s almost impossible not to make money owning so cal real estate. Sorry if you got caught playing over your head. Sounds like you must have. I have bought and sold several times since the late 80s. Read up, Torros. Learn about location. Don’t buy things you can’t afford to hold. Learn from your mistakes. You’ll do great! Maybe you and Iz should team up and buy a cool little cottage in San Pedro. It’s gonna happen next. Don’t buy a condo. I may go in with you!



*Your Business name is :

Arrogant A-hole Real Estate Holdings LLC
AKA 
Messy Financial*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 16, 2018)

*GM, Bailouts, and the Importance of Bankruptcy in Market Economies*

Proponents of corporate bailouts miss the importance of loss and bankruptcy within a market economy.
*
Saturday, December 15, 2018

Oluwatobi Walker*

*Loss and Bankruptcy*

The market economy is commonly referred to as a “profit system.” While true, this description misses the bigger picture. *The market economy is more accurately described as a “profit and loss system” in which profits and losses steer scarce resources (i.e. labor and capital) from less able entrepreneurs and inefficient industries to more able entrepreneurs and more efficient industries. If anything, the loss (and bankruptcy) part is probably the most important one. *

Entrepreneurial profits signal the creation of value due to accurate entrepreneurial foresight and judgment of consumer needs and wants. As a result, labor and capital are steered into industries that promise high rates of profit from less efficient industries. This helps to increase production, which in turn helps bring down prices of products and services until the rate of industry profits comes in line with the average rate of profits within the economy. This seamless process goes on and on, with some industries expanding while others contract even as the overall economy expands.


----------



## legend (Dec 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *GM, Bailouts, and the Importance of Bankruptcy in Market Economies*
> 
> Proponents of corporate bailouts miss the importance of loss and bankruptcy within a market economy.
> *
> ...


Trump's bankruptcies ended up being bailouts, but thanks for the lesson, Cubicle Man.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2018)

legend said:


> Trump's bankruptcies ended up being bailouts, but thanks for the lesson, Cubicle Man.


You’re welcome.  But I feel like I failed you because bailouts are not bankruptcies.  Kinda like a home is not an asset.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 18, 2018)

legend said:


> Trump's bankruptcies ended up being bailouts, but thanks for the lesson, Cubicle Man.


Apparently bankruptcy is a progressive idea.
In order for an economy to prosper it needs investment and investments are risky.
The risks benefit the economy. 
Forgiveness of debt encourages investments and risk.  

https://www.quora.com/Why-is-bankruptcy-important-for-an-economy


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Apparently bankruptcy is a progressive idea.
> In order for an economy to prosper it needs investment and investments are risky.
> The risks benefit the economy.
> Forgiveness of debt encourages investments and risk.
> ...


QE baby!  Don’t worry.  Spigot boy will save the day.


----------



## messy (Dec 18, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You’re welcome.  But I feel like I failed you because bailouts are not bankruptcies.  Kinda like a home is not an asset.


Do you have any assets? pretend that you do and you owned a house and you filled out a balance sheet...do you know what side the house would go on?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 18, 2018)

messy said:


> Do you have any assets? pretend that you do and you owned a house and you filled out a balance sheet...do you know what side the house would go on?


Yes


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

How do we go about our business in this world of scarcity without descending into a barbaric struggle for survival?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

.....Even though value is subjective, in a free market, people manifest their values by voluntarily deciding what they will pay for particular products and services. These objective prices, therefore, are reflections of subjective values. Entrepreneurs are able to use these objective prices to calculate expected profit and loss and act accordingly. In a free market, Mises shows, entrepreneurs are able to plan for the future and consumers will receive what they most want.

Socialism, on the other hand, is doomed because there is no way for the central planner to efficiently allocate factors of production because there is no way to calculate profit and loss. In a completely socialistic economy all of the means of production are owned by the state. There is, therefore, no actual exchange of goods, and hence no actual prices that reflect the actual subjective values of human beings. Producers, then, have no way to calculate whether their actions are productive or wasteful from the point of view of society. What is called a planned economy is, instead, as Mises so eloquently put it, “groping about in the dark.”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

The moral of the story is that voluntary exchange in a monetary economy allows us to have the civilization we enjoy. In order to engage in voluntary exchange using money, however, Mises stresses that it is neces- sary for people to own private property. You cannot exchange what you do not own. If there is no ownership of private property, there is no actual exchange. If there is no exchange, there is no division of labor and there is no money so there are neither money prices, nor economic calculation. We would be left with chaos, not civilization. For civilization to survive, consequently, Mises teaches us that society must be a private property order. If people are able to own and trade their property as they see fit, wealth increases and civilization prospers.--Shawn Ritenour, Grove City College


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

The insights of Mises do not stop with his critique of socialism, however. From his 1929 collection of essays A Critique of Interventionism through the rest of his career, he continually explained to whomever would listen that *even if the state does not fully socialize the economy, but intervenes only here and there, this too hinders the workings of the price system. To the extent that the state intervenes and curbs the free actions of individuals through price controls, monetary inflation, product restrictions, taxation, and subsidization, to that extent will prices for goods not accurately reflect the values of the people in that society. Such intervention will make it that much harder for entrepreneurs to do their job and one should expect to see shortages in some industries and surpluses in another.*--Shawn Ritenour, Grove City College


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

A man who chooses between drinking a glass of milk and a glass of a solution of potassium cyanide does not choose between two beverages; he chooses between life and death. A society that chooses between capitalism and socialism does not choose between two social systems; it chooses between social cooperation and the disintegration of society. Socialism is not an alternative to capitalism; it is an alternative to any system under which men can live as human beings. To stress this point is the task of economics as it is the task of biology and chemistry to teach that potassium cyanide is not a nutriment but a deadly poison.--Ludwig Von Misses


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

One may try to justify [social security] by declaring that the wage earners lack the insight and the moral strength to provide spontaneously for their own future. But then it is not easy to silence the voices of those who ask whether it is not paradoxical to entrust the nation’s welfare to the decisions of voters whom the law itself considers incapable of managing their own affairs.--Mises


----------



## legend (Dec 19, 2018)

messy said:


> Do you have any assets? pretend that you do and you owned a house and you filled out a balance sheet...do you know what side the house would go on?


What side does the house go on?


----------



## messy (Dec 19, 2018)

legend said:


> What side does the house go on?


Iz doesn’t have one and doesn’t know if a house that you inhabit is an “asset” or not, when filling out a balance sheet.


----------



## nononono (Dec 19, 2018)

legend said:


> Trump's bankruptcies ended up being bailouts, but thanks for the lesson, Cubicle Man.


*What's your excuse...........*


----------



## nononono (Dec 19, 2018)

legend said:


> What side does the house go on?


*Your Darkside.....and open the exit chute for clearing..*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

messy said:


> Iz doesn’t have one and doesn’t know if a house that you inhabit is an “asset” or not, when filling out a balance sheet.


How’s your reverse mortgage working?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 19, 2018)

legend said:


> What side does the house go on?


the liability side as always.


----------



## messy (Dec 20, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> the liability side as always.


Before we go any further, let’s look at Merriam-Webster’s definition of these two key words:

as·set [ˈa-ˌset also -sət] _noun_


A valuable person or thing
Something that is owned by a person, company, etc.
I took the above definition from one of those new-agey articles (you’re not a fact guy, you prefer to make up opinions) suggesting that a house is an expense and not an asset.

You should try owning your house, if you can ever get one. When you do, it becomes an asset.

But it’s clear from your long posts that you have not had any success in the financial world, so you may have lost money on your house, in which case to you it’s a liability because you owe more than it’s worth.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Before we go any further, let’s look at Merriam-Webster’s definition of these two key words:
> 
> as·set [ˈa-ˌset also -sət] _noun_
> 
> ...


The home that you live in is a liability.  A rental property is an asset.  Big difference.  One cash flows to the bank, the latter to you.  That’s just how it works RE guy.


----------



## messy (Dec 20, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The home that you live in is a liability.  A rental property is an asset.  Big difference.  One cash flows to the bank, the latter to you.  That’s just how it works RE guy.


Tell your accountant and your stockbroker and your banker.
If you tell them my house is a liability and not an asset, they’ll laugh at you.
But when they look at your situation, I assume they’d think otherwise. 
Your “financial life” is comprised of copying and pasting. LOL!


----------



## espola (Dec 20, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The home that you live in is a liability.  A rental property is an asset.  Big difference.  One cash flows to the bank, the latter to you.  That’s just how it works RE guy.


Coocoo.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Tell your accountant and your stockbroker and your banker.
> If you tell them my house is a liability and not an asset, they’ll laugh at you.
> But when they look at your situation, I assume they’d think otherwise.
> Your “financial life” is comprised of copying and pasting. LOL!


The house that you live in does not cash flow to you but it does to the bank.  Get a rental property and pay your tenant to live there.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

espola said:


> Coocoo.


The negotiator.  Lol!  So what option did you take?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

Doesn’t it give you two pause that denying that the homes we live in are a liability, is denying the housing crisis?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

pause..........................


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

......................


----------



## nononono (Dec 20, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How’s your reverse mortgage working?


*Oh my are those who subscribe in for a surprise......*


----------



## nononono (Dec 20, 2018)

espola said:


> Coocoo.


*You don't know much do you....*

*Even if your house is paid for it's NOT generating you TANGIBLE income. Unless your *
*home is a business, then it is something entirely different.*
*Why ...because you have to live somewhere, right ?*
*A rental property is net positive if ALL expenses are below the rental price.*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Iz doesn’t have one and doesn’t know if a house that you inhabit is an “asset” or not, when filling out a balance sheet.


Google : ....is ones home an asset...

Your financial planner, real estate agent, and accountant all call your house an asset. But in reality, an asset is only something that puts money in your pocket. If you have a house that you rent out to tenants, then it’s an asset. If you have a house, paid for or not, that you live in, then it can’t be an asset. Instead of putting money in your pocket, it takes money out of your pocket. That is the simple definition of a liability.

This is doubly true if you don’t own your home yet. Then it’s the bank’s asset, and it is working for them, but it’s not earning you anything.

The simple definition of an asset is something that puts money in your pocket. This is accomplished through four different categories, one of which is real estate. When I say real estate, I don’t mean your personal residence, which is a liability. What I mean is investment real estate, which is a great investment because it puts money in your pocket each month in the form of rent.

https://www.richdad.com/Resources/Rich-Dad-Financial-Education-Blog/april-2013/rich-dad-scam-6-your-house-is-an-asset.aspx


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Google : ....is ones home an asset...
> 
> Your financial planner, real estate agent, and accountant all call your house an asset. But in reality, an asset is only something that puts money in your pocket. If you have a house that you rent out to tenants, then it’s an asset. If you have a house, paid for or not, that you live in, then it can’t be an asset. Instead of putting money in your pocket, it takes money out of your pocket. That is the simple definition of a liability.
> 
> ...


You would think that it would be obvious after the housing crisis.


----------



## Booter (Dec 20, 2018)

*5 Things You Must Tell Your Grandma About the Ads on FOX News So She Doesn’t Get Scammed*

1. DO NOT MAKE THE CASH CALL. EVER! IN FACT, DON’T CALL ANYONE. OR PICK UP THE PHONE. DEVIOUS PEOPLE WANT YOUR MONEY. AND THAT’S THE JOB OF YOUR GRANDKIDS.

2. THE SALVATION ARMY DOESN’T WANT THAT LOVELY CLAY AIKEN TO BE HAPPY. AND, THEY HATE NEIL PATRICK HARRIS, THAT NICE BOY FROM THAT FUNNY SHOW GRANDMA LIKES.

3. FRED THOMPSON SECRETLY HATES YOU. AND THAT RASCAL SCOOTER YOUR RODE IN ON.

*4. YOU DON’T NEED A SPECIAL $10 DOLLAR BAG TO MAKE BAKED POTATOES



5. DON’T TRADE YOUR “WORTHLESS” ACTUAL MONEY FOR “VALUABLE” GOLD

*

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-hotchkiss/5-things-you-must-tell-yo_b_4176284.html


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 20, 2018)

Booter said:


> *5 Things You Must Tell Your Grandma About the Ads on FOX News So She Doesn’t Get Scammed*
> 
> 1. DO NOT MAKE THE CASH CALL. EVER! IN FACT, DON’T CALL ANYONE. OR PICK UP THE PHONE. DEVIOUS PEOPLE WANT YOUR MONEY. AND THAT’S THE JOB OF YOUR GRANDKIDS.
> 
> ...


You forgot one,


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

nononono said:


> *You don't know much do you....*
> 
> *Even if your house is paid for it's NOT generating you TANGIBLE income. Unless your *
> *home is a business, then it is something entirely different.*
> ...


a.k.a. an asset.


----------



## messy (Dec 20, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Google : ....is ones home an asset...
> 
> Your financial planner, real estate agent, and accountant all call your house an asset. But in reality, an asset is only something that puts money in your pocket. If you have a house that you rent out to tenants, then it’s an asset. If you have a house, paid for or not, that you live in, then it can’t be an asset. Instead of putting money in your pocket, it takes money out of your pocket. That is the simple definition of a liability.
> 
> ...


Wrong. It’s an asset.
Under republicans, stocks are not an asset.
You’re a dummy. I gave you the definition of the word “asset.” Look it up.


----------



## messy (Dec 20, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Google : ....is ones home an asset...
> 
> Your financial planner, real estate agent, and accountant all call your house an asset. But in reality, an asset is only something that puts money in your pocket. If you have a house that you rent out to tenants, then it’s an asset. If you have a house, paid for or not, that you live in, then it can’t be an asset. Instead of putting money in your pocket, it takes money out of your pocket. That is the simple definition of a liability.
> 
> ...


Richdad.com. LOL. 
Btw I am one, but I don’t get my financial info from that website.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Wrong. It’s an asset.
> Under republicans, stocks are not an asset.
> You’re a dummy. I gave you the definition of the word “asset.” Look it up.


You're denying the housing crisis happened.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Richdad.com. LOL.
> Btw I am one, but I don’t get my financial info from that website.


No. You're not.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Wrong. It’s an asset.
> Under republicans, stocks are not an asset.
> You’re a dummy. I gave you the definition of the word “asset.” Look it up.


Maybe you can show us how you calculate your Return on your asset.  Net Income/Total Average Assets


----------



## messy (Dec 20, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No. You're not.


Cubicle Boy. Stop cutting and pasting and live a little.
Buy a house, maybe go in on an investment property...kinda dangerous with our dipshit president, though,  so maybe you’d better keep your $50K life savings under your mattress.


----------



## messy (Dec 20, 2018)

Art


Bruddah IZ said:


> Maybe you can show us how you calculate your Return on your asset.  Net Income/Total Average Assets



 art isn’t an asset either, is it, dummy?

I gave you the definition earlier...so why don’t you and Lion hunker down and take an extension class or something and stop reading those nonsense websites. 
I’ve never seen such stupidity. You must both be broke.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Art
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lol!  Run the numbers Rich Dad.  Net Income/Total Average Assets is the definition.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Art
> 
> 
> 
> art isn’t an asset either, is it, dummy?


Depends.  If it's on display and drawing a Fee you could run the numbers quite easily.  Net Income/Total Average Assets.  Smart guy like you should be able to run those numbers in his head.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 20, 2018)

messy said:


> Richdad.com. LOL.
> Btw I am one, but I don’t get my financial info from that website.



*The house you live in is not an asset.*

The common understanding of an asset is something that we _own. _Even from an accounting perspective a house owned by a business entity would be reported on the asset side of the balance sheet.

Many people believe that the home they live in should be considered an asset. Let me offer a different perspective — that your home is a liability. This is a concept that was popularized by Robert Kiyosaki the author of ‘_Rich Dad, Poor Dad’. _The focus of this concept is on _cashflow._

If we view things from a cashflow perspective, a few things change:

Anything that increases our cash balance would be considered an _ASSET_.

Anything that decreases our cash balance would be considered a _LIABILITY_.

In this alternate way of looking at things, an asset is something that puts money in our pocket and a liability is something that takes money out of our pockets.

Even after purchasing your house you keep paying EMIs, so in that sense its a liability. Even if we are assuming that you have paid off the loan amount, you will still have to incur expenses such as tax levies, insurance and maintenance costs.

_But the value of the house is increasing - what about that?_

Yes, generally the housing prices are on the rise, but that is not always the case. More importantly, you will receive the benefits of that increase only when you sell the property

So does that mean real estate is a bad investment?

*Not necessarily.*

If you rent out the property, and your rental income covers your expenses — *Congratulations! Your house is now an asset!
https://www.quora.com/Is-owning-a-home-an-asset-or-a-liability*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 20, 2018)

*Is Your House An Asset Or A Liability?*
Over the last few years, many Americans found out that owning a big house was more like living the American nightmare, not the American dream. What got most people into trouble was they failed to realize that, on balance, a house is a liability, not an asset.

Now you might be thinking I'm exaggerating to make a point. But I'm not. On balance, a house is something you constantly pump money into, and for the most part, won't get out of it what you've invested in it. That sounds like a liability to me, not an asset. So before you buy your next house, you should ask yourself "what's it going to cost me," as opposed to "how much can I make off of it." That will help you keep your housing costs in line with your income.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/is-your-house-an-asset-or-a-liability/


----------



## espola (Dec 20, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> *The house you live in is not an asset.*
> 
> The common understanding of an asset is something that we _own. _Even from an accounting perspective a house owned by a business entity would be reported on the asset side of the balance sheet.
> 
> ...


If you pay off the mortgage, or inherit a house with no mortgage, is it an asset in your world?


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 20, 2018)

*Why Your House Is Not An Asset*
From a cash flow perspective, it’s actually a liability.

The cruel truth for most people is that their home is in fact not an asset but rather a liability. The point of this article is not to discourage you from buying a home, but rather to make you aware that you could make a serious financial error if you are purchasing your home with the idea that it is an investment.

https://www.entrepreneurmag.co.za/advice/personal-wealth/personal-finance/why-your-house-is-not-an-asset/


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 20, 2018)

espola said:


> If you pay off the mortgage, or inherit a house with no mortgage, is it an asset in your world?


Is it making you money or costing you money?


----------



## nononono (Dec 20, 2018)

Booter said:


> *5 Things You Must Tell Your Grandma About the Ads on FOX News So She Doesn’t Get Scammed*
> 
> 1. DO NOT MAKE THE CASH CALL. EVER! IN FACT, DON’T CALL ANYONE. OR PICK UP THE PHONE. DEVIOUS PEOPLE WANT YOUR MONEY. AND THAT’S THE JOB OF YOUR GRANDKIDS.
> 
> ...




*Not " our " problem if Liberals Grand Mothers have been misguided into watching *
*CNN, MSNBC and other MSM outlets posing as FOX News and let scammers take advantage of them....*
*Conservative Grand Mothers will educate Yours for a nominal fee with a Guarantee.*

*Poor poor tormented Booty.....*


----------



## nononono (Dec 20, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> *The house you live in is not an asset.*
> 
> The common understanding of an asset is something that we _own. _Even from an accounting perspective a house owned by a business entity would be reported on the asset side of the balance sheet.
> 
> ...



*All the above fantastic Knowledge you just imparted on " Messy " will go in one ear and*
*drain out his puka.......*


----------



## Lion Eyes (Dec 20, 2018)

nononono said:


> *All the above fantastic Knowledge you just imparted on " Messy " will go in one ear and*
> *drain out his puka.......*


Pompous adolescents believe they know best, apparently economics 101 was his favorite class.


----------



## espola (Dec 21, 2018)

Lion Eyes said:


> Is it making you money or costing you money?


Neutral, if I'm not paying on a loan and living there.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

The latest wave of selling shows how worried investors have become about the eventual demise of the economic expansion. Those jitters were exacerbated by concerns that the Federal Reserve is making a mistake by continuing to raise interest rates.
"Equity markets are quickly approaching the capitulation phase after having broken below critical support," Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at CFRA Research


----------



## espola (Dec 21, 2018)

Hey, izzy and like-minded idiots.-- Here is some help for you --

https://www.moneymanagement.org/credit-counseling/resources/how-to-create-a-personal-balance-sheet-and-determine-your-net-worth

...start developing your balance sheet by listing all of your assets (financial and tangible assets) with the values.

Cash (in the bank, money market accounts, or CDs)
All investments (mutual funds, college savings accounts, individual securities)
Home value (the resale value of your home)
Automobile value (the resale value of your car)
Personal Property Value (resale value of jewelry, household items, etc)
Other assets
The sum of all of those values is the total value of your assets. Your goal should be to continually increase your assets.

Next, you can look at your liabilities, which should be everything you owe. Here are some common liability categories:

Remaining mortgage balance
Car loans
Student loans
Any other personal loans
Credit card balances
The sum of all of the money you owe is your liabilities. As you start to pay down your debt, your total liabilities will decrease.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Hey, izzy and like-minded idiots.-- Here is some help for you --
> 
> https://www.moneymanagement.org/credit-counseling/resources/how-to-create-a-personal-balance-sheet-and-determine-your-net-worth
> 
> ...


Nah, that’s wrong. Go to richdad.com to learn the real shit. 
Not counting on Iz or Lion to set the world on fire, financially speaking! LOL.


----------



## espola (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Hey, izzy and like-minded idiots.-- Here is some help for you --
> 
> https://www.moneymanagement.org/credit-counseling/resources/how-to-create-a-personal-balance-sheet-and-determine-your-net-worth
> 
> ...


Not only that, if you declare to the IRS or a bankruptcy court that the house you own is not an asset, you will be subject to felony fraud indictment and prosecution.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Not only that, if you declare to the IRS or a bankruptcy court that the house you own is not an asset, you will be subject to felony fraud indictment and prosecution.





messy said:


> Nah, that’s wrong. Go to richdad.com to learn the real shit.
> Not counting on Iz or Lion to set the world on fire, financially speaking! LOL.


Maybe these idiots are underwater on their homes . . . and a few other loans.


----------



## espola (Dec 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Maybe these idiots are underwater on their homes . . . and a few other loans.


I'm sure their hero t can recommend a good bankruptcy lawyer.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Maybe these idiots are underwater on their homes . . . and a few other loans.


I sure hope you people are better at econ than you are at politics.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 21, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I sure hope you people are better at econ than you are at politics.


You care more about politics than the actual governing that is supposed to occur thereafter, therein lies one of your types problems.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Neutral, if I'm not paying on a loan and living there.


No property taxes, no home insurance, no utilities or maintenance cost?  I'd be happy to buy your property at a property tax lien auction.  Congratulations on paying off your loan.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Hey, izzy and like-minded idiots.-- Here is some help for you --
> 
> https://www.moneymanagement.org/credit-counseling/resources/how-to-create-a-personal-balance-sheet-and-determine-your-net-worth
> 
> ...


There's your Net worth argument again!  Lol!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Nah, that’s wrong. Go to richdad.com to learn the real shit.
> Not counting on Iz or Lion to set the world on fire, financially speaking! LOL.


Financial speak below:

Net Income from the home you live in/Total Avg. Assets = Return on Assets

In your case.  The home that you live in.

So far, you've never disclosed your purchase price, the interest rate, and now the net income you receive from the house that you live in.  Even though I've asked several times.  Why is that?  Are the equations to revealing for you people?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Not only that, if you declare to the IRS or a bankruptcy court that the house you own is not an asset, you will be subject to felony fraud indictment and prosecution.


Lets break this up because the IRS and Bankruptcy court are not the same thing.

The IRS only cares about income from your assets.  Since you have no income from your "asset" the IRS is not an issue.  The bankruptcy court only cares about working out issues with your creditors.  But since you paid off your loan, I can't imagine that bankruptcy court would waste tax payer dollars on your debt scenario.  Fraud is very hard to prove as you people know.


----------



## espola (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lets break this up because the IRS and Bankruptcy court are not the same thing.
> 
> The IRS only cares about income from your assets.  Since you have no income from your "asset" the IRS is not an issue.  The bankruptcy court only cares about working out issues with your creditors.  But since you paid off your loan, I can't imagine that bankruptcy court would waste tax payer dollars on your debt scenario.  Fraud is very hard to prove as you people know.


Ignoramus.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 21, 2018)

There was the three-hour presentation which contended that the universe is a giant egg. There was the Manchester musician who posited that the Earth is the shape of a diamond. And another who believes that the moon is a projection.

Welcome to the Flat Earth UK Convention, a raucous departure from scientific norms where people are free to believe literally anything.

“When people ask me what I believe, I can’t say that I believe in anything 100%”, Gary John tells the audience during his opening address. “Apart from that we don’t live on a globe”

https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2018/may/02/the-universe-is-an-egg-and-the-moon-isnt-real-notes-from-a-flat-earth-conference


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Ignoramus.


You people crack me up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> There was the three-hour presentation which contended that the universe is a giant egg. There was the Manchester musician who posited that the Earth is the shape of a diamond. And another who believes that the moon is a projection.
> 
> Welcome to the Flat Earth UK Convention, a raucous departure from scientific norms where people are free to believe literally anything.
> 
> ...


Diamond shaped earth.  No wonder you people think your home is an asset


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

nononono said:


> *All the above fantastic Knowledge you just imparted on " Messy " will go in one ear and*
> *drain out his puka.......*


Elemu puka!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Diamond shaped earth.  No wonder you people think your home is an asset


Those are your people for sure for sure.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Those are your people for sure for sure.


q.e.d.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Financial speak below:
> 
> Net Income from the home you live in/Total Avg. Assets = Return on Assets
> 
> ...


Dumbshit I’m sorry I’m still reeling  from my tax bill yesterday.

More than half my net worth is tied up in non-income-producing residential real estate and yet I had to write a check to the feds alone of about half a mil in income tax. Add my state tax burden and a) feel my pain and b) remind me of how much you know and how little I know.

Now tell me about your real estate, Cubicle Boy.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lets break this up because the IRS and Bankruptcy court are not the same thing.
> 
> The IRS only cares about income from your assets.  Since you have no income from your "asset" the IRS is not an issue.  The bankruptcy court only cares about working out issues with your creditors.  But since you paid off your loan, I can't imagine that bankruptcy court would waste tax payer dollars on your debt scenario.  Fraud is very hard to prove as you people know.


Espola is correct. In bankruptcy or tax proceedings, your home is considered an asset and subject to forfeiture (subject to certain bankruptcy chapter protections...) Liabilities aren’t subject to forfeiture. See how that works, Cubicle Boy?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Espola is correct. In bankruptcy or tax proceedings, your home is considered an asset and subject to forfeiture (subject to certain bankruptcy chapter protections...) *Liabilities aren’t subject to forfeiture. *See how that works, Cubicle Boy?


You're actually exactly right although you probably don't realize why.  Lol!  Your home, a current Liability is not subject to forfeiture because the bank has the first lien on your house via the DOT and promissary note.  If the loan is paid off then you're shit out of luck with your beloved asset (Net Income/Total Average Asset = Return on Assets).   Any questions?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Dumbshit I’m sorry I’m still reeling  from my tax bill yesterday.
> 
> More than half my net worth is tied up in non-income-producing residential real estate and yet I had to write a check to the feds alone of about half a mil in income tax. Add my state tax burden and a) feel my pain and b) remind me of how much you know and how little I know.
> 
> Now tell me about your real estate, Cubicle Boy.


Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Dumbshit I’m sorry I’m still reeling  from my tax bill yesterday.
> 
> More than half my net worth is tied up in non-income-producing residential real estate and yet I had to write a check to the feds alone of about half a mil in income tax. Add my state tax burden and a) feel my pain and b) remind me of how much you know and how little I know.
> 
> Now tell me about your real estate, Cubicle Boy.


Net Income from the home you live in/Total Avg. Assets = Return on Assets

or given your rant above

Net Income from your non-income producing residential RE/Total Avg. Assets = Return on Assets

At this point you should notice that your pain is attributed to the cash flowing away from your account and in to the accounts of the real asset holders.  I know very little.  So don't try to flatter yourself by over complicating what is a simple process.  I'm enjoying your convictions about why you think your RE is an asset and yet the source of so much pain given your inability to fill the Net income part of the Return on Assets equation.

Oh and my real estate is a liability.  Just like yours.  But not so painful.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Dumbshit I’m sorry I’m still reeling  from my tax bill yesterday.
> 
> More than half my net worth is tied up in non-income-producing residential real estate and yet I had to write a check to the feds alone of about half a mil in income tax. Add my state tax burden and a) feel my pain and b) remind me of how much you know and how little I know.
> 
> Now tell me about your real estate, Cubicle Boy.


You sound like Trump.
You know what they say about braggarts.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You sound like Trump.
> You know what they say about braggarts.


An insult to Trump I should think.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!


I wonder if he's gonna post his income tax returns for all to see.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Net Income from the home you live in/Total Avg. Assets = Return on Assets
> 
> or given your rant above
> 
> ...


My real estate has substantial net asset value notwithstanding hefty mortgages.
But that’s only according to banks and accountants and lenders and every single other financial expert. What we now know in  this idiocracy where people like you blab disinformation on websites, is that experts don’t matter.
I’m sorry you aren’t making a nice living but then again, how could you?


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You're actually exactly right although you probably don't realize why.  Lol!  Your home, a current Liability is not subject to forfeiture because the bank has the first lien on your house via the DOT and promissary note.  If the loan is paid off then you're shit out of luck with your beloved asset (Net Income/Total Average Asset = Return on Assets).   Any questions?


Are you lying, or just dumb? My house is subject to forfeiture, so why do you say it isn’t?
You didn’t know that?!


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I wonder if he's gonna post his income tax returns for all to see.


Only if I run for president


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> My real estate has substantial net asset value notwithstanding hefty mortgages.


Exactly.  No net income.  Hence the hefty mortgages.  I'm happy to say you have an asset if you have a rental property that is negative cash flow.  But who knows what's going on with you and your convoluted fairy tale Real Estate holding(s)


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> But that’s only according to banks and accountants and lenders and every single other financial expert.


Are you paying your experts?  If so, they have very little incentive to point out the dumbest rich guy in the room.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> What we now know in  this idiocracy where people like you blab disinformation on websites, is that experts don’t matter.


Experts do matter.  They let you know what your Net income is on assets.  Hopefully.  Go ahead an fill in the formula:  Net Income/Total Average Assets = Return on Assets.  Lets try a value or equity equation. How about Net Income/Average Equity = Return on Equity.  You don't need experts to do simple math.  You do need numbers and that's where you seem to spin off in to the universe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> I’m sorry you aren’t making a nice living but then again, how could you?


I'm sorry your taxes and mortgages are so hefty and painful that a nice living seems elusive.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm sorry your taxes and mortgages are so hefty and painful that a nice living seems elusive.


Learn to keep it simple. You’ll do better than complicating things with your YouTube videos and worries about expenses. 
I have a very nice living. I don’t worry so much about taxes and mortgages and stuff...remember the adage that it takes money to make money.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Experts do matter.  They let you know what your Net income is on assets.  Hopefully.  Go ahead an fill in the formula:  Net Income/Total Average Assets = Return on Assets.  Lets try a value or equity equation. How about Net Income/Average Equity = Return on Equity.  You don't need experts to do simple math.  You do need numbers and that's where you seem to spin off in to the universe.


Too complicated. Hire yourself a good accountant and mortgage broker and let them worry about that stuff. Invest and buy a house. You won’t regret it. But try to keep it simple. Some real estate, stocks (although Trump might destroy that asset class), art, cash, bonds. Sit back and let them average about 7% or so per year. Don’t worry so much about expenses. Good value costs money.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Are you paying your experts?  If so, they have very little incentive to point out the dumbest rich guy in the room.


Don’t worry so much. Pay the experts...they know so much more than you. Heck 20 years ago I even made a down payment on a 7-figure house by borrowing against my stocks and the market went up more than my interest on the leverage loan! Never could have done that without the advice of my friend the asset manager. And his point is well worth it. Maybe take a class. Everything you write is so wrongheaded and antithetical to ever making your money grow and investing smartly.


----------



## espola (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Don’t worry so much. Pay the experts...they know so much more than you. Heck 20 years ago I even made a down payment on a 7-figure house by borrowing against my stocks and the market went up more than my interest on the leverage loan! Never could have done that without the advice of my friend the asset manager. And his point is well worth it. Maybe take a class. Everything you write is so wrongheaded and antithetical to ever making your money grow and investing smartly.


Nothing new there.  Izzy is confused by things like percentage signs and decimal points.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Learn to keep it simple. You’ll do better than complicating things with your YouTube videos and worries about expenses.
> I have a very nice living. I don’t worry so much about taxes and mortgages and stuff...remember the adage that it takes money to make money.


Right.  Net Income/Total Average assets = Return on Assets.  That way you know you’re actually making money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Too complicated. Hire yourself a good accountant and mortgage broker and let them worry about that stuff. Invest and buy a house. You won’t regret it. But try to keep it simple. Some real estate, stocks (although Trump might destroy that asset class), art, cash, bonds. Sit back and let them average about 7% or so per year. Don’t worry so much about expenses. Good value costs money.


Exactly.  Net Income/ Average Total Assets lets you know when you’re getting good value for your money.  You’ve shown nothing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Nothing new there.  Izzy is confused by things like percentage signs and decimal points.


The negotiator with options.  Which did you choose?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Don’t worry so much. Pay the experts...they know so much more than you.


They know who is paying them.  The rest is easy.  But I can't knock you for employing the Austrian economic concept of the division of labor.  Yo don't know so you pay.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Heck 20 years ago I even made a down payment on a 7-figure house by borrowing against my stocks and the market went up more than my interest on the leverage loan! Never could have done that without the advice of my friend the asset manager. And his point is well worth it. Maybe take a class.


So your asset manager made the market go up by more than your interest on the leverage loan.  What did he do for you?  Please answer by filling in the following:  Net income/Total Average Assets = Return on Assets.  You know?  Some cattle to go with that big hat of yours.  Further, you've gone back to No purchase price, no interest rate, no loan amount......no credibility.  BTW I took the class that you should have taken.  Your experts love people like you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Everything you write is so wrongheaded and antithetical to ever making your money grow and investing smartly.


Just remember that Net Income/Total Average Assets = Return on Assets.  Your equity relies on asset net income too so you can do Net Income/Total Average Equity= Return on Equity.  Just plug in the numbers.  But without a real asset you can't calculate what you believe is going on.  See a pattern here?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Nothing new there.  Izzy is confused by things like percentage signs and decimal points.


Especially when I watch you guys calculate Return on Assets or Equity.


----------



## messy (Dec 21, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Exactly.  Net Income/ Average Total Assets lets you know when you’re getting good value for your money.  You’ve shown nothing.


Don’t take it out of a book, Cubicle Man. Live it. Take risks. Go with your gut. In real estate, buy location. That’s how you make your money grow. It sounds from all your equations that you have no money and you’re underwater on your house. Sucks for you.


----------



## nononono (Dec 21, 2018)

espola said:


> Neutral, if I'm not paying on a loan and living there.


*Neutral is a LIE.

You pay property taxes.
You pay utilities.
You pay upkeep.
You pay Insurance.

You are not very bright.*


----------



## nononono (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Don’t take it out of a book, Cubicle Man. Live it. Take risks. Go with your gut. In real estate, buy location. That’s how you make your money grow. It sounds from all your equations that you have no money and you’re underwater on your house. Sucks for you.


*Projection is a " Messy " Financial asset...........*


----------



## nononono (Dec 21, 2018)

messy said:


> Learn to keep it simple. You’ll do better than complicating things with your YouTube videos and worries about expenses.
> I have a very nice living. I don’t worry so much about taxes and mortgages and stuff...remember the adage that it takes money to make money.


*Do you suck on your thumb during typing or just in between sessions.........*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 22, 2018)

messy said:


> Don’t take it out of a book, Cubicle Man. Live it. Take risks. Go with your gut. In real estate, buy location. That’s how you make your money grow. It sounds from all your equations that you have no money and you’re underwater on your house. Sucks for you.


Nah.  Iʻm a negotiator.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 22, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Do you suck on your thumb during typing or just in between sessions.........*


No wonder the ROA and ROE equations are difficult.


----------



## messy (Dec 22, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nah.  Iʻm a negotiator.


I’m sure not. You don’t know how to make a deal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 22, 2018)

messy said:


> I’m sure not. You don’t know how to make a deal.


Cake


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 24, 2018)

*Elizabeth Warren Introduces Legislation to Create a Government-Run Pharmaceutical Manufacturer*
Warren said adding the agency would increase competition.
*Thursday, December 20, 2018
*
Maybe an experimental policy for Venezuela?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 25, 2018)

DECEMBER 25, 2018
*China cuts tariffs on 700 more items*
By Thomas Lifson
In its third round of tariff cuts this year, China announced that 700 more goods will have tariffs cut. Bloomberg reports:

China announced another round of tariff cuts, lowering import taxes on more than 700 goods from Jan. 1 as part of its efforts to open up the economy and lower costs for domestic consumers.

No doubt, that’s what they say. And it is true that domestic consumers will benefit from lower cost access to foreign goods. But, is President Trump’s pressure on China not a factor? I am sorry, but I can’t accept the notion that Trump is irrelevant to the decision.







Part of the Port of Shanghai

Note that thee rate cuts are temporary and can be changed at any time. To me, this is further evidence that they are a bargaining chip in the confrontation over trade that President Trump started.

The underlying reality – that President Trump recognized unlike his predecessors – is that because of its trade surplus, China has far more to lose than the US from a trade war. The comparatively simple reality should have fortified the US in taking a harder line toward China, and yet it never did until Trump.  Instead, the US has allowed itself to de-industrialize on a massive scale.

 There’s a new sheriff in town the last 2 years. A lot of people were doing very well under the old sheriffs, even though America as a whole did not.

Something to think about over the next 2 years.


----------



## tenacious (Dec 27, 2018)

I would have put this one in the "ponderable" thread... but I think all know why, so there isn't much to ponder.  




> *Why are Trump and Congress still getting paid amid a partial government shutdown?*
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/12/27/government-shutdown-congressional-presidential-pay/2421657002/
> 
> WASHINGTON – As the federal government faces a partial shutdown, critics have noted that President Donald Trump and the lawmakers on Capitol Hill who helped get the country in this predicament are still collecting paychecks.
> ...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 27, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I would have put this one in the "ponderable" thread... but I think all know why, so there isn't much to ponder.


meesy says the three branches of government are on your teat.  You can ponder if you like.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 28, 2018)

*A stunner: National debt interest will soon exceed national defense spending*
Andrew Malcolm Dec 27, 2018 2:31 PM





A billion here, a billion there, pretty soon big money


----------



## nononono (Dec 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> I would have put this one in the "ponderable" thread... but I think all know why, so there isn't much to ponder.


*Hey ...Dumb as a Rock, ponder this.*
*The President doesn't get paid....Now what.*
*The Congress should NOT be paid during these shutdowns....Not a penny !*


----------



## tenacious (Dec 28, 2018)

nononono said:


> *Hey ...Dumb as a Rock, ponder this.*
> *The President doesn't get paid....Now what.*
> *The Congress should NOT be paid during these shutdowns....Not a penny !*


Good grief you're stupid.  No wonder you vote for Trump.


----------



## nononono (Dec 28, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Good grief you're stupid.  No wonder you vote for Trump.


*Au Contraire .....you have exposed your lack there of with the above.....*


----------



## tenacious (Dec 30, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *A stunner: National debt interest will soon exceed national defense spending*
> Andrew Malcolm Dec 27, 2018 2:31 PM
> 
> 
> ...


Think this might by why Republican's lost the House, and barely hung onto the Senate in a year that heavily favored Republican candidates?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 30, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Think this might by why Republican's lost the House, and barely hung onto the Senate in a year that heavily favored Republican candidates?


Obama built that.
I must be wrong, but I thought we gained seats in the Senate.


----------



## nononono (Dec 30, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Obama built that.
> I must be wrong, but I thought we gained seats in the Senate.


*We did.....*
*It should be listed as :*
* 52 Republicans *
*46 Democrats*
*2 Independants*

*But the Democrats STOLE a seat in Arizona, Kyrsten Sinema.*
*The first Senator to admit to munching Carpet and Hot Dogs among other*
*Progressive/Communist disgusting habits......*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 30, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Think this might by why Republican's lost the House, and barely hung onto the Senate in a year that heavily favored Republican candidates?


Male democrats had to step aside and let thier women get the job done.


----------



## messy (Dec 30, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Male democrats had to step aside and let thier women get the job done.


What an irrelevant and stupid thing to say.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

messy said:


> What an irrelevant and stupid thing to say.


Mortgage paid?


----------



## tenacious (Dec 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Mortgage paid?


Bub's I'm really trying to follow your POV on the whole housing/mortgage debate/non-debate you are having with messy.  The thing is while I understand messy's perspective I'm really struggling to understand what your side of the debate/non-debate is?  It's like just a bunch of cut and pastes from different economists making different arguments and simplistic one-liners all mashed together.  

Anyway that in your own words, you could write up a quick paragraph or two explaining what your personal perspective is?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Bub's I'm really trying to follow your POV on the whole housing/mortgage debate/non-debate you are having with messy.  The thing is while I understand messy's perspective I'm really struggling to understand what your side of the debate/non-debate is?  It's like just a bunch of cut and pastes from different economists making different arguments and simplistic one-liners all mashed together.
> 
> Anyway that in your own words, you could write up a quick paragraph or two explaining what your personal perspective is?


Two paragraphs?  Sure, first of all we weren’t talking economics.  Messy thinks we were.  So much for really trying to follow along.

My personal perspective is that if you say you were really trying to follow along, make sure you’re doing just that.  You weren’t.  Whew! 2 paragraphs.


----------



## tenacious (Dec 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Two paragraphs?  Sure, first of all we weren’t talking economics.  Messy thinks we were.  So much for really trying to follow along.
> 
> My personal perspective is that if you say you were really trying to follow along, make sure you’re doing just that.  You weren’t.  Whew! 2 paragraphs.


So you can't even really sum up your argument?  lol


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> So you can't even really sum up your argument?  lol


I thought you said you were following along?


----------



## tenacious (Dec 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I thought you said you were following along?


No I said I was "trying" to follow along. 
If I was following, there would have to be an actually path of cohesive economic theory for one to follow...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> No I said I was "trying" to follow along.
> If I was following, there would have to be an actually path of cohesive economic theory for one to follow...


Right.  Except we weren't talking about economics.


----------



## tenacious (Dec 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Right.  Except we weren't talking about economics.


Yes... well having tried to follow you arguments, that would be your perspective I suppose.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> Yes... well having tried to follow you arguments, that would be your perspective I suppose.


Not very tenacious.  Maybe you can enroll at Fries U to get some perspective about what we were talking about.


----------



## messy (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> So you can't even really sum up your argument?  lol


His “argument” was summed up by Sheriff Joe. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about but the game is to go nowhere and keep making stuff up, so the other side (right now, you) gets riled up while he laughs.
Those of us who follow along the debate or argument, such as you, me and Fries, are foils for his game. That’s why he can’t answer the simple questions...they paint him in a corner and end the game! He doesn’t care about being wrong or misinformed about most things, so long as he can play with normal people like us.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

messy said:


> His “argument” was summed up by Sheriff Joe. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about but the game is to go nowhere and keep making stuff up, so the other side (right now, you) gets riled up while he laughs.
> Those of us who follow along the debate or argument, such as you, me and Fries, are foils for his game. That’s why he can’t answer the simple questions...they paint him in a corner and end the game! He doesn’t care about being wrong or misinformed about most things, so long as he can play with normal people like us.


KISS.  You paid your mortgage and that's all that matters.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

*Imagine if We Paid for Food like We Do Healthcare*
Hint: it would be a dystopian disaster.
*Friday, December 28, 2018
*
Imagine if you purchased food like most Americans obtained healthcare.

No, I really want you to try to envision it…

Struggling?

I am a family physician whose father worked in a grocery store, and I enjoy eating at Mexican restaurants immensely, so maybe I can help.

An 'Affordable' Food Plan
_[creepy melodramatic music]_

You enter the grocery store parking lot at 4:15 pm, having taken off work early because this particular store closes at 5:00 pm. This FoodMart wasn’t your personal preference based on quality, service, amenities, or price. You choose it, like all of your previous food choices, because it was included in your new food management plan’s network.

Thankfully, your new Green Cross Green Shield (GCGS) Bronze-Select food plan is a benefit provided by your new employer. There is some payroll deduction stuff that you don’t quite understand yet. Most of the plan’s $680 monthly premium is hidden from you and drastically reduces your wages. Still, you are happy that your food plan costs only (as far as you know) $123 per paycheck.

Despite not being particularly pleased with any of your previous food plans, you always try to take full advantage of the tax-preferred option of buying groceries and eating out as the plan allows. After all, you and most Americans haven’t known a different way of eating in your lifetimes. This is how you have purchased food since your parents’ employer’s food plan stopped covering you at age 26.

FoodMart’s entrance is not easy to find, but you finally make your way into the store. You are first greeted by a few women sitting behind a glass-enclosed desk. By greeted, I mean they ask you for your photo id and food plan card and hand you a clipboard with a stack of forms to complete. The lobby is crowded, but you manage to find a seat amid the sea of impatient shoppers. 

You have completed these types of forms dozens of times previously but dutifully do so again. (You still prefer 2 percent milk, don’t like more than four vegetables, and your peanut allergy is unchanged.) Forms completed, you check back in with the receptionist. After 20 minutes of waiting, she assigns you a cart, and you start to shop with your list in hand.

Worried that you won’t be able to afford everything on your list, you cross off any special items and opt only for the basics. As you scurry up and down the aisles, you see there are no prices listed on anything, nor labels telling you what is a Bronze-Select item. You suspect the delicatessen with your favorite cheeses is off-limits because of the large “included with UnitedFood Platinum-Plus” sign above it that has no mention of Green Cross Green Shield. Remembering that eggs are included as a “free” GCGS wellness benefit, you get three dozen of those—even though you don’t really need any right now.

During check-out, the cashier rings up the items and asks you for a $30 copay. You are given a six-page receipt with indecipherable codes and then asked to sign a few other forms because some of your items will be billed to you later.

Although vaguely suspicious that you’ve been taken advantage of somehow, you are happy that you got a big discount on your $18 box of Tasty Flakes cereal and have now reached your deductible.

https://fee.org/articles/imagine-if-we-paid-for-food-like-we-do-healthcare/?utm_medium=push_notification&utm_source=rss&utm_campaign=rss_pushcrew&notification_source=pushcrew_rss


----------



## messy (Dec 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Imagine if We Paid for Food like We Do Healthcare*
> Hint: it would be a dystopian disaster.
> *Friday, December 28, 2018
> *
> ...


This is great! I love the premise. So, like, if we had insurance for food, right? Because once in a while we might have to spend like $150,000 on dinner, so we would need to insure against that possibility? And it might work bad?
Such a great analogy...who came up with that?!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

messy said:


> This is great! I love the premise. So, like, if we had insurance for food, right? Because once in a while we might have to spend like $150,000 on dinner, so we would need to insure against that possibility? And it might work bad?
> Such a great analogy...who came up with that?!


The same guy that came up with reading and comprehension.


----------



## tenacious (Dec 31, 2018)

messy said:


> His “argument” was summed up by Sheriff Joe. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about but the game is to go nowhere and keep making stuff up, so the other side (right now, you) gets riled up while he laughs.
> Those of us who follow along the debate or argument, such as you, me and Fries, are foils for his game. That’s why he can’t answer the simple questions...they paint him in a corner and end the game! He doesn’t care about being wrong or misinformed about most things, so long as he can play with normal people like us.


"Stupid is as stupid does"...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 31, 2018)

messy said:


> His “argument” was summed up by Sheriff Joe. He doesn’t know what he’s talking about but the game is to go nowhere and keep making stuff up, so the other side (right now, you) gets riled up while he laughs.
> Those of us who follow along the debate or argument, such as you, me and Fries, are foils for his game. That’s why he can’t answer the simple questions...they paint him in a corner and end the game! He doesn’t care about being wrong or misinformed about most things, so long as he can play with normal people like us.


I said all that?
He still has you people beat.
Hanappa!


----------



## nononono (Dec 31, 2018)

messy said:


> What an irrelevant and stupid thing to say.


*Your Pal Tiny " T " is a ripe candidate to enlist as a new recruit for your up coming Winter Real Estate *
*classes you'll be struggling in......as is exampled below.*



tenacious said:


> Bub's I'm really trying to follow your POV on the whole housing/mortgage debate/non-debate you are having with messy.  The thing is while I understand messy's perspective I'm really struggling to understand what your side of the debate/non-debate is?  It's like just a bunch of cut and pastes from different economists making different arguments and simplistic one-liners all mashed together.
> 
> Anyway that in your own words, you could write up a quick paragraph or two explaining what your personal perspective is?



*If you cannot fathom the " Fantasy " Real Estate fabrications conjured up by " Messy " Financial.....*
*It should be suggested that you enroll in the up coming Winter Real Estate Financial Fleecing he*
*is going to subject himself too....then you shall both be on the same page and we don't have to*
*witness two candidates vie for the lead in a remake of the Movie Idiocracy.*


*




*


----------



## nononono (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> No I said I was "trying" to follow along.
> If I was following, there would have to be an actually path of cohesive economic theory for one to follow...



*Oh my.....Tiny " T ".....I show you the " Path " and you poop on it.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I said all that?
> He still has you people beat.
> Hanappa!


They actually beat themselves.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 31, 2018)

tenacious said:


> "Stupid is as stupid does"...


But if you’re smart you pay your mortgage.  You guys are at least that smart.


----------



## Multi Sport (Dec 31, 2018)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But if you’re smart you pay your mortgage.  You guys are at least that smart.


Smart? I stopped paying attention to Messy when I read his post that you always make money in real estate and it was pointed out all the time periods that people lost money in real estate. Then saw him walk it back...first it was just one time period, then two then it turned into usually make money or something like that. Dude is too busy trying to prove a point that he is creating his own facts...


----------



## messy (Dec 31, 2018)

Multi Sport said:


> Smart? I stopped paying attention to Messy when I read his post that you always make money in real estate and it was pointed out all the time periods that people lost money in real estate. Then saw him walk it back...first it was just one time period, then two then it turned into usually make money or something like that. Dude is too busy trying to prove a point that he is creating his own facts...


Listen. You’re probably an idiot if you don’t make money in real estate in Southern California. I don’t need to walk that back. But there’s always the possibility that you losers bought high and ran into tough times and had to sell low...Trump voters are the uneducated whites left behind amidst all the prosperity...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Listen. You’re probably an idiot if you don’t make money in real estate in Southern California. I don’t need to walk that back. But there’s always the possibility that you losers bought high and ran into tough times and had to sell low...Trump voters are the uneducated whites left behind amidst all the prosperity...


dizzy is the one who claimed he couldn't make a dime investing during the Obama years . . . must still be underwater.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Listen. You’re probably an idiot if you don’t make money in real estate in Southern California. I don’t need to walk that back. But there’s always the possibility that you losers bought high and ran into tough times and had to sell low...Trump voters are the uneducated whites left behind amidst all the prosperity...


Tell us about Hillary voters please.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> dizzy is the one who claimed he couldn't make a dime investing during the Obama years . . . must still be underwater.


You sure have a good memory when you want it.


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Tell us about Hillary voters please.


Massive majority in our state.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Massive majority in our state.


Very true, but I'm talking about legal voters.


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Very true, but I'm talking about legal voters.


Justice system weeds out political crime.
Look at Mueller, look at North Carolina.
We haven’t seen that here.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Justice system weeds out political crime.
> Look at Mueller, look at North Carolina.
> We haven’t seen that here.


Did you see comey's exoneration of your candidate?


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Did you see comey's exoneration of your candidate?


Huh? 
As I said, people do the crime, they do the time.
Look at Watergate, look at North Carolina right now. Flynn, Manafort. Don’t overthink it, pal.
A report will come out...maybe it will focus on the losing candidate, but that would be weird...although I’ve noticed a lot of weirdos focusing on the losing candidate... just nobody who’s responsible for bringing folks to justice.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Huh?
> As I said, people do the crime, they do the time.
> Look at Watergate, look at North Carolina right now. Flynn, Manafort. Don’t overthink it, pal.
> A report will come out...maybe it will focus on the losing candidate, but that would be weird...although I’ve noticed a lot of weirdos focusing on the losing candidate... just nobody who’s responsible for bringing folks to justice.


Sooo.......
I never realized it was the duty of the FBI to decide if someone was to be indicted, unless of course, you know.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Massive majority in our state.


You are in good company,

Jesse Jackson: Hillary Won by 3 Million Votes and Lost --- There’s Something Wrong with That
29 mins ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.breitbart.com/video/2019/01/01/jesse-jackson-hillary-won-by-3-million-votes-and-lost-theres-something-wrong-with-that/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjW6LL_j83fAhXbIDQIHaKMA1kQqUMwAnoECAwQDQ&usg=AOvVaw0yoVhBCjrkJyJ_71xgjN0x&ampcf=1


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Sooo.......
> I never realized it was the duty of the FBI to decide if someone was to be indicted, unless of course, you know.


You don’t like our justice system? What’s the matter with you?


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are in good company,
> 
> Jesse Jackson: Hillary Won by 3 Million Votes and Lost --- There’s Something Wrong with That
> 29 mins ago
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.breitbart.com/video/2019/01/01/jesse-jackson-hillary-won-by-3-million-votes-and-lost-theres-something-wrong-with-that/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjW6LL_j83fAhXbIDQIHaKMA1kQqUMwAnoECAwQDQ&usg=AOvVaw0yoVhBCjrkJyJ_71xgjN0x&ampcf=1


We all know how the electoral college works.
You want to get rid of our law enforcement agencies and justice system and I want to get rid of the electoral college. Sounds about right.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> You don’t like our justice system? What’s the matter with you?


Oh I don't know.

California authorities arrest, identify suspect and 7 others in officer's shooting death
3 days ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/12/28/us/suspect-arrest-california-police-officer-killed/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwiLkOXvo83fAhXK0J8KHV1LAMUQqUMwA3oECAkQEA&usg=AOvVaw3gx_RNrDHZeOax5q6IiN4h&ampcf=1


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> We all know how the electoral college works.
> You want to get rid of our law enforcement agencies and justice system and I want to get rid of the electoral college. Sounds about right.


You are putting words in my mouth.
Let's just get rid of anyone who ever worked for Obama and the Clinton's, that should take care of it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Listen. You’re probably an idiot if you don’t make money in real estate in Southern California. I don’t need to walk that back. But there’s always the possibility that you losers bought high and ran into tough times and had to sell low...Trump voters are the uneducated whites left behind amidst all the prosperity...


It was the Russians genius.  Not the Trump voters.  You know, the whole Mueller thing.  Collusion.   Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> dizzy is the one who claimed he couldn't make a dime investing during the Obama years . . . must still be underwater.


How’s that .02 cent annual raise coming along?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Tell us about Hillary voters please.


Smartest dumb guys in the room.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Huh?
> As I said, people do the crime, they do the time.
> Look at Watergate, look at North Carolina right now. Flynn, Manafort. Don’t overthink it, pal.
> A report will come out...maybe it will focus on the losing candidate, but that would be weird...although I’ve noticed a lot of weirdos focusing on the losing candidate... just nobody who’s responsible for bringing folks to justice.


Everything BUT the number of votes the Russians stole.


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It was the Russians genius.  Not the Trump voters.  You know, the whole Mueller thing.  Collusion.   Lol!


We don’t know yet, he hasn’t issued the report.
Just nailing folks for crimes related to lying about their Russian contacts so far.
I imagine Trump’s tax return may come up again soon.


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Everything BUT the number of votes the Russians stole.


Every what thing? Do the crime, do the time.
‘Murican justice. Best in the world.
Just like so cal real estate.


----------



## nononono (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Listen. You’re probably an idiot if you don’t make money in real estate in Southern California. I don’t need to walk that back. But there’s always the possibility that you losers bought high and ran into tough times and had to sell low...Trump voters are the uneducated whites left behind amidst all the prosperity...



*You should get over to Staples and pick up " Old School " pencil and paper, work out *
*some basic math just so YOU can last the first five days of class.....right now you're*
*headin out to high seas with a rubber dingy that leaks as fast as you fill it up with Lies.*

*Oh and " Messy " yur now a ball lickin racist ta boot....*


----------



## nononono (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Massive majority in our state.


*Crooked Votes...*
*Harvested Votes...*
*Motor Voter " Votes ".....*
*Stolen Military Votes.....*

*Yur full of Yur " Donkeys Poop.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> We don’t know yet, he hasn’t issued the report.
> Just nailing folks for crimes related to lying about their Russian contacts so far.
> I imagine Trump’s tax return may come up again soon.


Mortgage Interest deductions?  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Every what thing? Do the crime, do the time.
> ‘Murican justice. Best in the world.
> Just like so cal real estate.


Dragnet


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Dragnet


Nope. “Book him, Danno.”


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Mortgage Interest deductions?  Lol!


Russian lenders.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Nope. “Book him, Danno.”


Hukilau!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Russian lenders.


Real Asset holders


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Real Asset holders


They are if they own POTUS.


----------



## nononono (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> They are if they own POTUS.



*Look who owns who......*

*Cough up some MORE Democratic Taxes you dipshit.*
*Wait til the " New " boss, same as the " OLD " boss starts *
*raising the taxes here in California to fill up the MASSIVE*
*Pension hole that BOTH have sucked up and promised to *
*TRY and fill....Who owns Who uninformed " Messy " Financial !*

*The Unions OWNED Gov Jerry Brown ( YES OWNED, LOCK STOCK and BARREL ! )*
*And*
*The Unions OWN Gov Gavin Newsom ( YES THEY OWN HIM, LOCK STOCK and BARREL ! ) *


*Who Owns President Trump ?*

*Oh Puhlease tell the Forum......It ain't Russia, so WHO IS IT ?*


----------



## nononono (Jan 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Russian lenders.



*Really now....do YOU have Proof.*
*You don't think the previous administration didn't vet DJT when they*
*had TOTAL Control of the IRS......Think about that !*
*This whole thing is a distraction because THEY lost !*
*And they KNEW they were going to loose, why else would they have *
*instituted a Criminal operation like we have witnessed since Jan 20, 2017.....*
*The Coup is right there in front of you and every other American, people like*
*YOU either are ignoring it or are COMPLICIT with it....Nothing else.*


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Really now....do YOU have Proof.*
> *You don't think the previous administration didn't vet DJT when they*
> *had TOTAL Control of the IRS......Think about that !*
> *This whole thing is a distraction because THEY lost !*
> ...


“The whole system is rigged”—-said the winner Donald Trump


----------



## messy (Jan 1, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Really now....do YOU have Proof.*
> *You don't think the previous administration didn't vet DJT when they*
> *had TOTAL Control of the IRS......Think about that !*
> *This whole thing is a distraction because THEY lost !*
> ...


Let’s see the tax returns.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> “The whole system is rigged”—-said the winner Donald Trump


Hence the Dragnet.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Hence the Dragnet.


So the dragnet is to find the people rigging the system? Then why does Trump always call it a hoax and a witch hunt if he’s the one who told everyone the system is rigged?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> So the dragnet is to find the people rigging the system? Then why does Trump always call it a hoax and a witch hunt if he’s the one who told everyone the system is rigged?


You mean the riggers of the dragnet are trying to catch themselves?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

*I, Interest Rate*
Interest rates simply reflect the truth; and it is a very sad day when telling the truth can foster such ill will.
*Monday, December 31, 2018

https://fee.org/articles/i-interest-rate/*

To expand banks’ ability to engage in this monetary inflation, the government created a central bank. At first, this central bank merely backstopped the rest of the banks under the same gold standard. But eventually, the exchangeability for gold was eliminated, making the name “Federal Reserve Note” an absurdity because a piece of paper that cannot be exchanged for anything specific is no longer a “note” in financial terms. But it solved the problem of loaning the same dollar out to a borrower while making it simultaneously available for withdrawal to the depositor. Since neither could exchange it for any specific tangible item, both borrower and depositor could merrily go on pretending this arrangement was viable.

They say ignorance is bliss, although you all participate in this fraud knowingly today. So, it is more a case of believing what you want to believe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

As you may have surmised, I am the rate of interest, the price difference between present goods and future goods. Now, many economists mistakenly identify me merely as the price of borrowing money over time, but that is only one of the many messages I carry. I also represent the price spread in the various stages of production, where capitalists purchase present goods in the form of factors of production in the hopes of selling what is produced by those factors for a higher price than what they spent. I am also this difference in price.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

*Because this price of borrowing is above zero, there are some who consider my existence alone as evil.* They say I’m a party to a crime they call “usury,” which is a very strange concept. *When everyone is acting honestly, money is a scarce commodity, so any loan by Person A to Person B requires a sacrifice on the part of A. Person A must forego consumption in the present in order to lend to B.*

It is no different than if A were saving for a new car or some other expensive item for himself. He must forego eating out as much, or buying new clothes, or going on vacation this year in order to put aside money to buy the expensive item next year.

*By loaning money to B, A is allowing B to skip this sacrifice and purchase the expensive item now.* It seems a very peculiar notion that A should forego spending his own money on himself only to let B use it for free when needed. How did this obligation to serve B free of charge come about? *Aren’t all men created equal?*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

*Why California’s 1% Dip in Homelessness Is No "Success Story"*
If my friends on the left see this as an example of success, I’d hate to see their definition of failure.
*Monday, December 31, 2018
*
https://fee.org/articles/why-california-s-1-dip-in-homelessness-is-no-success-story/

And they got their wish. Check out the ostensibly good news in a story from the _San Fransisco Chronicle_:

*Investing billions of dollars in affordable housing and homeless programs in recent years has apparently put the brakes on what had been a surge in California’s homeless population, causing it to dip by 1 percent this year, a federal report released Monday showed.* …The report put California’s homeless population this year at 129,972,* a drop of 1,560 in the number of people on the streets in 2017. *…“I think San Francisco has shown that when targeted investments are made, we see reductions in homelessness here,” [Jeff Kositsky, head of the city’s Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing], said. He pointed out that family, youth and chronic veterans homelessness dropped in the city’s last full count — although the number of chronically homeless people went up.

Maybe I’m not in the Christmas spirit, but I don’t see this as a feel-good story.

*Are we really supposed to celebrate the fact that the government spent “billions of dollars,” and the net effect is that the homeless population dropped just 1 percent?*

*The story doesn’t contain enough details for precise measurements, but even if we assume “billions” is merely $2 billion, then it cost taxpayers close to $1.3 million to get one person off the street. For that amount of money, taxpayers could have bought each of them a mansion!
*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Why California’s 1% Dip in Homelessness Is No "Success Story"*
> If my friends on the left see this as an example of success, I’d hate to see their definition of failure.
> *Monday, December 31, 2018
> *
> ...


I really don't count on the government to give us numbers to 1% accuracy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)




----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Listen. You’re probably an idiot if you don’t make money in real estate in Southern California. I don’t need to walk that back. But there’s always the possibility that you losers bought high and ran into tough times and had to sell low...Trump voters are the uneducated whites left behind amidst all the prosperity...


Hey loser boy... my family has probably made more money in Real Estate last year then you will in your entire life. If you think buying and selling single family homes is gonna make you rich then you are the biggest fool on the forum. Just because someone dupped you with his infomercial at 2 AM doesn't make you smart it makes you naive. 

Lots, and I do mean lots, of people lose money in Real Estate every day. The difference is the people who lose hundreds of thousands have hundreds of millions to fall back on. You sound like you have two investment properties and want to act as though your Donald Trump. Stick to soccer talk Mr. Fake.


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> “The whole system is rigged”—-said the winner Donald Trump


*Excellent Quote......from " Our " POTUS !*


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> So the dragnet is to find the people rigging the system? Then why does Trump always call it a hoax and a witch hunt if he’s the one who told everyone the system is rigged?



*Back to Junior College you go, add a class on Logic will ya.....*


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Hey loser boy... my family has probably made more money in Real Estate last year then you will in your entire life. If you think buying and selling single family homes is gonna make you rich then you are the biggest fool on the forum. Just because someone dupped you with his infomercial at 2 AM doesn't make you smart it makes you naive.
> 
> Lots, and I do mean lots, of people lose money in Real Estate every day. The difference is the people who lose hundreds of thousands have hundreds of millions to fall back on. You sound like you have two investment properties and want to act as though your Donald Trump. Stick to soccer talk Mr. Fake.



*" Messy " Financial should post a location for a Gift drop off....*
*I would send him a couple of " Deep Wound " emergency medical Kits *
*in surplus.....he's gunna need something for all the self inflicted *
*Deep tissue injuries he's acquiring.*


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Hey loser boy... my family has probably made more money in Real Estate last year then you will in your entire life. If you think buying and selling single family homes is gonna make you rich then you are the biggest fool on the forum. Just because someone dupped you with his infomercial at 2 AM doesn't make you smart it makes you naive.
> 
> Lots, and I do mean lots, of people lose money in Real Estate every day. The difference is the people who lose hundreds of thousands have hundreds of millions to fall back on. You sound like you have two investment properties and want to act as though your Donald Trump. Stick to soccer talk Mr. Fake.


I don't know if once is enough.  Maybe tell him a couple more times how great the rest of your family is and how rich you think they are.  I'm sure that will convince him.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Hey loser boy... my family has probably made more money in Real Estate last year then you will in your entire life. If you think buying and selling single family homes is gonna make you rich then you are the biggest fool on the forum. Just because someone dupped you with his infomercial at 2 AM doesn't make you smart it makes you naive.
> 
> Lots, and I do mean lots, of people lose money in Real Estate every day. The difference is the people who lose hundreds of thousands have hundreds of millions to fall back on. You sound like you have two investment properties and want to act as though your Donald Trump. Stick to soccer talk Mr. Fake.


Your “family?” Is that who supports you? 
There’s no way a dummy like you has a job.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

It's true though...



> *How Trump Got Bad at Twitter*
> https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2019/01/01/how-trump-got-bad-at-twitter-223572
> 
> The late-December tweet from @realDonaldTrump was brief and absurd: “Farm Bill signing in 15 minutes! #Emmys #TBT.” It was accompanied by a clip from the 2005 Emmy awards in which the future leader of the free world, wearing a straw hat and overalls, sings the “Green Acres” theme song with actress Megan Mullally. The internet responded with predictable shock, tinged with mockery. But there was also a hint of excitement, maybe even relief: Had Trump gotten his Twitter mojo back?
> ...


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Your “family?” Is that who supports you?
> There’s no way a dummy like you has a job.


*So posts the political puppet.*


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> It's true though...


*Yes Tiny " T " it's true about you.*


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Your “family?” Is that who supports you?
> There’s no way a dummy like you has a job.


Well you're right about one thing. I don't have a job. Haven't had one since I was 20.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Well you're right about one thing. I don't have a job. Haven't had one since I was 20.


Nobody is surprised.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I don't know if once is enough.  Maybe tell him a couple more times how great the rest of your family is and how rich you think they are.  I'm sure that will convince him.


I think you and Messy should go in business together. I mean, he keeps posting about all his real estate holdings. Or maybe he can give you a personal class on how to flip homes? What? You haven't been kerping up with his post? What's wrong Tenacious D? Kevin Spacey not around to be your life coach?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Nobody is surprised.


Yep.. nobody is surprised by your stupidity.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> I don't know if once is enough.  Maybe tell him a couple more times how great the rest of your family is and how rich you think they are.  I'm sure that will convince him.


I know you're jealous and all but try not to be such a hater...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I think you and Messy should go in business together. I mean, he keeps posting about all his real estate holdings. Or maybe he can give you a personal class on how to flip homes? What? You haven't been kerping up with his post? What's wrong Tenacious D? Kevin Spacey not around to be your life coach?


I wonder how many people are out of work because KS is a pedophile creep? T wants to give him a pass because he employs people.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I wonder how many people are out of work because KS is a pedophile creep? T wants to give him a pass because he employs people.


A pass? That's like giving one of these sick clergymen a pass because they do good deeds.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Yep.. nobody is surprised by your stupidity.


I was responding to your post about never having a job because your family has money. 
You don’t seem like a guy with a job. 
It seems like having a job, though, might make you feel better about yourself. You know, like having a purpose?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I was responding to your post about never having a job because your family has money.
> You don’t seem like a guy with a job.
> It seems like having a job, though, might make you feel better about yourself. You know, like having a purpose?


Why, do you need a job? I can't make a guarantee that I'll hire you but I don't discriminate .


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Why, do you need a job? I can't make a guarantee that I'll hire you but I don't discriminate .


You make no sense. What a surprise! A guy without a job suggesting that he will employ me? Huh? Or do you mean you’ll ask your family about hiring me? LOL.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I was responding to your post about never having a job because your family has money.
> You don’t seem like a guy with a job.
> It seems like having a job, though, might make you feel better about yourself. You know, like having a purpose?


You also need to follow along better. Were did I ever post that I never had a job? That's your problem.  Just like your friends, the Drunken Rat, no D and rest, you only read what you want to read. You also assume too much...


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You make no sense. What a surprise! A guy without a job suggesting that he will employ me? Huh? Or do you mean you’ll ask your family about hiring me? LOL.


If I ever thought you were smart I take it back...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> If I ever thought you were smart I take it back...


He's smart enough to pay his mortgage and call his house an asset despite no net income from that asset.  Get ready for a long convoluted post about future value and LTV.  Something about the bank making a bad deal for itself.  Lol!


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> You also need to follow along better. Were did I ever post that I never had a job? That's your problem.  Just like your friends, the Drunken Rat, no D and rest, you only read what you want to read. You also assume too much...


You said you haven’t had a job since 20 years old. Congrats on the paper route!


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He's smart enough to pay his mortgage and call his house an asset despite no net income from that asset.  Get ready for a long convoluted post about future value and LTV.  Something about the bank making a bad deal for itself.  Lol!


Hey look, it’s an idiot party! Two guys who talk nonsense, but they make sense to each other. Iz relies on the gubmint for his pay and the other idiot relies on family. Perfect.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey look, it’s an idiot party! Two guys who talk nonsense, but they make sense to each other. Iz relies on the gubmint for his pay and the other idiot relies on family. Perfect.


Perfect for the t ideal . . . and then complain about how the rest of us live our lives and make a living.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey look, it’s an idiot party! Two guys who talk nonsense, but they make sense to each other. Iz relies on the gubmint for his pay and the other idiot relies on family. Perfect.


Such a jealous little man.. sorry your life sucks so bad.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Perfect for the t ideal . . . and then complain about how the rest of us live our lives and make a living.


Off the wagon already? Dude... it's only the second day of the year!


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I know you're jealous and all but try not to be such a hater...


Hater? I've got nothing but love in my heart multi.  Well love and a little pity and distain, but certainly no hate.  I really don't pay enough attention to other people to have my emotions rise to the level of hate...

Personally I've had to work my whole life.  But then again I've spent my life as a professional creative, I've traveled the world and I get to read write ups on shows I helped put together in the NYTimes and Rolling Stone.  So while I'm sure it would be nice to sit home all day getting money for nothing; for me being born to a teen mom out in a single wide in the IE, all I can say is being a working man has proven quite satisfying.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You said you haven’t had a job since 20 years old. Congrats on the paper route!


Pay attention and maybe you'll learn something. Well, your not very smart so I doubt you will...


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Hater? I've got nothing but love in my heart multi.  Well love and a little pity and distain, but certainly no hate.  I really don't pay enough attention to other people to have my emotions rise to the level of hate...
> 
> Personally I've had to work my whole life.  But then again I've spent my life as a professional creative, I've traveled the world and I get to read write ups on shows I helped put together in the NYTimes and Rolling Stone.  So while I'm sure it would be nice to sit home all day getting money for nothing; for me being born to a teen mom out in a single wide in the IE, all I can say is being a working man has proven quite satisfying.


Well congratulations Tenacious! I'm sure your Mom is very proud of you for pulling yourself up from your bootstraps and becoming such a wonderful person. Im sure she would approve of your post about my daughter...


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Such a jealous little man.. sorry your life sucks so bad.


Nobody’s jealous of you. 
I’ve known people without jobs...generally sucks for them, even if their “family” supports them.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Well congratulations Tenacious! I'm sure your Mom is very proud of you for pulling yourself up from your bootstraps and becoming such a wonderful person. Im sure she would approve of your post about my daughter...


For being an anonymous blogger, it's funny that you are so worried about your reputation of one of your anonymous screen names that you can't take a joke.  Maybe I was a little too close to the mark for you to see the humor?

But then again, that's another thing about being a working man.  When you achieve personal success with your own hands... it's a lot easier brush off what other people say because you don't expect anyone to give you anything.  Not even respect, cuz you know that shit's got to be earned.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Nobody’s jealous of you.
> I’ve known people without jobs...generally sucks for them, even if their “family” supports them.


Sure you are.  Not only that but you have a reading comprehension issue and probably suffer from a lack of self worth. That's why your trying to tell everyone how great your doing. Overcomensate much?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> For being an anonymous blogger, it's funny that you are so worried about your reputation of one of your anonymous screen names that you can't take a joke.  Maybe I was a little too close to the mark for you to see the humor?
> 
> But then again, that's another thing about being a working man.  When you achieve personal success with your own hands... it's a lot easier brush off what other people say because you don't expect anyone to give you anything.  Not even respect, cuz you know that shit's got to be earned.


Take a joke about my daughter? Nope. You'll never have my respect. You don't even know me or my family and pull that crap like you know my kid. Sorry dude, your a low life...


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Sure you are.  Not only that but you have a reading comprehension issue and probably suffer from a lack of self worth. That's why your trying to tell everyone how great your doing. Overcomensate much?


What’s my reading comprehension issue? 
And you’re the one who sounds jealous...you’ve never accomplished anything, clearly. 
Volunteer!


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> What’s my reading comprehension issue?
> And you’re the one who sounds jealous...you’ve never accomplished anything, clearly.
> Volunteer!


Jealous of Mr House Flipper? Try again! Too funny and please keep trying. Im having a good laugh


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Take a joke about my daughter? Nope. You'll never have my respect. You don't even know me or my family and pull that crap like you know my kid. Sorry dude, your a low life...


Ask your dad to buy you something.  I'm sure it will make you feel better.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Ask your dad to buy you something.  I'm sure it will make you feel better.


Keep trying low life. The way you make a fool of yourself is comedy gold. Im sure your Mom is so proud!


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Jealous of Mr House Flipper? Try again! Too funny and please keep trying. Im having a good laugh


I asked about the reading comprehension issue you have mentioned a couple of times. Are you as incapable of your buddy Iz? He doesn’t know what he’s talking about either. Ever.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Ask your dad to buy you something.  I'm sure it will make you feel better.


It doesn’t make him feel better. Can’t you tell it makes him feel worse.
“My family has so much more money than you, neh neh neh!”


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I asked about the reading comprehension issue you have mentioned a couple of times. Are you as incapable of your buddy Iz? He doesn’t know what he’s talking about either. Ever.


That's reading comprehension AND asumptions. You see how that worked. You can't even remember what was posted much less comprehend the post..  keep trying though.


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Nobody is surprised.


*You're not very bright " Messy ", but then I'm not surprised.*

*Here's a hint:*

*He's self employed.*


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> It doesn’t make him feel better. Can’t you tell it makes him feel worse.
> “My family has so much more money than you, neh neh neh!”


See "comprehension " . Something that you lack. That and intelligence ...


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You're not very bright " Messy ", but then I'm not surprised.*
> 
> *Here's a hint:*
> 
> *He's self employed.*


Here’s a hint. Self-employed people have a job.
That’s what the word “employed” means.
Oh my God, you’re all so fucking stupid.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> It doesn’t make him feel better. Can’t you tell it makes him feel worse.
> “My family has so much more money than you, neh neh neh!”


Says the guy trying to tell everyone how great his real estate investments are doing. See, I told you you were jealous..


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You said you haven’t had a job since 20 years old. Congrats on the paper route!


*" Messy " Financial......come on level with the forum, you dropped a lot of acid as a youth.*


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Here’s a hint. Self-employed people have a job.
> That’s what the word “employed” means.
> Oh my God, you’re all so fucking stupid.


You win the internet today for the most idiot statement....

Go back and take another 3 AM real estate flipping class.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> *" Messy " Financial......come on level with the forum, you dropped a lot of acid as a youth.*


I'm laughing at these two tools. Messy is trying to sell us his get rich "Amway" real estate classes then gets butt hurt cause nobody is buying. Then you have the self proclaimed Tenacious D giving us his sad and challenging childhood looking for sympathy and saying what a great guy he is necause he has no hate yet had no problem talking crap about my daughter who he has never met. A couple of hypocritical tools.

It may be a new year but these guys are still the same losers...


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Here’s a hint. *Self-employed people have a job.*
> That’s what the word “employed” means.
> Oh my God, you’re all so fucking stupid.


*Really now " Messy " Financial.....I haven't had a " Job " for well a coons age and more.*
*I have employed many many many individuals, yet I don't have a job. I'll be damned.*

*Hey " Messy " Financial...is the term " Fucking Stupid " what happened to you ....*
*Syphilis will slowly rot your brain. You should have been " Fucking Smart " *...*


** Psssst ....That implies wearing a condom " Messy " Financial...*


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Really now " Messy " Financial.....I haven't had a " Job " for well a coons age and more.*
> *I have employed many many many individuals, yet I don't have a job. I'll be damned.*
> 
> *Hey " Messy " Financial...is the term " Fucking Stupid " what happened to you ....*
> ...


Oh my... Messy Finacial Assistance. So fitting!


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I'm laughing at these two tools. Messy is trying to sell us his get rich "Amway" real estate classes then gets butt hurt cause nobody is buying. Then you have the self proclaimed Tenacious D giving us his sad and challenging childhood looking for sympathy and saying what a great guy he is necause he has no hate yet had no problem talking crap about my daughter who he has never met. A couple of hypocritical tools.
> 
> It may be a new year but these guys are still the same losers...


*That's ok....they provide the entertainment. I'm going to recommend these Lunatic Liberals to the 
three stooges in DC as assistants. Larry, Moe and Curly will just gush over their loyalty....*


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> You win the internet today for the most idiot statement....
> 
> Go back and take another 3 AM real estate flipping class.


You sure you didn’t mean “idiotic statement?”
Let me help you, spoiled angry boy.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Oh my... Messy Finacial Assistance. So fitting!


You sure you didn’t mean “financial?”


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You sure you didn’t mean “financial?”


Sure thing smart guy. I'll give you that because it's all you got and I'm in a giving spirit. 

But tell me about this volunteer thing you posted about. Sounds like you must do a lot of it. Do you volunteer with your family or is it just you?


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You sure you didn’t mean “idiotic statement?”
> Let me help you, spoiled angry boy.


*You were the Stunt man in the Knight scene for Monty Python *
*weren't you " Messy "Financial.*

*" It's just a minor flesh wound "*


----------



## nononono (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You sure you didn’t mean “financial?”


*You could have gotten them for free " Messy " Financial.....*


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Sure thing smart guy. I'll give you that because it's all you got and I'm in a giving spirit.
> 
> But tell me about this volunteer thing you posted about. Sounds like you must do a lot of it. Do you volunteer with your family or is it just you?


I’m thinking you should volunteer somewhere, inasmuch as you don’t have a job.
Tell me about my reading comprehension problem that you mentioned twice.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> *That's ok....they provide the entertainment. I'm going to recommend these Lunatic Liberals to the
> three stooges in DC as assistants. Larry, Moe and Curly will just gush over their loyalty....*


Ever notice how guys like Mr Tenacious claim the moral high ground but when confronted with the crap they did they run and hide from you? Predictable...


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I’m thinking you should volunteer somewhere, inasmuch as you don’t have a job.
> Tell me about my reading comprehension problem that you mentioned twice.


AND assumptions. You can't even get that right. See, I did it again and you can't even comprehend that.


----------



## messy (Jan 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> AND assumptions. You can't even get that right. See, I did it again and you can't even comprehend that.


I must have misunderstood when you said you don’t have a job. I wasn’t surprised, remember?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I must have misunderstood when you said you don’t have a job. I wasn’t surprised, remember?


Wrong. Keep trying sunshine.  Eventually you'll find your post where you made an incorrect assumption of me. You haven't been around long enough.

And sorry to disappoint you but running a business does not afford me too much free time. What free time I do get I spend watching my kids play the beautiful game.  Ironically though, I do volunteer. I can't go into detail because the last time I did your little friends got upset.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Here’s a hint. Self-employed people have a job.
> That’s what the word “employed” means.
> Oh my God, you’re all so fucking stupid.


You are getting a bit emotional.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are getting a bit emotional.


Emotional or overcompensating?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Hater? I've got nothing but love in my heart multi.  Well love and a little pity and distain, but certainly no hate.  I really don't pay enough attention to other people to have my emotions rise to the level of hate...
> 
> Personally I've had to work my whole life.  But then again I've spent my life as a professional creative, I've traveled the world and I get to read write ups on shows I helped put together in the NYTimes and Rolling Stone.  So while I'm sure it would be nice to sit home all day getting money for nothing; for me being born to a teen mom out in a single wide in the IE, all I can say is being a working man has proven quite satisfying.


There is the self hating elitist.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey look, it’s an idiot party! Two guys who talk nonsense, but they make sense to each other. Iz relies on the gubmint for his pay and the other idiot relies on family. Perfect.


You are pretty entertaining, can I come work for you? Maybe we can entertain each other.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Hater? I've got nothing but love in my heart multi.  Well love and a little pity and distain, but certainly no hate.  I really don't pay enough attention to other people to have my emotions rise to the level of hate...
> 
> Personally I've had to work my whole life.  But then again I've spent my life as a professional creative, I've traveled the world and I get to read write ups on shows I helped put together in the NYTimes and Rolling Stone.  So while I'm sure it would be nice to sit home all day getting money for nothing; for me being born to a teen mom out in a single wide in the IE, all I can say is being a working man has proven quite satisfying.


What a douchebag.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> There is the self hating elitist.


Yes... how elitist to say I'm proud to spent my life working.  And what a slap in the face to all those blue collar, trust fund types.  
Great point Joe.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What a douchebag.


Multi not a douchebag.  He's just got some issues that I think we all hope he can work out.


----------



## espola (Jan 2, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Multi not a douchebag.  He's just got some issues that I think we all hope he can work out.


He seems to jump into conversations as if he thinks people are already calling him an idiot.  That actually comes later.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 3, 2019)

espola said:


> He seems to jump into conversations as if he thinks people are already calling him an idiot.  That actually comes later.


Like you are doing right now?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 3, 2019)

*Venezuela Economic Collapse Has Lessons for America's Socialists...*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 3, 2019)

SOCIALISM RISING
*Dems take House pushing massive government expansion, taxes, freebies as party lurches left*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 3, 2019)

*December: Hiring Surged at U.S. Companies, Smashing Expectations*


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *December: Hiring Surged at U.S. Companies, Smashing Expectations*


What are you reading? Good reports result in a stock market uptick.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey look, it’s an idiot party! Two guys who talk nonsense, but they make sense to each other. Iz relies on the gubmint for his pay and the other idiot relies on family. Perfect.


You didn't rely on your family?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Perfect for the t ideal . . . and then complain about how the rest of us live our lives and make a living.


Nobody is complaining about your .02 cent annual raise.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Here’s a hint. Self-employed people have a job.
> That’s what the word “employed” means.
> Oh my God, you’re all so fucking stupid.


Tell us more about the net income from the home you live in and how you relied on the bank to finance 80% of your purchase price and all your equity while the bank continues to collect 27% in interest of your monthly payments after 20 years.  Lol!


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Tell us more about the net income from the home you live in and how you relied on the bank to finance 80% of your purchase price and all your equity while the bank continues to collect 27% in interest of your monthly payments after 20 years.  Lol!


I don’t need to tell you! You know how mortgages work! That’s so impressive.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> I asked about the reading comprehension issue you have mentioned a couple of times. Are you as incapable of your buddy Iz? He doesn’t know what he’s talking about either. Ever.


You prove me right every time you pay your mortgage.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> I don’t need to tell you! You know how mortgages work! That’s so impressive.


Not really.  You pay every month.  That's it.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not really.  You pay every month.  That's it.


Wait, what? The bank loans you money to buy a house and you pay them back on their loan every month? With interest? Whoa, dude, someone’s been doing their homework!
And here I thought you weren’t sophisticated about such things.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Wait, what? The bank loans you money to buy a house and you pay them back on their loan every month? With interest? Whoa, dude, someone’s been doing their homework!
> And here I thought you weren’t sophisticated about such things.


That's how your liability works.  Not sophisticated at all.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not really.  You pay every month.  That's it.


So wait. If I sell my house now, how much does the bank get? 
You’re scaring me.
I know what they get if I don’t sell it. They get monthly payments, much of which is deductible to me as interest, right? 
But what if I sell it?


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That's how your liability works.  Not sophisticated at all.


You mean my loan liability? You are blowing me away this morning. Did you learn this on your own? Or did you go to some kind of mortgage school?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> You mean my loan liability? You are blowing me away this morning. Did you learn this on your own? Or did you go to some kind of mortgage school?


Yes a lien on your house.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U.


Yeah, makes sense. He seems like he could teach you a lot.
So now that you know the basics, get in touch with him and go deeper.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Yeah, makes sense. He seems like he could teach you a lot.
> So now that you know the basics, get in touch with him and go deeper.


I did.  He said that you're a good mortgage payer and that you realize failure to do so would result in foreclosure proceedings.  But the bank isn't worried because they have your equity locked up which includes your 20% down payment.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes a lien on your house.


Man, now you are delving into the concept of “securitization” of the mortgage loan? Holy moly, Fries taught you well. 
And what happens when you finish paying back the loan, with interest? Or what happens when you sell?
So, take my case for example. I bought a 2800 sq foot house in the high 800s. I keep paying the darn bank, mostly interest(!), while I live there. 
I can probably now sell it for about $4m. How much of that would the bank get?


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I did.  He said that you're a good mortgage payer and that you realize failure to do so would result in foreclosure proceedings.  But the bank isn't worried because they have your equity locked up which includes your 20% down payment.


Wait, the bank has my down payment? Didn’t the person who sold me the house get my down payment? Please explain. I thought the bank loaned me money?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Wait, the bank has my down payment? Didn’t the person who sold me the house get my down payment? Please explain.


No but the bank does control 100% of your equity if you enter foreclosure and, yes the seller got 100% of the purchase price.  That's why you don't have to pay PMI.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No but the bank does control 100% of your equity if you enter foreclosure and, yes the seller got 100% of the purchase price.  That's why you don't have to pay PMI.


You mean if I default on my loan I don’t own the house? OMG I can’t believe you’re giving me all this great info for free! Thanks, Iz!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Man, now you are delving into the concept of “securitization” of the mortgage loan? Holy moly, Fries taught you well.
> And what happens when you finish paying back the loan, with interest? Or what happens when you sell?
> So, take my case for example. I bought a 2800 sq foot house in the high 800s. I keep paying the darn bank, mostly interest(!), while I live there.
> I can probably now sell it for about $4m. How much of that would the bank get?


Probably?  lol!  Didn't you refi 100k for education?


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Probably?  lol!  Didn't you refi 100k for education?


Yes but my rates went way down at the same time. I owe about $500. How much would the bank get if I sold the house?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Yes but my rates went way down at the same time. I owe about $500. How much would the bank get if I sold the house?


Depends how much you owe when you sell.  Lets not forget the buyers willingness to pay what you think you can get.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Depends how much you owe when you sell.  Lets not forget the buyers willingness to pay what you think you can get.


So wait I pay the bank what I owe and I get to keep the rest? Crazy!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> So wait I pay the bank what I owe and I get to keep the rest? Crazy!


Congratulations.  You no longer have a liability.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> So wait I pay the bank what I owe and I get to keep the rest? Crazy!


What are the terms of your loan and when did you take it out?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> So wait I pay the bank what I owe and I get to keep the rest? Crazy!


That's presuming you have the cash on hand to pay off the loan in full. Do you?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

Easy Multi.  Let him roll in all that cash he's earning a ton of interest on.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Congratulations.  You no longer have a liability.


So let me get this straight. A loan, ie a debt, is a liability? You are like, as someone once said (well, more than once), an economical jenious. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> That's presuming you have the cash on hand to pay off the loan in full. Do you?


Do you mean if I pay the bank loan back it presumes I have the money to do it? What a great question! I see why you and Iz are friends!


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> What are the terms of your loan and when did you take it out?


The latest version is 3.15% for 15 years, which I took out about 8 years ago. About $500K left.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Do you mean if I pay the bank loan back it presumes I have the money to do it? What a great question! I see why you and Iz are friends!


Are you normally this dense? Or do you need your coffee first?

People take out loans to pay off loans all the time. You posted that you refied your loan. So wjo paid off your first? Did the bank just give you a new loan and forgot about the first? No. The first had to be paid off first. Then again.. do you have a second?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> The latest version is 3.15% for 15 years, which I took out about 8 years ago. About $500K left.


What was your loan amount?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> So let me get this straight. A loan, ie a debt, is a liability? You are like, as someone once said (well, more than once), an economical jenious. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!


It’s not my knowledge.  Just standard stuff for homeowners.  The loan is liability for you and an asset for the bank.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> The latest version is 3.15% for 15 years, which I took out about 8 years ago. About $500K left.


The new simulation.  We seem to have lost 5 years in two weeks time.  Lmao!


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It’s not my knowledge.  Just standard stuff for homeowners.  The loan is liability for you and an asset for the bank.


Wow, you are so good. A loan is a liability to the borrower and an asset to the lender. Just like that, huh? 
So what if I borrow money and buy stock? Is the loan still a liability? And how about the stock? Is it a liability too?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The new simulation.  We seem to have lost 5 years in two weeks time.  Lmao!


Funny how Messy is talking about paying off his loan and selling his home. What I want to know is he viewing his home as an investment or his place of residence? If it's an investment and he sells it what money is he using to buy his next investment to live in? It's a 2800' house so will he be downsizing and moving to a less desirable area to be able to pocket some profits or does he think his home was the only one thst went up in value?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Wow, you are so good. A loan is a liability to the borrower and an asset to the lender. Just like that, huh?
> So what if I borrow money and buy stock? Is the loan still a liability? And how about the stock? Is it a liability too?


What was your original loan amount on the current 15 year?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Funny how Messy is talking about paying off his loan and selling his home. What I want to know is he viewing his home as an investment or his place of residence? If it's an investment and he sells it what money is he using to buy his next investment to live in? It's a 2800' house so will he be downsizing and moving to a less desirable area to be able to pocket some profits or does he think his home was the only one thst went up in value?


The simulation always works to his advantage.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Funny how Messy is talking about paying off his loan and selling his home. What I want to know is he viewing his home as an investment or his place of residence? If it's an investment and he sells it what money is he using to buy his next investment to live in? It's a 2800' house so will he be downsizing and moving to a less desirable area to be able to pocket some profits or does he think his home was the only one thst went up in value?


All 100% valid points. What I’m doing is explaining to Iz the financial benefits of owning a house in a desirable area, so that you can consider those options. I don’t think he understands.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> All 100% valid points. What I’m doing is explaining to Iz the financial benefits of owning a house in a desirable area, so that you can consider those options. I don’t think he understands.


I think he understands location just as much as you do. 

How much was your original loan amount again?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> All 100% valid points. What I’m doing is explaining to Iz the financial benefits of owning a house in a desirable area, so that you can consider those options. I don’t think he understands.


Nothing wrong with validating your liability.


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nothing wrong with validating your liability.


Proving my point...


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I think he understands location just as much as you do.
> 
> How much was your original loan amount again?


He doesn’t. He thinks a house is a liability, as if I lived where he does. My last loan amount was like 650 or something.


----------



## nononono (Jan 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> AND assumptions. You can't even get that right. See, I did it again and you can't even comprehend that.


*Gopher was digging in the lawn, nice short swing with a wedge and " Messy " was his new name !*


----------



## nononono (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Proving my point...


*My my....point proving. And " Messy ".*


----------



## nononono (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Wow, you are so good. A loan is a liability to the borrower and an asset to the lender. Just like that, huh?
> So what if I borrow money and buy stock? Is the loan still a liability? And how about the stock? Is it a liability too?


*I have a sock full of nickles.....do you view that as a liability.*


----------



## messy (Jan 3, 2019)

nononono said:


> *I have a sock full of nickles.....do you view that as a liability.*


What’s a nickle?


----------



## nononono (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> What’s a nickle?


*Just say " Uncle ".......*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> Proving my point...


Paying your mortgage makes a point.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 3, 2019)

messy said:


> He doesn’t. He thinks a house is a liability, as if I lived where he does. My last loan amount was like 650 or something.


Lol!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

* 
*
*OCASIO-CORTEZ: Raise Tax Rates to 70%!*


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *
> *
> *OCASIO-CORTEZ: Raise Tax Rates to 70%!*


You mean like when America Was Great? What were the tax rates then?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> You mean like when America Was Great? What were the tax rates then?


Woe!


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Woe!


That’s your answer? Should I repeat the question? When do you think Trump refers to when he says “Again” and what were the tax rates?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s your answer? Should I repeat the question? When do you think Trump refers to when he says “Again” and what were the tax rates?


I checked and Woe was my answer. 1941 is the date I checked.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *
> *
> *OCASIO-CORTEZ: Raise Tax Rates to 70%!*


We don’t need no stinking tariffs.


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I checked and Woe was my answer. 1941 is the date I checked.


so we haven't been great since 1941? is that what trump means? thanks for checking!


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I checked and Woe was my answer. 1941 is the date I checked.


So that's when we were "Great?" Back when the top tax rate was 75%+? So you're a fan of AOC?  That's a surprise.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> so we haven't been great since 1941? is that what trump means? thanks for checking!


You will have to ask him.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> So that's when we were "Great?" Back when the top tax rate was 75%+? So you're a fan of AOC?  That's a surprise.


No and yes it is. That's what the woe was about.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

After the worst Christmas Eve in the history of the stock market, the Santa Clause rally came late. You better strap in though as the bubble has popped and this is exactly the kind of roller coaster ride you expect in a bear market.

All the problems that resulted in the ’08 financial crisis have been made worse since that crisis by the very institution – the Federal Reserve – that created the problem in the first place.  —Schiff


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> After the worst Christmas Eve in the history of the stock market, the Santa Clause rally came late. You better strap in though as the bubble has popped and this is exactly the kind of roller coaster ride you expect in a bear market.
> 
> All the problems that resulted in the ’08 financial crisis have been made worse since that crisis by the very institution – the Federal Reserve – that created the problem in the first place.  —Schiff


Is the below what you're talking about?

In his latest podcast, Peter Schiff said he thinks the president is saying all of this in order to have a place to put the blame when the economy tanks.


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s your answer? Should I repeat the question? When do you think Trump refers to when he says “Again” and what were the tax rates?



*Are you going to take BASIC " American " History this up coming semester......You *
*really should. Your lack of there of is quite obvious.*
*I mean you could use this tool your barely operating called the " Internet ", but *
*it appears you need a teacher to hold your hand daily to progress...Sad.*


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> Is the below what you're talking about?
> 
> In his latest podcast, Peter Schiff said he thinks the president is saying all of this in order to have a place to put the blame when the economy tanks.



*" Peter " Schiff.....*

*Is that " Adam " Schiff for Brains on line persona when he's trolling the *
*Standard Hotel......*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> Is the below what you're talking about?
> 
> In his latest podcast, Peter Schiff said he thinks the president is saying all of this in order to have a place to put the blame when the economy tanks.


Schiff didn’t say that.


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

*" Messy " Financial has a " Messy " Brain.*


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Schiff didn’t say that.


Sure he didn’t.


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> Sure he didn’t.



*Before the Helicopter crash or after................*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> Sure he didn’t.


Oh good.  I thought Fries U brainwashed you in to thinking it was the Tariffs.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh good.  I thought Fries U brainwashed you in to thinking it was the Tariffs.


Gotta find a way to blame Trump.
I don't know who is a bigger coward, booty or fries?


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh good.  I thought Fries U brainwashed you in to thinking it was the Tariffs.


I think you and Schiff are both saying is that now that we have a Republican president, we will possibly enter a recession, just like the last time we had a Republican president.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> I think you and Schiff are both saying is that now that we have a Republican president, we will possibly enter a recession, just like the last time we had a Republican president.


Ahhhh Fries U not as ineffective as I thought.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> I think you and Schiff are both saying is that now that we have a Republican president, we will possibly enter a recession, just like the last time we had a Republican president.


What we've been saying is that Democrat presidents usually need to have their terms subsidized by the taxpayer.


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What we've been saying is that Democrat presidents usually need to have their terms subsidized by the taxpayer.


You prefer recession. I don’t. 
Then again, I assume you don’t have much to lose in a recession.


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> You prefer recession. I don’t.
> Then again, I assume you don’t have much to lose in a recession.


*You're telegraphing again.....you want the miserable Democratic Party to bring about*
*a recession so you can moan and groan. The POTUS isn't letting you butter butts *
*drive the proverbial car in the ditch as Obama did. He's rebuilt the car and we're *
*humming down the road of economic growth....You pieces of Schiff are lurking*
*around the Gas Stations like zombies only wanting to sabotage the vehicle.....*
*Guess what.....you don't know what stations are being used. So now you want to*
*destroy the very roadway to success America is traveling on, guess again.....*
*POTUS put a cattle catcher on the front of the vehicle and now all you hateful*
*Democratic Zombies are being pushed into your proverbial ditch filled with mud.....*


*You're an UNSCHOOLED TOOL " Messy " Financial.....just a lowdown FOOLISH TOOL...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

messy said:


> You prefer recession. I don’t.
> Then again, I assume you don’t have much to lose in a recession.


What's wrong with a recession?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What's wrong with a recession?


Everything's on sale.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Everything's on sale.


Including messy's equity.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 4, 2019)

I'm surprised Ratboy didn't post this article, it's from his favorite source Yahoo...


There’s an old adage in economics that says, “the stock market is not the economy.”

And though the stock market and the economy do move in the same general direction over the long run, Friday’s December jobs report was one of the strongest examples in recent memory bolstering the case that the stock market is not, in real-time, a very good indicator of how the economy is performing.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/stock-market-not-economy-labor-184609482.html


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Including messy's equity.


He's pretty concerned for a super rich guy.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 4, 2019)

From PBS....

More than 300,000 jobs were created in December, doubling what was expected and signaling that the U.S. economy remains stable despite the recent market volatility and political tensions. In addition, wage growth was the highest it’s been in a decade. Amna Nawaz speaks with Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, for more on why this report contained “nothing but good news.”

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/december-job-creation-wage-growth-provide-a-burst-of-good-economic-news


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Including messy's equity.


*" Messy " Financial is gunna be in a world of hurt if he takes out another *
*reverse mortgage to fund his online Idiocracy classes.....*
*Someone should send him a message by starving carrier pigeon advising him to*
*not sign the contract.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 4, 2019)

*Fails as U.S. Manufacturing Booms*



_





ROBYN BECK/AFP/Getty
JOHN BINDER 4 Jan 2019 
*American manufacturing jobs have boomed to a more than 20-year high as President Trump has imposed a wide range of tariffs on imported steel, aluminum, and Chinese products — dooming predictions made by free traders that have yet to pan out.*


U.S. manufacturers added 284,000 jobs in the last year, the most jobs added in the sector in a single year since 1997, as Breitbart News’s Economics Editor John Carney notes. In December 2018, alone, about 32,000 factory jobs were created.

American manufacturing is vital to the prosperity of communities, as every one manufacturing job supports about 3.6 American jobs in other sectors of industry.

The U.S. manufacturing jobs boom comes as free trade economists, billionaire donors, and establishment media pundits have routinely claimed that Trump’s 25 percent tariff on imported steel and ten percent tariff on aluminum would cripple the American economy.


In November 2018, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce wrote a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer claiming that Trump’s tariffs on imported products “endangers the jobs of millions of workers” in industries that have grown to rely on cheap foreign imports.

Months ago, the chairman of Cummins, a fortune 500 company, wrote an op-ed in the New York Times claiming that even short-term tariffs would cripple American industry.

“We see no upside in the implementation of tariffs,” Cummins Chairman Tom Linebarger wrote. “They are a tax, and the risky proposition of entering a trade war could slow down the economy. Even putting up short-term barriers with trading partners in China and Europe can cause long-term losses in market share, resulting in lost jobs in the United States.”

The free traders at the Tax Foundation wrote their research predicted that not only would Trump’s tariffs crush American industries, but they would also decrease Americans’ wages.

“These tariffs increase production costs for U.S. manufacturers, placing them at a competitive disadvantage, and will, on net, destroy more output, wages, and employment in the United States than they create,” Tax Foundation analysts wrote.

For U.S. wages, the opposite has panned out. In December, Americans’ wages grew 3.2 percent in December 2018 compared to last year.

The conservative Heritage Foundation called Trump’s tariffs “ineffective and dangerous,” elected Republicans have called the tariffs “dumb,” and pro-free trade Trade Partnership claimed that the tariffs would eliminate 146,000 American jobs, a claim that has yet to come to fruition.

Alliance for American Manufacturing President Scott Paul credited Trump’s tariffs for the economic boom in U.S. manufacturing, telling Breitbart News in a statement:

December was another great month for manufacturing. *With 32,000 new jobs last month, tough action against trade cheats is helping create new jobs for American workers*. [Emphasis added]

Paul said the new Democrat-Republican split Congress should now focus its attention on a massive infrastructure investment to continue driving American manufacturing and job creation.

“With more manufacturing jobs, communities throughout the country grow,” Paul said.

As Breitbart News has extensively reported, between 2001 and 2017, the U.S.-China trade deficit was responsible for the loss of 3.4 million American jobs. The vast majority of jobs lost from free trade with China have been in the U.S. manufacturing sector, making up 74.4 percent of all jobs lost and amounting to 2.5 million U.S. manufacturing jobs lost. This total of jobs lost also includes the 1.3 million American jobs lost since 2008.
_


----------



## nononono (Jan 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Fails as U.S. Manufacturing Booms*
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*If the American Public was REALLY aware of why Trump and the " Military "*
*are rapidly bringing manufacturing stateside they would be triple proud of POTUS !!!!!*

*They would also seek out every foul mouthed NWO supporting Democrat/Rhino and*
*lock them up !!!!*


----------



## messy (Jan 4, 2019)

What’s 


Sheriff Joe said:


> He's pretty concerned for a super rich guy.


what’s “super rich?” $25m+? I’m not that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 5, 2019)

messy said:


> What’s
> 
> what’s “super rich?” $25m+? I’m not that.


Just change the simulation and make it so.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 8, 2019)

*Top 20% of households pay 88% of federal income taxes...*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 8, 2019)

Smart Power.
_*Dems Eye 33% Corporate Rate Hike...*_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 8, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Smart Power.
> _*Dems Eye 33% Corporate Rate Hike...*_


Looking out for the middle class!!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 8, 2019)

NYC MAYOR GUARANTEES HEALTH CARE FOR ALL


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 8, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> NYC MAYOR GUARANTEES HEALTH CARE FOR ALL


It's not health insurance, his spokesman clarified after the surprise announcement on MSNBC Tuesday morning.


----------



## Booter (Jan 8, 2019)

*115 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Revenue Goes to Paying Off Angry Farmers*


*




*

“Billions of Dollars are pouring into the coffers of the U.S.A.,” tweeted President Trump last month, “because of the Tariffs being charged to China.”

It would be nice if it were true. But it is, in fact, doubly false.

First, tariffs are _not_ “being charged to China.” They are being charged to _American firms_ importing Chinese goods. As the left-hand bar in the graphic above shows, such firms will pay about $8.4 billion in tariffs on China imports by the end of 2018.

Second, this tariff revenue does not remain in U.S. government “coffers.” As shown in the right-hand bar above, _all of it and more_ is being paid out to American farmers as partial compensation for their losses from Chinese tariff retaliation. The U.S. government has already committed to paying out $1.2 billion more to angry American farmers than it will take in this year from angry American firms.

*By launching a trade war with China, therefore, the president has simultaneously raised taxes on U.S. companies and lost the government money.* And with the farm constituency critical to his 2020 re-election hopes, the losses are only set to mount going forward.

https://www.cfr.org/blog/115-percent-trumps-china-tariff-revenue-goes-paying-angry-farmers


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 8, 2019)

Booter said:


> *115 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Revenue Goes to Paying Off Angry Farmers*
> 
> 
> *
> ...


Fake News Booty.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 8, 2019)

Booter said:


> *115 Percent of Trump’s China Tariff Revenue Goes to Paying Off Angry Farmers*
> 
> 
> *
> ...


The coward is back.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The coward is back.


New coward same as the old coward.


----------



## legend (Jan 9, 2019)

Hey Iz and Joe, does it feel like game over yet? Kinda does, huh? Even the Chief Justice spoke out against your boy a couple of weeks ago.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 9, 2019)

legend said:


> Hey Iz and Joe, does it feel like game over yet? Kinda does, huh? Even the Chief Justice spoke out against your boy a couple of weeks ago.


I am ok with that, at the very least he kept HRC from office, appointed a bunch of judges including 2 supremes, took your party so far left there is no coming back and put our country back on top for a change.
Pence will be fine.
How is RBG feeling?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 9, 2019)

Burn it down,
*Republican House Increased Debt $7.9 Trillion in 8 Years...*


----------



## messy (Jan 9, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am ok with that, at the very least he kept HRC from office, appointed a bunch of judges including 2 supremes, took your party so far left there is no coming back and put our country back on top for a change.
> Pence will be fine.
> How is RBG feeling?


Oh he’s not leaving office. Just nobody listening to him anymore except at the WWE rallies he holds. And judges frequently surprise when they’re on the bench. The Chief Justice has already let us know that...twice, actually.
As far as the country being “on top,” I don’t even know wtf you mean.
America is prevailing over Trump.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

legend said:


> Hey Iz and Joe, does it feel like game over yet? Kinda does, huh? Even the Chief Justice spoke out against your boy a couple of weeks ago.


How many votes?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 9, 2019)

messy said:


> Oh he’s not leaving office. Just nobody listening to him anymore except at the WWE rallies he holds. And judges frequently surprise when they’re on the bench. The Chief Justice has already let us know that...twice, actually.
> As far as the country being “on top,” I don’t even know wtf you mean.
> America is prevailing over Trump.


You know what I mean.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You know what I mean.


Heʻs back in the simulator again.


----------



## messy (Jan 9, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You know what I mean.


If the country felt like it was “on top,” he’d be popular. Quite the opposite is true.


----------



## Booter (Jan 9, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News Booty.


Is your head in the sand or is it up your ass?


----------



## Booter (Jan 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The coward is back.


I knew you especially would love that one - tariffs being used to pay subsidies.  All thanks to your almighty hero Don the Con.  Fortuanaly Donny has a much better understanding of Economics than you.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Heʻs back in the simulator again.


He sure spends a good amount of time in there.


----------



## messy (Jan 9, 2019)

Booter said:


> I knew you especially would love that one - tariffs being used to pay subsidies.  All thanks to your almighty hero Don the Con.  Fortuanaly Donny has a much better understanding of Economics than you.


You’re right. I don’t think they understand this stuff. We know Iz doesn’t.


----------



## messy (Jan 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Heʻs back in the simulator again.


Hey Iz, is your name on a real property deed anywhere (I assume not) and, if so, do you pay a mortgage? 
Also, does most of your income come via checks from the Federal Government?
Remember, these aren’t tough questions. Simple “yes” or “no” answers work best.


----------



## espola (Jan 9, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re right. I don’t think they understand this stuff. We know Iz doesn’t.


It's very simple really - some Americans (the importers and their customers) will pay taxes known as tariffs on goods imported from China or wherever.  Part of that tariff income will be used to pay subsidies or support payments to Americans who need the money because China or wherever is not buying the goods they used to export.

Hmmm -- Americans who have the money paying taxes to support Americans who need the money.  Sounds like socialism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

Booter said:


> I knew you especially would love that one - tariffs being used to pay subsidies.  All thanks to your almighty hero Don the Con.  Fortuanaly Donny has a much better understanding of Economics than you.


Iʻd say he understands you cowards better.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey Iz, is your name on a real property deed anywhere (I assume not) and, if so, do you pay a mortgage?
> Also, does most of your income come via checks from the Federal Government?
> Remember, these aren’t tough questions. Simple “yes” or “no” answers work best.


Obviously not.


----------



## messy (Jan 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Obviously not.


So your landlord has the asset and you pay for it, so the landlord gets the income and the equity, but you pay for it.
And your rent is not deductible (except any portion you may use for "business").
Nice work!


----------



## messy (Jan 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Iʻd say he understands you cowards better.


Yeah Booter, you coward.

Izzy served....lunch!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

espola said:


> It's very simple really - some Americans (the importers and their customers) will pay taxes known as tariffs on goods imported from China or wherever.  Part of that tariff income will be used to pay subsidies or support payments to Americans who need the money because China or wherever is not buying the goods they used to export.
> 
> Hmmm -- Americans who have the money paying taxes to support Americans who need the money.  Sounds like socialism.


Sounds like eminent domain


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

messy said:


> So your landlord has the asset and you pay for it, so the landlord gets the income and the equity, but you pay for it.
> And your rent is not deductible (except any portion you may use for "business").
> Nice work!


You said there are few things worse than being a landlord.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re right. I don’t think they understand this stuff. We know Iz doesn’t.


Ask Fries uncle what izzy knows.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 9, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> He sure spends a good amount of time in there.


Slow learner.


----------



## Booter (Jan 11, 2019)

*3 myths about the poor that Republicans are using to support slashing US safety net*
*
Most welfare recipients are makers not takers*
The first myth, that people who receive public benefits are “takers” rather than “makers,” is flatly untrue for the vast majority of working-age recipients.

In early December, House Speaker Paul Ryan said, “We have a welfare system that’s trapping people in poverty and effectively paying people not to work.”

Not true. Welfare – officially called Temporary Assistance to Needy Families – has required work as a condition of eligibility since then-President Bill Clinton signed welfare reform into law in 1996. And the earned income tax credit, a tax credit for low- and moderate-income workers, by definition, supports only people who work.

Workers apply for public benefits because they need assistance to make ends meet. American workers are among the most productive in the world, but over the last 40 years the bottom half of income earners have seen no income growth. As a result, since 1973, worker productivity has grown almost six times faster than wages.

*What the needy deserve*

The second myth is that low-income Americans do not deserve a helping hand.

This idea derives from our belief that the U.S. is a meritocracy where the most deserving rise to the top. Yet where a person ends up on the income ladder is tied to where they started out.

Indeed, America is not nearly as socially mobile as we like to think. Forty percent of Americans born into the bottom-income quintile – the poorest 20 percent – will stay there. And the same “stickiness” exists in the top quintile.

As for people born into the middle class, only 20 percent will ascend to the top quintile in their lifetimes.

The third myth is that government assistance is a waste of money and doesn’t accomplish its goals.

In fact, poverty rates would double without the safety net, to say nothing of human suffering. Last year, the safety net lifted 38 million people, including 8 million children, out of poverty.

*The facts of welfare*
*In trotting out these myths, Republican lawmakers are also tapping into long-standing racist stereotypes about who receives support. For instance, the “welfare queen” – a code word for an African-American woman with too many children who refuses to work – is a fiction.*

*The facts of welfare are that most recipients are white, families that receive aid are smaller on average than other families and the program requires recipients to work and is tiny in relation to the overall federal budget – about half a percent. Yet, the welfare queen is an archetype invoked to generate public antagonism against the safety net. Expect her to make frequent appearances in the months to come.*

*Americans should demand fact-based justifications for tax and entitlement reforms. It is time to retire the welfare queen and related tropes that paint needy Americans as undeserving.*

http://theconversation.com/3-myths-about-the-poor-that-republicans-are-using-to-support-slashing-us-safety-net-89048


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 11, 2019)

Booter said:


> *3 myths about the poor that Republicans are using to support slashing US safety net
> 
> Most welfare recipients are makers not takers*
> The first myth, that people who receive public benefits are “takers” rather than “makers,” is flatly untrue for the vast majority of working-age recipients.
> ...


Just think how much money we would have if these disease ridden murdering illegal alien criminals weren't here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 11, 2019)

Booter said:


> *3 myths about the poor that Republicans are using to support slashing US safety net
> 
> Most welfare recipients are makers not takers*
> The first myth, that people who receive public benefits are “takers” rather than “makers,” is flatly untrue for the vast majority of working-age recipients.
> ...


Just one of the many effects of QE.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> So your landlord has the asset and you pay for it, so the landlord gets the income and the equity, but you pay for it.
> And your rent is not deductible (except any portion you may use for "business").
> Nice work!


Are those your thoughts or Legends? Or maybe there's a third name... me thinks so.


----------



## nononono (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> What’s
> 
> what’s “super rich?” $25m+? I’m not that.



*You're not even " ich "......*
*Don't worry ...Rodent will bring you some Hot Chocolate.*


----------



## messy (Jan 14, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Are those your thoughts or Legends? Or maybe there's a third name... me thinks so.


I am glad you re-posted my note to Izzy. He seems pretty thick and he needed to read it again.


----------



## messy (Jan 14, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You're not even " ich "......*
> *Don't worry ...Rodent will bring you some Hot Chocolate.*


What’s super rich to you? $25m was just a number I pulled. And $10m in assets other than your home seems rich to me. But barely.
Do you have an opinion on this?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> What’s super rich to you? $25m was just a number I pulled. And $10m in assets other than your home seems rich to me. But barely.
> Do you have an opinion on this?


Who is this?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> What’s super rich to you? $25m was just a number I pulled. And $10m in assets other than your home seems rich to me. But barely.
> Do you have an opinion on this?


Lol... who asking for an opinion? Legend?


----------



## messy (Jan 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You said there are few things worse than being a landlord.


I said for me it would be a bad choice. You’d have to ask your landlord about whether he/she enjoys it.


----------



## messy (Jan 14, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Lol... who asking for an opinion? Legend?


Why does it matter who’s asking. Maybe ask your “family” what is rich.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> I said for me it would be a bad choice. You’d have to ask your landlord about whether he/she enjoys it.


Okay.  She’s busy cooking right now.  I’ll ask her during after dinner tea.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> Why does it matter who’s asking. Maybe ask your “family” what is rich.


Keep trying loser! Oh wait.. keep trying Legend! Crap... keep trying whatever screen name you log into guy!


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jan 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> *3 myths about the poor that Republicans are using to support slashing US safety net
> 
> Most welfare recipients are makers not takers*
> The first myth, that people who receive public benefits are “takers” rather than “makers,” is flatly untrue for the vast majority of working-age recipients.
> ...



*The Obama administration effectively gutted the law’s requirements in July 2012 when it released a policy directive through the Department of Health and Human Services that allowed states to waive the TANF program’s work requirements.
*
https://www.heritage.org/welfare/commentary/obama-gutted-work-requirements-welfare-why-trump-right-restore-them


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 14, 2019)

messy said:


> I am glad you re-posted my note to Izzy. He seems pretty thick and he needed to read it again.


My Landlord said she has a liability and an asset.


----------



## messy (Jan 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> My Landlord said she has a liability and an asset.


She has you to pay the liability though, while she keeps the asset. I don’t do that. Sucker.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> She has you to pay the liability though, while she keeps the asset. I don’t do that. Sucker.


I pay her and she pays the bank plus nets some income.  Are you netting some income from the house you live in?


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I pay her and she pays the bank plus nets some income.  Are you netting some income from the house you live in?


Nope. Building millions of equity for myself while I pay every month like you do. You build equity for someone else while you pay every month.
You might want to re-consider that approach.
I’d loan you the down payment, but from reading your posts you don’t strike me as a guy who would take responsibility for repaying a loan.


----------



## espola (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Nope. Building millions of equity for myself while I pay every month like you do. You build equity for someone else while you pay every month.
> You might want to re-consider that approach.
> I’d loan you the down payment, but from reading your posts you don’t strike me as a guy who would take responsibility for repaying a loan.


You could make him buy PMI.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Nope. Building millions of equity for myself while I pay every month like you do. You build equity for someone else while you pay every month.
> You might want to re-consider that approach.
> I’d loan you the down payment, but from reading your posts you don’t strike me as a guy who would take responsibility for repaying a loan.


Your simulation allows you to lend downpayments?  Is that like a community chest thing?  Kek!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

espola said:


> You could make him buy PMI.


Maybe his simulation has a stipulation for relegating his loan to the the banks loan.  Or maybe his loan can be a gift.  Or maybe his loan pushes my debt to income ratio beyond lending guidelines.  Fries U, what a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Nope. Building millions of equity for myself while I pay every month like you do. You build equity for someone else while you pay every month.
> You might want to re-consider that approach.
> I’d loan you the down payment, but from reading your posts you don’t strike me as a guy who would take responsibility for repaying a loan.


BTW, you had me at “Nope”.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> She has you to pay the liability though, while she keeps the asset. I don’t do that. Sucker.


The only sucker here is you Legend/Messy. How lonely and desperate are you to not only have three screen names but to be commenting and liking your own post? 

You fail...


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your simulation allows you to lend downpayments?  Is that like a community chest thing?  Kek!


Nah... he lends money to Legend at 20% who buys property from Wez next to a dump and then does a few TIs and tries to flip it....

Hmmm


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Nope. Building millions of equity for myself while I pay every month like you do. You build equity for someone else while you pay every month.
> You might want to re-consider that approach.
> I’d loan you the down payment, but from reading your posts you don’t strike me as a guy who would take responsibility for repaying a loan.


Says the dishonest poster that needs more than 1 identity.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your simulation allows you to lend downpayments?  Is that like a community chest thing?  Kek!


Simulation, you had this liar pegged from the start.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> The only sucker here is you Legend/Messy. How lonely and desperate are you to not only have three screen names but to be commenting and liking your own post?
> 
> You fail...


3? I thought 2...what’s the third? And aren’t you also GoBear?


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> BTW, you had me at “Nope”.


Why do you keep paying for the landlord’s equity instead of building your own with the same monthly payments?


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your simulation allows you to lend downpayments?  Is that like a community chest thing?  Kek!


I once loaned a down payment to an employee about 15 years ago. He bought for 575. Paid me back timely and now the house is worth about 1.5. He’s been with me 20 years now. You should borrow a down payment from somebody, but not me...somebody who trusts you to repay. Oops...


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> 3? I thought 2...what’s the third? And aren’t you also GoBear?


Keep trying Sunshine and try to keep up. You must be one desperate dude...

Now run along and have have a conversation with other accounts. Seriously dude, you liked your own comments from your other accounts?

Loser..


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Keep trying Sunshine and try to keep up. You must be one desperate dude...
> 
> Now run along and have have a conversation with other accounts. Seriously dude, you liked your own comments from your other accounts?
> 
> Loser..


Is Sunshine the third one? What’s the third one? Cat got your tongue? Can your “family” help out?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Is Sunshine the third one? What’s the third one? Cat got your tongue? Can your “family” help out?


Keep trying Sunshine. Maybe Legend can jump in and help you out? You certainly need all the help ypu can get. Is that why you created those other accounts because you need the help? Oh my..

 Fail!


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Keep trying Sunshine. Maybe Legend can jump in and help you out? You certainly need all the help ypu can get. Is that why you created those other accounts because you need the help? Oh my..
> 
> Fail!


Cat got your tongue? Who’s the third? What other accounts, plural, do I have, GoBear?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Cat got your tongue? Who’s the third? What other accounts, plural, do I have, GoBear?


I love this! Keep making yourself look like a complete tool Legend! Come on, create more accounts to like your own post! The libs on here need your help Messy/Legend!!

Dude you are such a loser... get a life.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> I once loaned a down payment to an employee about 15 years ago. He bought for 575. Paid me back timely and now the house is worth about 1.5. He’s been with me 20 years now. You should borrow a down payment from somebody, but not me...somebody who trusts you to repay. Oops...


How much did you lend?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Cat got your tongue? Who’s the third? What other accounts, plural, do I have, GoBear?


@*GOBEARGO* who was the guy who thought we were the same person? Was it this loser Messy/Legend or was it one of the other paranoid libs on here?


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How much did you lend?


A sufficient amount to enable him to purchase the house.


----------



## nononono (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> A sufficient amount to enable him to purchase the house.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> A sufficient amount to enable him to purchase the house.


Kek! The simulation goes on.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

QAthly in


messy said:


> Why do you keep paying for the landlord’s equity instead of building your own with the same monthly payments?


Hmmm you mean she gets monthly income from me AND and equity when she sells.  What a great idea.  A true asset.  See the difference in what she gets as opposed to what you get?  Hail Fries U.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Nah... he lends money to Legend at 20% who buys property from Wez next to a dump and then does a few TIs and tries to flip it....
> 
> Hmmm


Sounds like a cool board game.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QAthly in
> Hmmm you mean she gets monthly income from me AND and equity when she sells.  What a great idea.  A true asset.  See the difference in what she gets as opposed to what you get?  Hail Fries U.


How much do you pay her every month?
Is it a big building? 
I buy my own asset while I live in it.
I also buy art assets while enjoying them on my walls. They don’t produce income either but boy do they appreciate.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Kek! The simulation goes on.


I understand that it’s hard for a person with your, shall we say, limitations, to believe that every word I’ve said is true. Money is very complicated for you; you like to talk about it a lot, but you really know very little about how to earn it and make it grow. It’s an ironic juxtaposition. I never pretended, like you do. I shut up until I learned about things like real estate and bonds and stocks. You should try acknowledging how little you know...I’ve noticed that Fries is very patient with you in trying to explain how things work, but your insecurity prevents you from getting it. Your loss. Stay poor, my friend!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> How much do you pay her every month?
> Is it a big building?
> I buy my own asset while I live in it.
> I also buy art assets while enjoying them on my walls. They don’t produce income either but boy do they appreciate.


I pay her a "sufficient amount" with the income I earn from leasing out Fries uncle's Caterpillars.  An income earning asset.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I pay her a "sufficient amount" with the income I earn from leasing out Fries uncle's Caterpillars.  An income earning asset.


Does she own a big building or are you a substantial contributor to the costs of her maintaining her asset value?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> I understand that it’s hard for a person with your, shall we say, limitations, to believe that every word I’ve said is true. Money is very complicated for you; you like to talk about it a lot, but you really know very little about how to earn it and make it grow. It’s an ironic juxtaposition. I never pretended, like you do. I shut up until I learned about things like real estate and bonds and stocks. You should try acknowledging how little you know...I’ve noticed that Fries is very patient with you in trying to explain how things work, but your insecurity prevents you from getting it. Your loss. Stay poor, my friend!


Lol! Just play the game.  You might learn something about how the bank strokes your ego with promises of equity and the magic of Net Worth while you pay them double digit interest on your monthly payments.  Kek!


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol! Just play the game.  You might learn something about how the bank strokes your ego with promises of equity and the magic of Net Worth while you pay them double digit interest on your monthly payments.  Kek!


The bank tells me nothing about my equity and my net worth. Why are you so scared?  You see, yet again you’re complicating it. The bank loans me money on a repayment schedule so I can buy my house. nothing more to it than that. Instead of going to the bank for a loan, you pay money to your landlord so she can buy the house.  I also use credit lines to buy capital assets for my business and income-producing assets. And yes, the big, bad bank charged me interest! They don’t strone my ego or make promises. What’s the deal? A bank throw you out of your house once, because you’re so bad with money that you got foreclosed upon? That’s my guess.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Does she own a big building or are you a substantial contributor to the costs of her maintaining her asset value?


Yup and the adjoining cannibis fields.  Hard Money Loan, 12% simple interest, 3 years, balloon payment at the end.   I hold the DOT's and the promissary note.  60% LTV.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yup and the adjoining cannibis fields.  Hard Money Loan, 12% simple interest, 3 years, balloon payment at the end.   I hold the DOT's and the promissary note.  60% LTV.


You pay her rent so she can own the house? And proof that you’re on another planet is your reference to 12% interest. Fancy talk though...”hard money” “DOT’s” “LTV.” Legit people don’t talk like that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> The bank tells me nothing about my equity and my net worth. You see, yet again you’re complicating it. The bank loans me money on a repayment schedule so I can buy my house. nothing more to it than that. Instead of going to the bank for a loan, you pay money to your landlord so she can buy the house.


Yes that was my point.  The bank doesn't tell you anything about your equity and net worth?  Really?  They just full doc'd your loan.  Does an appraisal and loan application ring a bell.  And you wonder why I question what you say about your financial prowess.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> You pay her rent so she can own the house? And proof that you’re on another planet is your reference to 12% interest. Fancy talk though...”hard money” “DOT’s” “LTV.” Legit people don’t talk like that.


They actually do.  And don't flatter yourself, it's not that fancy.  It's a loan with different terms for repayment.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes that was my point.  The bank doesn't tell you anything about your equity and net worth?  Really?  They just full doc'd your loan.  Does an appraisal and loan application ring a bell.  And you wonder why I question what you say about your financial prowess.


Bank tells me nothing about my equity and net worth, fool. They tell themselves about the house value based upon what their appraiser tells them. And they ask me my net worth when I fill out the application...they don’t tell it to me nor do they promise me anything. My mortgage co is my broker (Morgan Stanley, remember) so they’re already well aware of my net worth, anyway. Now how much do you pay in rent every month?


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> They actually do.  And don't flatter yourself, it's not that fancy.  It's a loan with different terms for repayment.


You’re in a weird world. Who loans or borrows money at 12%? Somebody without assets, ha!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re in a weird world. Who loans or borrows money at 12%? Somebody without assets, ha!


Who borrows money when 60% plus of your monthly payment goes to interest for the first 6 years?!!  Fries U, what a deal!!


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Who borrows money when 60% plus of your monthly payment goes to interest for the first 6 years?!!  Fries U, what a deal!!


Did you get foreclosed upon, ever?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Did you get foreclosed upon, ever?


No.  But I did have to foreclose someone before.  What a pain.


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  But I did have to foreclose someone before.  What a pain.


Stroke of a pen from the cubicle and you served your banker bosses by taking somebody’s home? No wonder you’re such a happy guy. 
And no wonder you can’t afford a house. Jeez, what a shit job you have.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Stroke of a pen from the cubicle and you served your banker bosses by taking somebody’s home? No wonder you’re such a happy guy.
> And no wonder you can’t afford a house. Jeez, what a shit job you have.


But it was their asset.  How could we take it?  Fries U strikes again!


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But it was their asset.  How could we take it?  Fries U strikes again!


You had a contract that allowed you to take it if they didn’t pay you for it. Pretty much the same with any asset that anyone buys. Again, very basic stuff. Don’t overcomplicate it, son.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> You had a contract that allowed you to take it if they didn’t pay you for it. Pretty much the same with any asset that anyone buys. Again, very basic stuff. Don’t overcomplicate it, son.


You mean like a liability.  Fries U baby!!


----------



## messy (Jan 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mean like a liability.  Fries U baby!!


There are a few ways to be an asset. On credit, via a loan, installments, etc. It doesn’t matter what kind of asset. Real property is just one type of asset. 
Unless you buy it “outright,” you can in many cases be at risk for losing the asset. This particularly applies to when the lender has the asset as “collateral” (look it up) for the loan. In such a case, the lender need not sue you for money, they can simply repossess the asset. Liability is the loan, not the asset. They are not only two different things, they are actually opposite. Why are you having such a difficult time with these concepts? They’re not complicated.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 15, 2019)

messy said:


> There are a few ways to be an asset. On credit, via a loan, installments, etc. It doesn’t matter what kind of asset. Real property is just one type of asset.
> Unless you buy it “outright,” you can in many cases be at risk for losing the asset. This particularly applies to when the lender has the asset as “collateral” (look it up) for the loan. In such a case, the lender need not sue you for money, they can simply repossess the asset. Liability is the loan, not the asset. They are not only two different things, they are actually opposite. Why are you having such a difficult time with these concepts? They’re not complicated.


LMAO!!! You and Fries should get married.  Nothing more complicated then your jumbled thesis above.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Stroke of a pen from the cubicle and you served your banker bosses by taking somebody’s home? No wonder you’re such a happy guy.
> And no wonder you can’t afford a house. Jeez, what a shit job you have.


Getting a bit emotional aren't we?
Personal also, especially for someone who can't even be 1 identify on a soccer forum.
You lose.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Getting a bit emotional aren't we?
> Personal also, especially for someone who can't even be 1 identify on a soccer forum.
> You lose.


He and Fries must be having a spat.  They’re both a little emotional.


----------



## messy (Jan 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> LMAO!!! You and Fries should get married.  Nothing more complicated then your jumbled thesis above.


Which part was too complicated for you? Happy to break it down even further. Although some of it is so basic that a dictionary can even help you.


----------



## messy (Jan 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mean like a liability.  Fries U baby!!


How much do you pay in rent for your residence every month?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Which part was too complicated for you? Happy to break it down even further. Although some of it is so basic that a dictionary can even help you.


Yes it can.  But at some point you have to understand the process.  Otherwise you’re just messily stacking words. You write about collateral for a loan which was easy enough and correct.  You then contradict yourself by saying “the liability is the loan, not the asset”.  Maybe not what you meant.  But if you meant that statement to mean that the loan is a liability for the borrower, I am proud of your progress.  But people who know finance and real estate know a convoluted understanding when they read it.  So just to clarify, the loan is a liability for the borrower?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2019)

messy said:


> How much do you pay in rent for your residence every month?


A more than sufficient amount.


----------



## messy (Jan 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> A more than sufficient amount.


How much is that? More than $5K?


----------



## messy (Jan 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes it can.  But at some point you have to understand the process.  Otherwise you’re just messily stacking words. You write about collateral for a loan which was easy enough and correct.  You then contradict yourself by saying “the liability is the loan, not the asset”.  Maybe not what you meant.  But if you meant that statement to mean that the loan is a liability for the borrower, I am proud of your progress.  But people who know finance and real estate know a convoluted understanding when they read it.  So just to clarify, the loan is a liability for the borrower?


Yes, the loan is a liability for the borrower. The asset is what the buyer (I.e. borrower) financed with the loan. Not convoluted. Only your misunderstanding of what an “asset” is, as Fries has explained to you several times.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Yes, the loan is a liability for the borrower. The asset is what the buyer (I.e. borrower) financed with the loan. Not convoluted. Only your misunderstanding of what an “asset” is, as Fries has explained to you several times.


So far so good.  An asset for the lender who has collateralized your debt.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 23, 2019)

In the famous words of Bruddah Iz,

*"Venezuela"

Because socialism works, except whenever it is tried.

Venezuela Takes to Streets…
https://www.breitbart.com/national-security/2019/01/23/venezuela-socialist-officials-assault-opposition-lawmakers-outside-legislature/
…USA: Guaido President!…
39
…Socialist Officials Assault Opposition Lawmakers Outside Legislature*


----------



## nononono (Jan 23, 2019)

messy said:


> Stroke of a pen from the cubicle and you served your banker bosses by taking somebody’s home? No wonder you’re such a happy guy.
> And no wonder you can’t afford a house. Jeez, what a shit job you have.



*You've been foreclosed on before.....Niceeeee.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 23, 2019)

Sometimes, a three-point celebration is just a three-point celebration. Sometimes, a pep rally is just a pep rally. Sometimes, a smile is just a smile. And sometimes, a hat is just a hat.

Only among the most deranged partisans could a universal sports ritual, a common high school activity, a typical teen face and patriotic headgear be construed as evil symbols of patriarchal oppression.

These, however, are the soul-sapping, lunacy-inducing times in which we live.--Malkin


----------



## messy (Jan 23, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You've been foreclosed on before.....Niceeeee.*


not me. your buddy iz forecloses on people...


----------



## messy (Jan 23, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So far so good.  An asset for the lender who has collateralized your debt.


Hey, you forgot about the house! I make more than the bank! But they don't pay taxes on their interest (offshore havens) and I pay minimal taxes on the gains I get from selling a capital asset.
The moral of the story is...it sucks to work for your money. You pay full tax rates on income you work for.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 23, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey, you forgot about the house! I make more than the bank! But they don't pay taxes on their interest (offshore havens) and I pay minimal taxes on the gains I get from selling a capital asset.
> The moral of the story is...it sucks to work for your money. You pay full tax rates on income you work for.


Fries U!!  What a deal.


----------



## messy (Jan 23, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U!!  What a deal.


Oh I’m sorry...I reminded you that you aren’t the bank or the seller. You’re the guy that the government doesn’t protect...when you work in your cubicle, you pay ordinary tax rates.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 23, 2019)

messy said:


> Oh I’m sorry...I reminded you that you aren’t the bank or the seller. You’re the guy that the government doesn’t protect...when you work in your cubicle, you pay ordinary tax rates.


You reminded me that collateralized debt masquerading as an asset feeds the ego’s of those that buy equity by renting cash for 30 years.


----------



## messy (Jan 23, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You reminded me that collateralized debt masquerading as an asset feeds the ego’s of those that buy equity by renting cash for 30 years.


Stay poor and in the cubicle.
Keep paying your landlord so he can gain equity in his asset. 
Keep paying your ordinary income tax...although your marginal rate is probably low...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 23, 2019)

messy said:


> Stay poor and in the cubicle.
> Keep paying your landlord so he can gain equity in his asset.
> Keep paying your ordinary income tax...although your marginal rate is probably low...


We can’t all collateralize as much debt as you can and call it an asset while not generating any income until 20 to 30 years later.  Kek U!! What a deal!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2019)

That weird silence from Democrats over Venezuela's massive rejection of socialism
JANUARY 24, 2019
Funny how even the foreign-affairs Democrats, who have got lots to tweet about the shutdown, transgender troops, high school football, and Roe v. Wade...
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/that_weird_silence_from_democrats_over_venezuelas_massive_rejection_of_socialism.html


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> That weird silence from Democrats over Venezuela's massive rejection of socialism
> JANUARY 24, 2019
> Funny how even the foreign-affairs Democrats, who have got lots to tweet about the shutdown, transgender troops, high school football, and Roe v. Wade...
> https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/that_weird_silence_from_democrats_over_venezuelas_massive_rejection_of_socialism.html


Where’s AOC at and her 70% tax?


----------



## tenacious (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You reminded me that collateralized debt masquerading as an asset feeds the ego’s of those that buy equity by renting cash for 30 years.


"those that buy equity by renting cash". 
Hmm.  Try and say that fast and 3 times in a row...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

tenacious said:


> "those that buy equity by renting cash".
> Hmm.  Try and say that fast and 3 times in a row...


Once a month will do.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 25, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> That weird silence from Democrats over Venezuela's massive rejection of socialism
> JANUARY 24, 2019
> Funny how even the foreign-affairs Democrats, who have got lots to tweet about the shutdown, transgender troops, high school football, and Roe v. Wade...
> https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/that_weird_silence_from_democrats_over_venezuelas_massive_rejection_of_socialism.html


Weird silence?  

I think Dems are probably talking about Roger Stone getting arrested this morning, and what yet another member of the Trump election inner circle having "weird" criminal ties to Russian Oligarchs means.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Once a month will do.


"Will do" as in you're going to start saying that line to yourself three times, rapidly in a row, once a month sort of way?  Or is it a "will do" as in a "I'm bubs, and I write crazy posts" sort of way...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Weird silence?
> 
> I think Dems are probably talking about Roger Stone getting arrested this morning, and what yet another member of the Trump election inner circle having "weird" criminal ties to Russian Oligarchs means.


Circle


----------



## tenacious (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Circle


Any thoughts on the arrest of Roger Stone?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

tenacious said:


> "Will do" as in you're going to start saying that line to yourself three times, rapidly in a row, once a month sort of way?  Or is it a "will do" as in a "I'm bubs, and I write crazy posts" sort of way...


Lol!!  You people crack me up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Any thoughts on the arrest of Roger Stone?


Yes.


----------



## tenacious (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.


You've had thoughts that you'd like to share?


----------



## tenacious (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!!  You people crack me up.


Which people are you lumping me in with?


----------



## Booter (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sometimes, a three-point celebration is just a three-point celebration. Sometimes, a pep rally is just a pep rally. Sometimes, a smile is just a smile. And sometimes, a hat is just a hat.
> 
> Only among the most deranged partisans could a universal sports ritual, a common high school activity, a typical teen face and patriotic headgear be construed as evil symbols of patriarchal oppression.
> 
> These, however, are the soul-sapping, lunacy-inducing times in which we live.--Malkin


*Sometimes a scarf is just a scarf.*

*Malkin's Crusade against a Sinister Scarf![edit]*
In 2008, Malkin looked at an ad Rachael Ray did for Dunkin' Donuts and decided that the black-and-white paisley scarf she was wearing was a sly sign of support for the Palestinian Liberation Organization.[16]

It is scientifically impossible to make that sound more ridiculous than it really is. Trust us, we tried.

*Sometimes a crescent is just a shape.*

*Malkin and the Sinister Crescent![edit]*
In 2005, Malkin took a pre-eminent role in an astoundingly dumb controversy regarding a proposed memorial for Flight 93. Dubbed "Crescent of Embrace," it consisted primarily of a stand of trees partially surrounding the crash site. The design was selected by a panel composed of design experts and victims' family members, and it was announced on September 7.[4]

Shortly after the announcement, a group of Internet obsessives—Malkin among them—came to the conclusion that the Memorial was actually a covert memorial to the terrorists.[5] Why? Because it's a big red crescent, a _historic_ symbol of Islam![6] With such clear facts, all Malkin had to overcome were the families, all of whom were sure the claims were utter bunk.[7] Of course, Malkin is not one to let something as petty as the stated desires of the grieving get in her way.

The dreaded crescent was not a particularly long-term campaign, for Malkin or anyone else. Today, the only ones who want to talk about it are the mentally unstable sons of renowned political theorists.[8]

*Sometimes an interment camp is Racist.*

*Malkin defends Japanese internment[edit]*
In 2004, Malkin released a book _defending_ Japanese internment during World War II (something that was ordered by Franklin D. Roosevelt). Apparently, she didn't like the fact that Japanese internment was brought up by those opposing racial profiling of terr'ists Muslims, so she decided to write a negationist history of Japanese internment. In fact, it was *not racist*. Nothing to do with racism, nothing at all.[3] The book is especially ironic considering that the leading conservative Republican during World War II was _opposed_ to Japanese American Internment.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Sometimes a scarf is just a scarf.*
> 
> *Malkin's Crusade against a Sinister Scarf![edit]*
> In 2008, Malkin looked at an ad Rachael Ray did for Dunkin' Donuts and decided that the black-and-white paisley scarf she was wearing was a sly sign of support for the Palestinian Liberation Organization.[16]
> ...


Fake news.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

tenacious said:


> You've had thoughts that you'd like to share?


Yes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 25, 2019)

tenacious said:


> Which people are you lumping me in with?


Lol! You people crack me up.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol! You people crack me up.


What do you think about Lumpy as a nickname for Tenacious? A much bettah fit.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 27, 2019)

*The Truth about the Shutdown: Daily Federal Spending Fell Just 7% During "the Government Shutdown"*
Calling the current budget impasse a shutdown is just another example of the political corruption of our language.

*The Debt Factor*
However, the federal government is rolling over a large amount of its debt. It is issuing new government securities and using the funds from the sale of these securities to pay for previous securities that have come due. These withdrawals are under the line item Public Debt Cash Redemptions (PDCR). It’s analogous to a firm borrowing money to make the principal payments on its debt.

The bulk of federal spending is this type of spending. The spending number is so high because of this debt service.

Most everyone, all households and businesses, would classify loan payments as spending even if they financed the loan payments by borrowing money. However, most analysts, when they discuss federal spending, omit this debt service. They usually only include the other types of spending. So let’s take a look at that.

In FY 2018, federal withdrawals (spending) not including the debt service (PDCR) totaled $4,757.8 billion. That’s a daily average of $13 billion. (As an aside, please note that two-thirds of federal spending in FY 2018 was debt payments. This should make us uneasy regarding the federal government’s long-term financial viability.)

For the first four weeks of the shutdown, December 22, 2018, to January 18 of this year, withdrawals less PDCR totaled $338.5 billion for a daily average of a little more than $12 billion.

So by this measure of federal spending, the feds are spending on average 7.3 percent less per day during this shutdown than they did in FY 2018.

*Regardless of your position on the shutdown, we should recognize the deceit involved in calling this a shutdown. Spending $12 billion per day is not a shutdown. Spending 7 percent less than you spent last year is not a shutdown.

Calling the current budget impasse a shutdown is just another example of the political corruption of our language.*


----------



## Booter (Jan 28, 2019)

*Trump and the National Debt*
*Instead of Eliminating the Debt, Trump Will Add $5.6 Trillion*

*During the 2016 presidential campaign, Republican candidate Donald Trump promised he would eliminate the nation’s debt in eight years. Instead, his budgets would add $8.3 trillion in four years. It would increase the U.S. debt to $25 trillion.*

*Trump has a cavalier attitude about the nation’s debt load. During the campaign, he said the nation could "borrow knowing that if the economy crashed, you could make a deal.” He added, “The United States will never default because you can print the money." *

*As interest rates and inflation rise, the cost of providing benefits and paying the interest on the debt will skyrocket. That leaves less money for other services. At that point, the government will be forced to cut services or raise taxes. That will further slow economic growth. At that point, continued deficit spending will no longer work. *

*As interest rates and inflation rise, the cost of providing benefits and paying the interest on the debt will skyrocket. That leaves less money for other services. At that point, the government will be forced to cut services or raise taxes. That will further slow economic growth. At that point, continued deficit spending will no longer work. *


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 28, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump and the National Debt*
> *Instead of Eliminating the Debt, Trump Will Add $5.6 Trillion*
> 
> *During the 2016 presidential campaign, Republican candidate Donald Trump promised he would eliminate the nation’s debt in eight years. Instead, his budgets would add $8.3 trillion in four years. It would increase the U.S. debt to $25 trillion.*
> ...


Fake News.


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump and the National Debt*
> *Instead of Eliminating the Debt, Trump Will Add $5.6 Trillion*
> 
> *During the 2016 presidential campaign, Republican candidate Donald Trump promised he would eliminate the nation’s debt in eight years. Instead, his budgets would add $8.3 trillion in four years. It would increase the U.S. debt to $25 trillion.*
> ...


There’s no such thing as a fiscally conservative Republican. Not Bush, not W, not Trump. Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown have proven track records as fiscally conservative Democrats, which is why they both gave us budget surpluses.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

messy said:


> There’s no such thing as a fiscally conservative Republican. Not Bush, not W, not Trump. Bill Clinton and Jerry Brown have proven track records as fiscally conservative Democrats, which is why they both gave us budget surpluses.


The Republican Congress gave Slick Margarita Crisis Bailout Willy his surplus after he and then Secretary of Treasury Bob Rubin conned the tax payers in to bailing out American Banks like Citi.  Rubin pulled down 20 million from Citi bank when he went to work for them the following year as a lobbyist.  Prety slick huh?  Jerry Brown is going to be known for not funding pensions.  Hence the surplus when you don't account for unfunded liabilities.


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

I love the Fox Talk radio ads. 

Services for people drowning in debt who want to get out of their obligations.

“Mosquito Joe” franchises.

Health insurance collectives where you call like “1-800-Bible” to sign up.


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Republican Congress gave Slick Margarita Crisis Bailout Willy his surplus after he and then Secretary of Treasury Bob Rubin conned the tax payers in to bailing out American Banks like Citi.  Rubin pulled down 20 million from Citi bank when he went to work for them the following year as a lobbyist.  Prety slick huh?  Jerry Brown is going to be known for not funding pensions.  Hence the surplus when you don't account for unfunded liabilities.


Predicting again?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump and the National Debt*
> *Instead of Eliminating the Debt, Trump Will Add $5.6 Trillion*
> 
> *During the 2016 presidential campaign, Republican candidate Donald Trump promised he would eliminate the nation’s debt in eight years. Instead, his budgets would add $8.3 trillion in four years. It would increase the U.S. debt to $25 trillion.*
> ...


Thanks for highlighting the long term effects of 6 straight years of QE to prop up Obama's two terms, nearly doubling the National Debt.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

messy said:


> Predicting again?


Past history that they don't teach at Fries U. Kek!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

messy said:


> I love the Fox Talk radio ads.
> 
> Services for people drowning in debt who want to get out of their obligations.
> 
> ...


Somebody has to offer real Health Insurance.


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Past history that they don't teach at Fries U. Kek!


“Jerry Brown is going to be known for...” 
doesn’t sound like “past history.” Sounds more like “future history.”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

messy said:


> “Jerry Brown is going to be known for...”
> doesn’t sound like “past history.” Sounds more like “future history.”


Unfunded.  Past tense.  History.  Is known for.  Thank you for the correction.


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Unfunded.  Past tense.  History.  Is known for.  Thank you for the correction.


Except that’s not at all what he’s known for, so wrong again, hombre.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

messy said:


> Except that’s not at all what he’s known for, so wrong again, hombre.


Okay. Kek!  Game Over, I win!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

*California’s New Governor Calls for a Tax on Drinking Water*
Communities throughout the state struggle with dangerous pollutants in their supply, but opponents of the suggested tax say there is no need to tax residents in order to solve the problem.
*Monday, January 28, 2019*








*Carey Wedler*

Newsom’s push has received praise from environmental groups, but the _Sacramento Bee_ reports that while the budget has an increased chance of passing since Democrats regained their supermajority in the legislature, some Democrats are hesitant to approve new taxes on drinking water.

*Considering the hundreds of millions of dollars that have already been allocated to fix the water problem, it seems the bigger issue isn’t a lack of funding but an excess of bureaucracy and intervention.*


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Okay. Kek!  Game Over, I win!


Most popular politician in the history of our fine state.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 28, 2019)

messy said:


> Most popular politician in the history of our fine state.


Ahhh yes.  Popularity.


----------



## messy (Jan 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ahhh yes.  Popularity.


For 45 years. Insane.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ahhh yes.  Popularity.


Didn't do Hillary much good.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 28, 2019)

This just in,
Elizabeth Warren aka Pocahontas is batshit crazy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 29, 2019)

messy said:


> For 45 years. Insane.


That’s a lot of unfunded liabilities.


----------



## messy (Jan 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That’s a lot of unfunded liabilities.


That’s a big budget surplus! 2 terms, 40 years apart. Both times!
Learn from the Democrats, son. And while you’re at it, go spend some money, will ya’? Abundance!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 29, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s a big budget surplus! 2 terms, 40 years apart. Both times!
> Learn from the Democrats, son. And while you’re at it, go spend some money, will ya’? Abundance!


Ya gotta have it to spend it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 29, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ya gotta have it to spend it.


You people sure don't.


----------



## nononono (Jan 29, 2019)

messy said:


> not me. your buddy iz forecloses on people...



*Awww.....now now " Messy " Financial...Your Queen Bee Kamala from the hive*
*up north says that the TRUTH is the key.*
*Just ask Willie and a few other step stools ....*
*You've been foreclosed on.*


----------



## nononono (Jan 29, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ya gotta have it to spend it.


*Not if you're a Democrat or a Rhino....*

*California's Debt is a large proportion of the National Debt....*


----------



## messy (Jan 29, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Awww.....now now " Messy " Financial...Your Queen Bee Kamala from the hive*
> *up north says that the TRUTH is the key.*
> *Just ask Willie and a few other step stools ....*
> *You've been foreclosed on.*


That makes sense!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 29, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s a big budget surplus! 2 terms, 40 years apart. Both times!
> Learn from the Democrats, son. And while you’re at it, go spend some money, will ya’? Abundance!


Call your liabilities an asset and presto you have a surplus


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 29, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s a big budget surplus! 2 terms, 40 years apart. Both times!
> Learn from the Democrats, son. And while you’re at it, go spend some money, will ya’? Abundance!


6 straight years of QE to subsidize a democrats two terms while nearly doubling the nations debt.  Fries U!! What a deal


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jan 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 6 straight years of QE to subsidize a democrats two terms while nearly doubling the nations debt.  Fries U!! What a deal


Yet you are mum on the new increasing t debt numbers.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 29, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yet you are mum on the new increasing t debt numbers.


2 years and still no QE.


----------



## messy (Jan 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Call your liabilities an asset and presto you have a surplus


I don’t count the value of my encumbered real estate assets when I look at my unencumbered annual income, stocks and bonds. I invest in more shit and the abundance grows! Try it!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 29, 2019)

messy said:


> I don’t count the value of my encumbered real estate assets when I look at my unencumbered annual income, stocks and bonds. I invest in more shit and the abundance grows! Try it!


I was talking about your boys unfunded liabilities.


----------



## messy (Jan 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I was talking about your boys unfunded liabilities.


Think abundance. They’ll all be paid, baby. It’s the golden state. 
And if they’re not, that’s ok too. People gotta work. Too many public employees retiring early with lifetime big pensions.


----------



## nononono (Jan 30, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> This just in,
> Elizabeth Warren aka Pocahontas is batshit crazy.










*That's Kamala Harris hanging right next to her !*


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 6 straight years of QE to subsidize a democrats two terms while nearly doubling the nations debt.  Fries U!! What a deal


How much has the debt increased in the last two years? And we were not in any recession when he took over? We had actual growth, unlike Obama?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> How much has the debt increased in the last two years? And we were not in any recession when he took over? We had actual growth, unlike Obama?


8 years of debt based growth while nearly doubling national debt easily drives additional debt.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> Think abundance. They’ll all be paid, baby. It’s the golden state.
> And if they’re not, that’s ok too. People gotta work. Too many public employees retiring early with lifetime big pensions.


Public employees should work and fund their pensions while Brown et al play Enron with their money?  Fries U!  What a deal!


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Public employees should work and fund their pensions while Brown et al play Enron with their money?  Fries U!  What a deal!


Which pensions have gone unpaid so far? Anyone you know?


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 8 years of debt based growth while nearly doubling national debt easily drives additional debt.


How much has the debt grown under Trump? Do the budgets he has presented reduce the debt, or tend to substantially increase the debt?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> Which pensions have gone unpaid so far? Anyone you know?


Can’t pay what you don’t fund.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> How much has the debt grown under Trump? Do the budgets he has presented reduce the debt, or tend to substantially increase the debt?


Same as Obama’s 1 trillion a year.  Without QE!!  See the diff? Fries U!  What a deal!


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Same as Obama’s 1 trillion a year.  Without QE!!  See the diff? Fries U!  What a deal!


So the debt grows the same under Trump? Even though there’s no recession to spend is out of? That’s crazy, isn’t it?


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Can’t pay what you don’t fund.


So no one? You don’t know anybody whose pension payments haven’t been made? Have you heard of anyone in that position? Have you read of anyone who went looking for their pension payment and didn’t get it, because of a lack of funds?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Can’t pay what you don’t fund.


I notice that the Legendary Mess bails on a thread when he is made to look like a tool. Soon he's gonna bail on this one..


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I notice that the Legendary Mess bails on a thread when he is made to look like a tool. Soon he's gonna bail on this one..


So Iz doesn’t know anybody, nor has he heard of anybody, that has not received a pension payment due to lack of funding.

I asked him twice and then I also asked him about the debt growth under trump. I have two questions hanging out there, so what do you mean? 

Since you’re butting in like the idiot that you are and claiming I bailed when I didn’t, stupid (did I mention that you’re stupid?), do you know anybody whose pension payment hasn’t been made to to lack of funding of our state’s pension fund?


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I notice that the Legendary Mess bails on a thread when he is made to look like a tool. Soon he's gonna bail on this one..


What were you saying about pension funds and me looking like a tool? They’re unfunded? How do? Or did you bail...maybe your family called?


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> What were you saying about pension funds and me looking like a tool? They’re unfunded? How do? Or did you bail...maybe your family called?


Are you drunk or something? Oh wait..this is your normal multiple screen name self.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> So Iz doesn’t know anybody, nor has he heard of anybody, that has not received a pension payment due to lack of funding.
> 
> I asked him twice and then I also asked him about the debt growth under trump. I have two questions hanging out there, so what do you mean?
> 
> Since you’re butting in like the idiot that you are and claiming I bailed when I didn’t, stupid (did I mention that you’re stupid?), do you know anybody whose pension payment hasn’t been made to to lack of funding of our state’s pension fund?


Yep you bailed all right. Why did you completely change your response on the Climate thread? I mean, using the edit feature to fix a typo is one thing but using it the way you did, to cover your ass because it needed covering is, well, very liberal of you. You attorneys crack me up, always needing loophole to bail you out. In this case... the edit feature. Continue on Alice...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> So the debt grows the same under Trump? Even though there’s no recession to spend is out of? That’s crazy, isn’t it?


What’s even crazier is when YOU, like your boy Brown, forget about the liabilities in interest on 20 trillion in national debt.  Nearly half of which was added under Obama alone.  Interest alone is at 3 trillion!!  You don’t need a recession to go with that.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> So no one? You don’t know anybody whose pension payments haven’t been made? Have you heard of anyone in that position? Have you read of anyone who went looking for their pension payment and didn’t get it, because of a lack of funds?


At least your debt is collateralized.  Pension funds aren’t in addition to not being funded.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 30, 2019)

messy said:


> Which pensions have gone unpaid so far? Anyone you know?


You sure don't sound like a millionaire.


----------



## messy (Jan 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Yep you bailed all right. Why did you completely change your response on the Climate thread? I mean, using the edit feature to fix a typo is one thing but using it the way you did, to cover your ass because it needed covering is, well, very liberal of you. You attorneys crack me up, always needing loophole to bail you out. In this case... the edit feature. Continue on Alice...


We were on the topic of pensions, right? And you stepped in to accuse me of bailing? Who’s drunk, exactly? Or are you just being stupid again?


----------



## espola (Jan 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Yep you bailed all right. Why did you completely change your response on the Climate thread? I mean, using the edit feature to fix a typo is one thing but using it the way you did, to cover your ass because it needed covering is, well, very liberal of you. You attorneys crack me up, always needing loophole to bail you out. In this case... the edit feature. Continue on Alice...


Coocoo.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 31, 2019)

Sounds like ca is cutting taxes to stimulate the economy?

California Revenue Crash as Pot Taxes miss Budget by $1 Billion
JANUARY 31, 2019
This is like, so uncool, man. 

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/california_revenue_crash_as_pot_taxes_miss_budget_by_1_billion.html


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jan 31, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Sounds like ca is cutting taxes to stimulate the economy?
> 
> California Revenue Crash as Pot Taxes miss Budget by $1 Billion
> JANUARY 31, 2019
> ...


Shocking!  Not Ca.??!!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 31, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Shocking!  Not Ca.??!!


Cra Cra.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 31, 2019)

messy said:


> We were on the topic of pensions, right? And you stepped in to accuse me of bailing? Who’s drunk, exactly? Or are you just being stupid again?


Keep trying Alice..


----------



## messy (Jan 31, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Keep trying Alice..


Thanks for acknowledging that yes, you’re just being stupid again.
Hey what are you doing today? Has your family told you yet? 
I’m at my office, FYI.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jan 31, 2019)

SCHULTZ: I'LL DEFEND AMERICAN DREAM!
_DEMS FREAKOUT_


----------



## Multi Sport (Jan 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Thanks for acknowledging that yes, you’re just being stupid again.
> Hey what are you doing today? Has your family told you yet?
> I’m at my office, FYI.


That has to be an all time weak ass attempt at smack. C'mon Alice! I expect more from you! Dig in Sunshine, don't just stand there and bleed!!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 1, 2019)

Where can I send the bacon?






DEM: TAX RICH AT 90%


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Where can I send the bacon?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Booter (Feb 4, 2019)

*The Curse of Econ 101*
When it comes to basic policy questions such as the minimum wage, introductory economics can be more misleading than it is helpful.

*The argument against increasing the minimum wage often relies on what I call “economism”—the misleading application of basic lessons from Economics 101 to real-world problems, creating the illusion of consensus and reducing a complex topic to a simple, open-and-shut case.*

The real impact of the minimum wage, however, is much less clear than these talking points might indicate. *Looking at historical experience, there is no obvious relationship between the minimum wage and unemployment:* adjusted for inflation, the federal minimum was highest from 1967 through 1969, when the unemployment rate was below 4 percent—a historically low level. When economists try to tackle this question, they come up with all sorts of results. In 1994, David Card and Alan Krueger evaluated an increase in New Jersey’s minimum wage by comparing fast-food restaurants on both sides of the New Jersey-Pennsylvania border. They concluded, “Contrary to the central prediction of the textbook model ... we find no evidence that the rise in New Jersey’s minimum wage reduced employment at fast-food restaurants in the state.”

Card and Krueger’s findings have been vigorously contested across dozens of empirical studies. Today, people on both sides of the debate can cite papers supporting their position, and reviews of the academic research disagree on what conclusions to draw. David Neumark and William Wascher, economists who have long argued against the minimum wage, reviewed more than one hundred empirical papers in 2006. Although the studies had a wide range of results, they concluded that the “preponderance of the evidence” indicated that a higher minimum wage does increase unemployment. On the other hand, two recent meta-studies (which pool together the results of multiple analyses) have found that increasing the minimum wage does not have a significant impact on employment. In the past several years, a new round of sophisticated analyses comparing changes in employment levels between neighboring counties also found “strong earnings effects and no employment effects of minimum wage increases.” (That is, the number of jobs stays the same and workers make more money.) Not surprisingly, Neumark and Wascher have contested this approach. The profession as a whole is divided on the topic: When the University of Chicago Booth School of Business asked a panel of prominent economists in 2013 whether increasing the minimum wage to $9 would “make it noticeably harder for low-skilled workers to find employment,” the responses were split down the middle.

The idea that a higher minimum wage might not increase unemployment runs directly counter to the lessons of Economics 101. According to the textbook, if labor becomes more expensive, companies buy less of it. But there are several reasons why the real world does not behave so predictably. Although the standard model predicts that employers will replace workers with machines if wages increase, additional labor-saving technologies are not available to every company at a reasonable cost. Small employers in particular have limited flexibility; at their scale, they may not be able to maintain their operations with fewer workers. (Imagine a local copy shop: No matter how fast the copy machine is, there still needs to be one person to deal with customers.) Therefore, some companies can’t lay off employees if the minimum wage is increased. At the other extreme, very large employers may have enough market power that the usual supply-and-demand model doesn’t apply to them. They can reduce the wage level by hiring fewer workers (only those willing to work for low pay), just as a monopolist can boost prices by cutting production (think of an oil cartel, for example). A minimum wage forces them to pay more, which eliminates the incentive to minimize their workforce.

A higher minimum wage motivates more people to enter the labor force, raising both employment and output. Finally, higher pay increases workers’ buying power. Because poor people spend a relatively large proportion of their income, a higher minimum wage can boost overall economic activity and stimulate economic growth, creating more jobs. *All of these factors vastly complicate the two-dimensional diagram taught in Economics 101 and help explain why a higher minimum wage does not necessarily throw people out of work. The supply-and-demand diagram is a good conceptual starting point for thinking about the minimum wage. But on its own, it has limited predictive value in the much more complex real world.*

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/01/economism-and-the-minimum-wage/513155/


----------



## nononono (Feb 4, 2019)

messy said:


> How much has the debt increased in the last two years? And we were not in any recession when he took over? We had actual growth, unlike Obama?



*Define your point.....*

*Then ascribe the point to a Logical Premise.....*

*Premise*
*Body*
*Conclusion*


----------



## nononono (Feb 4, 2019)

Booter said:


> *The Curse of Econ 101*
> When it comes to basic policy questions such as the minimum wage, introductory economics can be more misleading than it is helpful.
> 
> *The argument against increasing the minimum wage often relies on what I call “economism”—the misleading application of basic lessons from Economics 101 to real-world problems, creating the illusion of consensus and reducing a complex topic to a simple, open-and-shut case.*
> ...



*Did I miss something in that article...?*
*Where does the article address the Employer as related to minimum wage/profitability....*

*Econ 101....how to Cornfuse the emerging Entrepreneur in one Semester. *


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 7, 2019)

*NETFLIX paid $0 in taxes...** 
*
_*Record $845 million profits...*_


----------



## messy (Feb 7, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *NETFLIX paid $0 in taxes...**
> *
> _*Record $845 million profits...*_


That's how it's supposed to work, dummy. And be very happy that our president helped bring us major corporate tax cuts. They needed it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 7, 2019)

messy said:


> That's how it's supposed to work, dummy. And be very happy that our president helped bring us major corporate tax cuts. They needed it.


You are still a little bit emotional? I am just posting info, you take it the way you want.
Don't make me get Iz involved.


----------



## messy (Feb 7, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are still a little bit emotional? I am just posting info, you take it the way you want.
> Don't make me get Iz involved.


Just happy for Netflix. I hope you are too.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 7, 2019)

messy said:


> Just happy for Netflix. I hope you are too.


Can't say that I am.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 9, 2019)

Booter said:


> *The Curse of Econ 101*
> When it comes to basic policy questions such as the minimum wage, introductory economics can be more misleading than it is helpful.
> 
> *The argument against increasing the minimum wage often relies on what I call “economism”—the misleading application of basic lessons from Economics 101 to real-world problems, creating the illusion of consensus and reducing a complex topic to a simple, open-and-shut case.*
> ...


Sucker.


----------



## Booter (Feb 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker.


Predictable.

The fact that this is the debate already demonstrates the historical influence of economism. Once upon a time, the major issue affecting workers’ wages and income inequality was unionization. In the 1950s, about one in every three wage and salary employees was a union member. Unions, of course, were an early and frequent target of economism. Hayek argued that unions are bad both for workers, because “they cannot in the long run increase real wages for all wishing to work above the level that would establish itself in a free market,” and for society as a whole, because “by establishing effective monopolies in the supply of the different kinds of labor, the unions will prevent competition from acting as an effective regulator of the allocation of all resources.” For Friedman, unions “harmed the public at large and workers as a whole by distorting the use of labor” while increasing inequality even within the working class. The changing composition of the U.S. workforce, state right-to-work laws, and aggressive anti-unionization tactics by employers—increasingly tolerated by the National Labor Relations Board, beginning with the Reagan administration—all contributed to a long, slow fall in unionization levels. By 2015, only 12 percent of wage and salary employees were union members—fewer than 7 percent in the private sector. Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace with the overall growth of the economy. According to an analysis by the sociologists Bruce Western and Jake Rosenfeld, one-fifth to one-third of the increase in inequality between 1973 and 2007 results from the decline of unions.

With unions only a distant memory for many people, federal minimum-wage legislation has become the best hope for propping up wages for low-income workers. And again, the worldview of economism comes to the aid of employers by abstracting away from the reality of low-wage work to a pristine world ruled by the “law” of supply and demand.


----------



## messy (Feb 12, 2019)

Booter said:


> Predictable.
> 
> The fact that this is the debate already demonstrates the historical influence of economism. Once upon a time, the major issue affecting workers’ wages and income inequality was unionization. In the 1950s, about one in every three wage and salary employees was a union member. Unions, of course, were an early and frequent target of economism. Hayek argued that unions are bad both for workers, because “they cannot in the long run increase real wages for all wishing to work above the level that would establish itself in a free market,” and for society as a whole, because “by establishing effective monopolies in the supply of the different kinds of labor, the unions will prevent competition from acting as an effective regulator of the allocation of all resources.” For Friedman, unions “harmed the public at large and workers as a whole by distorting the use of labor” while increasing inequality even within the working class. The changing composition of the U.S. workforce, state right-to-work laws, and aggressive anti-unionization tactics by employers—increasingly tolerated by the National Labor Relations Board, beginning with the Reagan administration—all contributed to a long, slow fall in unionization levels. By 2015, only 12 percent of wage and salary employees were union members—fewer than 7 percent in the private sector. Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace with the overall growth of the economy. According to an analysis by the sociologists Bruce Western and Jake Rosenfeld, one-fifth to one-third of the increase in inequality between 1973 and 2007 results from the decline of unions.
> 
> With unions only a distant memory for many people, federal minimum-wage legislation has become the best hope for propping up wages for low-income workers. And again, the worldview of economism comes to the aid of employers by abstracting away from the reality of low-wage work to a pristine world ruled by the “law” of supply and demand.


So what does Make America Great Again mean? When was that? What were the tax rates? What was the percentage of labor in unions?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 12, 2019)

Booter said:


> Predictable.
> 
> The fact that this is the debate already demonstrates the historical influence of economism. Once upon a time, the major issue affecting workers’ wages and income inequality was unionization. In the 1950s, about one in every three wage and salary employees was a union member. Unions, of course, were an early and frequent target of economism. Hayek argued that unions are bad both for workers, because “they cannot in the long run increase real wages for all wishing to work above the level that would establish itself in a free market,” and for society as a whole, because “by establishing effective monopolies in the supply of the different kinds of labor, the unions will prevent competition from acting as an effective regulator of the allocation of all resources.” For Friedman, unions “harmed the public at large and workers as a whole by distorting the use of labor” while increasing inequality even within the working class. The changing composition of the U.S. workforce, state right-to-work laws, and aggressive anti-unionization tactics by employers—increasingly tolerated by the National Labor Relations Board, beginning with the Reagan administration—all contributed to a long, slow fall in unionization levels. By 2015, only 12 percent of wage and salary employees were union members—fewer than 7 percent in the private sector. Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace with the overall growth of the economy. According to an analysis by the sociologists Bruce Western and Jake Rosenfeld, one-fifth to one-third of the increase in inequality between 1973 and 2007 results from the decline of unions.
> 
> With unions only a distant memory for many people, federal minimum-wage legislation has become the best hope for propping up wages for low-income workers. And again, the worldview of economism comes to the aid of employers by abstracting away from the reality of low-wage work to a pristine world ruled by the “law” of supply and demand.


Fake News.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 12, 2019)

messy said:


> So what does Make America Great Again mean? When was that? What were the tax rates? What was the percentage of labor in unions?


Why are you asking booty?
You people fucked up the union thing.


----------



## messy (Feb 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker.


...Says the guy whose tag line admits he can't afford health insurance. Commenting on economics. LOL.


----------



## messy (Feb 12, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Why are you asking booty?
> You people fucked up the union thing.


asking you then. same questions.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 12, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


----------



## Booter (Feb 13, 2019)

*National debt tops $22 trillion for the first time as experts warn of ripple effects*


The Treasury Department reported the debt hit $22.012 trillion, a jump of more than $30 billion in just this month.

The national debt has been rising at a faster rate following the passage of President Donald Trump’s $1.5 trillion tax-cut package a little more than a year ago and as the result of congressional efforts to increase spending on domestic and military programs. The nation has added more than $1 trillion in debt in the last 11 months alone.

“Reaching this unfortunate milestone so rapidly is the latest sign that our fiscal situation is not only unsustainable but accelerating,” said Michael A. Peterson, chief executive officer of the Peter G. Peterson Foundation, a nonpartisan organization working to address the country’s long-term fiscal challenges.

“The fiscal recklessness over the past years has been shocking, with few willing to step up with a real plan,” they said. “We need responsible leadership to fix the debt, not a worsening of partisanship.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2019/02/12/national-debt-tops-22-trillion-first-time-ever/2849978002/


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 13, 2019)

Booter said:


> *National debt tops $22 trillion for the first time as experts warn of ripple effects*
> 
> 
> The Treasury Department reported the debt hit $22.012 trillion, a jump of more than $30 billion in just this month.
> ...


Obama built that.


----------



## messy (Feb 13, 2019)

Booter said:


> *National debt tops $22 trillion for the first time as experts warn of ripple effects*
> 
> 
> The Treasury Department reported the debt hit $22.012 trillion, a jump of more than $30 billion in just this month.
> ...


What is Republican economic logic again? You cut taxes and increase spending? Deficits climb and then Dick Cheney, etc. say who gives a damn about deficits? So this is about right.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

Booter said:


> Predictable.
> 
> The fact that this is the debate already demonstrates the historical influence of economism. Once upon a time, the major issue affecting workers’ wages and income inequality was unionization. In the 1950s, about one in every three wage and salary employees was a union member. Unions, of course, were an early and frequent target of economism. Hayek argued that unions are bad both for workers, because “they cannot in the long run increase real wages for all wishing to work above the level that would establish itself in a free market,” and for society as a whole, because “by establishing effective monopolies in the supply of the different kinds of labor, the unions will prevent competition from acting as an effective regulator of the allocation of all resources.” For Friedman, unions “harmed the public at large and workers as a whole by distorting the use of labor” while increasing inequality even within the working class. The changing composition of the U.S. workforce, state right-to-work laws, and aggressive anti-unionization tactics by employers—increasingly tolerated by the National Labor Relations Board, beginning with the Reagan administration—all contributed to a long, slow fall in unionization levels. By 2015, only 12 percent of wage and salary employees were union members—fewer than 7 percent in the private sector. Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace with the overall growth of the economy. According to an analysis by the sociologists Bruce Western and Jake Rosenfeld, one-fifth to one-third of the increase in inequality between 1973 and 2007 results from the decline of unions.
> 
> With unions only a distant memory for many people, federal minimum-wage legislation has become the best hope for propping up wages for low-income workers. And again, the worldview of economism comes to the aid of employers by abstracting away from the reality of low-wage work to a pristine world ruled by the “law” of supply and demand.


_Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace etc.with the overall growth of the economy._

_Low- and middle-income workers’ _are not the same people over a lifetime.  Low and middle income workers make more and move up as they gain more skills, education, etc.  Less experienced workers replace those that vacate those _Low- and middle-income worker _positions so that there is a another set of workers to gain new skills.


----------



## messy (Feb 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> _Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace etc.with the overall growth of the economy._
> 
> _Low- and middle-income workers’ _are not the same people over a lifetime.  Low and middle income workers make more and move up as they gain more skills, education, etc.  Less experienced workers replace those that vacate those _Low- and middle-income worker _positions so that there is a another set of workers to gain new skills.


Got that, Booter? There are no experienced, older low- and middle-income workers. Even though an older low- or middle-income worker wrote that!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


Socialism.  Very real news.  Just ask Venezuelans.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

messy said:


> ...Says the guy whose tag line admits he can't afford health insurance. Commenting on economics. LOL.


Says the chicken who doesn't want to do the ROA because he knows it proves him wrong and so he wants to call a professional.  Cluck, Cluck


----------



## messy (Feb 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Says the chicken who doesn't want to do the ROA because he knows it proves him wrong and so he wants to call a professional.  Cluck, Cluck


Huh? Wrong about what?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Got that, Booter? There are no experienced, older low- and middle-income workers. Even though an older low- or middle-income worker wrote that!


He gets that socialism likes one size fits all policies.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Huh? Wrong about what?


Everything ROA


----------



## messy (Feb 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He gets that socialism likes one size fits all policies.


That’s very well stated...


----------



## messy (Feb 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Everything ROA


That’s very clear, too. You’re a good talker.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s very well stated...


Not if you're Venezuelan.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s very clear.


apparently not


----------



## messy (Feb 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not if you're Venezuelan.


You get it, Tiger. You’re on a roll.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

Booter said:


> *National debt tops $22 trillion for the first time as experts warn of ripple effects*
> 
> 
> The Treasury Department reported the debt hit $22.012 trillion, a jump of more than *$30 billion in just this month.*


Over twice that a month during 6 years of QE.  Any surprise that we are at 22 trillion.  Duh


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 13, 2019)

messy said:


> You get it, Tiger. You’re on a roll.


That's not saying much.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Over twice that a month during 6 years of QE.  Any surprise that we are at 22 trillion.  Duh


Math is not your strong point.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Math is not your strong point.


Denial is yours.


----------



## Booter (Feb 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Over twice that a month during 6 years of QE.  Any surprise that we are at 22 trillion.  Duh


Source?


----------



## Booter (Feb 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> _Low- and middle-income workers’ reduced bargaining power is a major reason why their wages have not kept pace etc.with the overall growth of the economy._
> 
> _Low- and middle-income workers’ _are not the same people over a lifetime.  Low and middle income workers make more and move up as they gain more skills, education, etc.  Less experienced workers replace those that vacate those _Low- and middle-income worker _positions so that there is a another set of workers to gain new skills.


Yes, you never see old janitors, maids, cooks, waitresses, punch press operators, die casters, receptionists, assembly workers,...etc.  these folks stay in these positions and at these levels for a variety of reasons.  The sort of work that they do makes up the backbone of the economy and they should get to live a version of the American Dream.  Your lack of understanding or experience of the real world is comical.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> Yes, you never see old janitors, maids, cooks, waitresses, punch press operators, die casters, receptionists, assembly workers,...etc.  these folks stay in these positions and at these levels for a variety of reasons.  The sort of work that they do makes up the backbone of the economy and they should get to live a version of the American Dream.  Your lack of understanding or experience of the real world is comical.


dizzy is an anti-government, who depends on the government for a living, anti-intellectual, who joined the Navy because he didn't like school, anti-labor, because they tell him to be (and he has representation through governmental bureaucracy and doesn't understand the plight of those that don't), against the best interest of the overall wellbeing of America and Americans . . . he does believe in trickle down.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Math is not your strong point.


Comprehension and logic are but two of your "weak"points.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> dizzy is an anti-government, who depends on the government for a living, anti-intellectual, who joined the Navy because he didn't like school, anti-labor, because they tell him to be (and he has representation through governmental bureaucracy and doesn't understand the plight of those that don't), against the best interest of the overall wellbeing of America and Americans . . . he does believe in trickle down.


This from a guy who needed a union to keep him employed & tell him what to think...you're sumthin' else Daffy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 14, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> This from a guy who needed a union to keep him employed & tell him what to think...you're sumthin' else Daffy.


Showing your lack of understanding once again I see . . . I thought the plumber straightened you out on all that 8 years ago? There's your faulty memory showing up once again. How old are you? E has a much, much, better memory than you.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 14, 2019)

*BREAKING: Amazon Cancels New York Deal, Citing Trouble From “Local Elected Officials”*
Brandon Morse


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 14, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *BREAKING: Amazon Cancels New York Deal, Citing Trouble From “Local Elected Officials”*
> Brandon Morse


You down with corporate subsides? . . .  even for Amazon?


----------



## nononono (Feb 14, 2019)

messy said:


> ...Says the guy whose tag line admits he can't afford health insurance. Commenting on economics. LOL.


*" Messy " Econ 101.....*

*How to bankrupt an Ice Cream Truck in less than 5 hours.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> Source?


The Housing Crisis is a good place to start.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> Yes, you never see old janitors, maids, cooks, waitresses, punch press operators, die casters, receptionists, assembly workers,...etc.  these folks stay in these positions and at these levels for a variety of reasons.  The sort of work that they do makes up the backbone of the economy and they should get to live a version of the American Dream.  Your lack of understanding or experience of the real world is comical.


More Socialist gobbly gook.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> dizzy is an anti-government, who depends on the government for a living, anti-intellectual, who joined the Navy because he didn't like school, anti-labor, because they tell him to be (and he has representation through governmental bureaucracy and doesn't understand the plight of those that don't), against the best interest of the overall wellbeing of America and Americans . . . he does believe in trickle down.


Socialist brain washing complete.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> This from a guy who needed a union to keep him employed & tell him what to think...you're sumthin' else Daffy.


2 cent opinion to go with his 2 cent annual raises.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Showing your lack of understanding once again I see . . . I thought the plumber straightened you out on all that 8 years ago? There's your faulty memory showing up once again. How old are you? E has a much, much, better memory than you.


Weak


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Socialist brain washing complete.


Brain? Not too sure about that.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You down with corporate subsides? . . .  even for Amazon?


Whatever it takes.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Brain? Not too sure about that.


Rat size.  Perfect for a maze runner.


----------



## messy (Feb 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Housing Crisis is a good place to start.


He gave up already on this one. God the stupidity boggles.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 14, 2019)

messy said:


> He gave up already on this one. God the stupidity boggles.


Yes it does


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Socialist brain washing complete.


Dead on wasn't I?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

Maybe Trump is a Democrat.

SPENDING BINGE WORSE THAN UNDER OBAMA, BUSH
https://www.conservativereview.com/news/bipartisan-spending-binge-now-worse-bush-o


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Maybe Trump is a Democrat.
> 
> SPENDING BINGE WORSE THAN UNDER OBAMA, BUSH
> https://www.conservativereview.com/news/bipartisan-spending-binge-now-worse-bush-o


Yup. What did Ann Coulter day today? “The only national emergency is that the President is an idiot.” Was that it?


----------



## espola (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Yup. What did Ann Coulter day today? “The only national emergency is that the President is an idiot.” Was that it?


She also said t only did it to please his stupidest supporters.  

Standing by for comments...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Yup. What did Ann Coulter day today? “The only national emergency is that the President is an idiot.” Was that it?


Are you asking me a question?
Trump Praises Limbaugh, Fox News Figures, and Says Ann Coulter Has Gone ‘Off the Reservation’
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://variety.com/2019/politics/news/trump-praises-rush-limbaugh-fox-news-figures-1203141023/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjnm5y-t77gAhXmrVQKHdBlDwMQ0PADMAV6BAgEEBk&usg=AOvVaw3ELROfCzv5HZPF_MYHhPrf


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

espola said:


> She also said t only did it to please his stupidest supporters.
> 
> Standing by for comments...


He’s got a lot of those. You ever listen to Hannity and Limbaugh? You listen and you don’t believe anyone is stupid enough to take them seriously but millions do.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> He’s got a lot of those. You ever listen to Hannity and Limbaugh? You listen and you don’t believe anyone is stupid enough to take them seriously but millions do.


It does all seem to be some strange hoax, prank or nightmare . . . to take those people seriously is to abandon all commonsense and sense of reasoning. Do these people ever question the validity of their BS? These people are looking for ratings and selling books and have a segment of America hooked deep, that's the business plan . . . it has nothing to do with caring about anything but their bank account.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> He’s got a lot of those. You ever listen to Hannity and Limbaugh? You listen and you don’t believe anyone is stupid enough to take them seriously but millions do.


Not the same ones stupid enough to vote for Hillary, twice.


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Not the same ones stupid enough to vote for Hillary, twice.


Actually, the smarter ones voted for Hillary. But you knew that. "I love the uneducated!"


----------



## Booter (Feb 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The Housing Crisis is a good place to start.[/QUOTE
> So, no source - just pulled it out of your ass.  Typical.


----------



## Booter (Feb 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> More Socialist gobbly gook.


So, nothing?


----------



## Booter (Feb 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Socialist brain washing complete.


again - nothing.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Actually, the smarter ones voted for Hillary. But you knew that. "I love the uneducated!"


Didn't you just say you weren't arrogant?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

Most intelligent post from you ever.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Yup. What did Ann Coulter day today? “The only national emergency is that the President is an idiot.” Was that it?


Why did you people elect such a man?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 15, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Why did you people elect such a man?


Ann really lost her marbles.
Remember when she predicted Trump would win the primary on the Bill Maher show?
They all laughed at her, and she was right.
Then Trump didnt return her phone calls and she went off the deep end.
Reminds me of what happened to that fat cow Rosie O Donnell, and the way Pelosi chewed on her face in the SOTU address.
He knows how to bring out their inner lunatic, and then he just stands back and lets it happen.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 15, 2019)

Best President EVAH.


----------



## Booter (Feb 15, 2019)

*In our opinion: Congratulations, the U.S. debt just passed $22 trillion*

Perhaps the most disturbing thing about the recent government shutdown was not whether Congress would agree to the construction of a border wall. It was that neither side made any attempt to stand for austerity.

Not long ago, shutdowns were staged over debt ceilings, sequestrations and fiscal cliffs — all in efforts to force cuts that might bring the nation’s expenses more in line with its revenues.

This one was staged over whether to add an expenditure. The Republican Party, long the vanguard of fiscal conservatism, was silent on the need for prudence.

Meanwhile, economists are noting an historical anomaly. *The nation has both a booming economy and a growing annual budget deficit. Usually, deficits fall along with unemployment.*

In fiscal year 2019, the federal government is projected to run a deficit of nearly $1 trillion, spending $4.4 trillion while raising only $3.42 trillion.

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/900055857/in-our-opinion-congratulations-the-us-debt-just-passed-dollar22-trilion.html

Izzy,  The problem is your hero Don the Con is an idiot.  *The nation has both a booming economy and a growing annual budget deficit. Usually, deficits fall along with unemployment.*


----------



## espola (Feb 15, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Ann really lost her marbles.
> Remember when she predicted Trump would win the primary on the Bill Maher show?
> They all laughed at her, and she was right.
> Then Trump didnt return her phone calls and she went off the deep end.
> ...


People are going to be laughing at you for the rest of your life.


----------



## espola (Feb 15, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Best President EVAH.


See above.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 15, 2019)

espola said:


> See above.


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Ann really lost her marbles.
> Remember when she predicted Trump would win the primary on the Bill Maher show?
> They all laughed at her, and she was right.
> Then Trump didnt return her phone calls and she went off the deep end.
> ...


Man, that's great stuff. You ain't kidding.  "Remember how Ann Coulter was smart and then Don was mean to her afterward? And that other stuff he does to make people mad? He's such a great president."
You're serious, aren't you? Wow.


----------



## espola (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Man, that's great stuff. You ain't kidding.  "Remember how Ann Coulter was smart and then Don was mean to her afterward? And that other stuff he does to make people mad? He's such a great president."
> You're serious, aren't you? Wow.


People are going to be laughing at him for the rest of his life.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 15, 2019)




----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Man, that's great stuff. You ain't kidding.  "Remember how Ann Coulter was smart and then Don was mean to her afterward? And that other stuff he does to make people mad? He's such a great president."
> You're serious, aren't you? Wow.


Here's something you dont have to pretend like you read.





Ima giver.


----------



## espola (Feb 15, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Here's something you dont have to pretend like you read.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Your "giver" bone seems to be stuck.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Feb 15, 2019)

espola said:


> Your "giver" bone seems to be stuck.


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Here's something you dont have to pretend like you read.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


He makes no sense, he’s lying and you can’t pin him down.
I know—it’s Chicken Iz!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> He makes no sense, he’s lying and you can’t pin him down.
> I know—it’s Chicken Iz!


Don't be a hater, next time pick on someone down on your level.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> again - nothing.


Thatʻs what socialism generates.  Nada


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 15, 2019)

Denying the housing crisis.  Not surprised.  Do you have a preferable source.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> He makes no sense, he’s lying and you can’t pin him down.
> I know—it’s Chicken Iz!


Oh look itʻs Mr. Collateralized debt masquerading as an asset.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> *In our opinion: Congratulations, the U.S. debt just passed $22 trillion*
> 
> Perhaps the most disturbing thing about the recent government shutdown was not whether Congress would agree to the construction of a border wall. It was that neither side made any attempt to stand for austerity.
> 
> ...


Sorry pal Obama ran over a trillion every year he was in office.


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh look itʻs Mr. Collateralized debt masquerading as an asset.


Easy for you to say, nimrod. 
All I got is a brain, some dough, some houses, a dictionary and everybody who knows anything telling me what an “asset” is.
But I think you and Ricky did good today. He used “ironic” in a sentence and you used “masquerading”!  Big time!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Yup. What did Ann Coulter day today? “The only national emergency is that the President is an idiot.” Was that it?


How crappy a candidate did you people have to nominate to lose to an idiot?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Easy for you to say, nimrod.
> All I got is a brain, some dough, some houses, a dictionary and everybody who knows anything telling me what an “asset” is.
> But I think you and Ricky did good today. He used “ironic” in a sentence and you used “masquerading”!  Big time!


Almost time to pay your mortgage asset boy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 15, 2019)

messy said:


> He makes no sense, he’s lying and you can’t pin him down.
> I know—it’s Chicken Iz!


I wonder why it is always libs that fake victimhood? Must not happen as often necessary to promote the 2020 liberal platform, whitey bad.


----------



## messy (Feb 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Almost time to pay your mortgage asset boy.


Pay mine for me like you pay your landlord’s, would you, sucker?
Question (which you won’t answer cuz you’re a Chicken): when you pay your landlord’s mortgage and he sells the property, do you get any of the sales price? 
Ha!


----------



## messy (Feb 16, 2019)

espola said:


> She also said t only did it to please his stupidest supporters.
> 
> Standing by for comments...


I wonder how many are following Coulter and taking the next train outta Trumptown, now that they’ve been duped? Maby not many because “his stupidest supporters” are most of them, I think.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 16, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I wonder why it is always libs that fake victimhood? Must not happen as often necessary to promote the 2020 liberal platform, whitey bad.


Right on Q, AOC, the gift that keeps on giving.

AOC Slams The ‘Racial Injustice’ Of The Cannabis Business As White Men Profit
https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c676fcce4b05c889d1f6cfc


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 16, 2019)

messy said:


> I wonder how many are following Coulter and taking the next train outta Trumptown, now that they’ve been duped? Maby not many because “his stupidest supporters” are most of them, I think.


Maybe you should quit thinking, not your strong suit.


----------



## messy (Feb 16, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Right on Q, AOC, the gift that keeps on giving.
> 
> AOC Slams The ‘Racial Injustice’ Of The Cannabis Business As White Men Profit
> https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5c676fcce4b05c889d1f6cfc


Her point is an accurate one, of course. Those are called facts. Her solution, i.e. affirmative action, is debatable.
In any event, she’s pretty great.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Her point is an accurate one, of course. Those are called facts. Her solution, i.e. affirmative action, is debatable.
> In any event, she’s pretty great.


For us.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Her point is an accurate one, of course. Those are called facts. Her solution, i.e. affirmative action, is debatable.
> In any event, she’s pretty great.


Now I know who your professor was at fries U.
Congratulations.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 16, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Ann really lost her marbles.
> Remember when she predicted Trump would win the primary on the Bill Maher show?
> They all laughed at her, and she was right.
> Then Trump didnt return her phone calls and she went off the deep end.
> ...


Exhibit 376: Yet another example of the plumber trying to do something he's not good at, troll.

You really look silly trying to do that kinda thing, leave it to joe and nono, you're outta your lane there, they do asinine, foolish and silly well it's who they are . . . unless of course you are having a mid-life crisis.
You should maybe stick with the "I'm the smartest guy on the planet" routine.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 16, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> For us.


There is no "us" in your case joe, just a bunch of let down, ripped off rubes like those that bought t condos in Rosarito or trumpU victims . . . you just don't wanna see reality, don't wanna admit you were cheated.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Pay mine for me like you pay your landlord’s, would you, sucker?
> Question (which you won’t answer cuz you’re a Chicken): when you pay your landlord’s mortgage and he sells the property, do you get any of the sales price?
> Ha!


No.  See the difference between an asset and your liability.


----------



## messy (Feb 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  See the difference between an asset and your liability.


Wait, you pay for someone’s mortgage but you don’t get anything back when the property sells? 
Can you not afford a down payment or something? 
Don’t be ashamed...be ashamed for other reasons...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  See the difference between an asset and your liability.


Too bad you have a long history of lying, repeating long ago refuted rhetoric and simply parroting right-wing talking points (besides just acting like the forum parrot) or someone might take you seriously.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 16, 2019)

messy said:


> I wonder how many are following Coulter and taking the next train outta Trumptown, now that they’ve been duped? Maby not many because “his stupidest supporters” are most of them, I think.


Nominated a great candidate didnʻt you!  Fries U!  What a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 16, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Too bad you have a long history of lying, repeating long ago refuted rhetoric and simply parroting right-wing talking points (besides just acting like the forum parrot) or someone might take you seriously.


Truth often has the above effect on Fries U grads and applicants like Whiskers.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Truth often has the above effect on Fries U grads and applicants like Whiskers.


I'm pretty sure your whole rap is BS, that's what you people do.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm pretty sure your whole rap is BS, that's what you people do.


Wounded Wodent


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Wounded Wodent


Just calling out another wannabe lying nutter. It's hard to fathom how fragile an ego one must have to come in here like you nutters do and try to portray yourselves as something, you obviously, are not. A sub forum with maybe 10 participants total? What gives?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 19, 2019)




----------



## nononono (Feb 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Math is not your strong point.



*Boy o boy.....the finger counter is on his soapbox.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Just calling out another wannabe lying nutter. It's hard to fathom how fragile an ego one must have to come in here like you nutters do and try to portray yourselves as something, you obviously, are not. A sub forum with maybe 10 participants total? What gives?


Most of what is discussed here is above your head.  That is obvious by your above response.


----------



## nononono (Feb 19, 2019)

*




*

*Poor Poor Rodent.......at least he has the sewer.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Most of what is discussed here is above your head.  That is obvious by your above response.


I'll let you know when that happens Mr. Cut & paste.


----------



## Booter (Feb 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sorry pal Obama ran over a trillion every year he was in office.


Source?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2019)

Booter said:


> Source?


Which do you prefer?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'll let you know when that happens Mr. Cut & paste.


I’ll let you know when you’ve let us know that it happened.  Your contributions have been irrelevant thus far.


----------



## Booter (Feb 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sorry pal Obama ran over a trillion every year he was in office.


Do you have a source supporting your statement?  Otherwise are you lying or are you stupid?


----------



## Booter (Feb 19, 2019)

*If Not for Republican Policies, the Federal Government Would Be Running a Surplus *

Introduction In 2000, the federal government ran a surplus of $236 billion. The next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected that over the following ten years, the accumulated surplus would add up to $5.6 trillion – $889 billion in 2011 alone.
For the recently-completed fiscal year, 2018, the federal government ran a deficit of $779 billion. 

What contributed to the $779 billion deficit in 2018? 
• Bush Tax Cuts: $488 billion
• Trump Tax Cuts: $164 billion 
• Direct costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: $127 billion
• Base defense increases: $156 billion

*Simply put, without the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the enormous post-9/11 defense buildup, and several rounds of costly, regressive tax cuts, the federal budget would not be $779 billion in deficit, but rather $156 billion in surplus.*

The story of how the federal government turned projected surpluses into deficits is one of two decades’ worth of Republican policies that amounted to a massive transfer of wealth from working families and middle-class Americans to the wealthiest individuals and largest corporations in the country. Even worse, these were policies that put our armed forces in the middle of immutable quagmires overseas that have left thousands of American troops – and thousands of Iraqi, Afghani, and other civilians – dead, and thousands more dealing with injuries for the rest of their lives. In short, the last 20 years of federal policymaking have been a disaster for our economy, for our health, and for our standard of living.

Despite 40 years of Republican rhetoric on how tax cuts “pay for themselves” through increased economic growth, there has been one consistent problem: It is not true.

*Conclusion 
Despite longstanding Republican protestations that theirs is the party of “fiscal responsibility,” two Republican policies alone – enormous, regressive tax cuts and the massive post-2001 defense buildup – served to turn what would otherwise be a $156 billion surplus in 2018 into a $779 billion deficit. Counterfactually, if these policies were never enacted – or if they were paid for with new revenues instead of added to the national debt – the debt would not be equivalent to nearly 80 percent of the economy, but rather 31 percent, and on a downward path.*

https://www.budget.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/GOP Policies Caused the Deficit REPORT 10-15-18.pdf


----------



## nononono (Feb 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'll let you know when that happens Mr. Cut & paste.



*Classic response from an under educated individual.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 19, 2019)

Booter said:


> *If Not for Republican Policies, the Federal Government Would Be Running a Surplus *
> 
> Introduction In 2000, the federal government ran a surplus of $236 billion. The next year, the Congressional Budget Office projected that over the following ten years, the accumulated surplus would add up to $5.6 trillion – $889 billion in 2011 alone.
> For the recently-completed fiscal year, 2018, the federal government ran a deficit of $779 billion.
> ...


Sucker! The Republican Congress was responsible for the surplus while slick willy and Treasury Secretary Bob Ruben were bailing the banks out of Mexican real estate investments during the Tequila Crisis. Bush and Obama made trillion dollar deficits fashionable.  Make sure you know what your sources are cherry picking Bootsie.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker! The Republican Congress was responsible for the surplus while slick willy and Treasury Secretary Bob Ruben were bailing the banks out of Mexican real estate investments during the Tequila Crisis. Bush and Obama made trillion dollar deficits fashionable.  Make sure you know what your sources are cherry picking Bootsie.


I'm sure that's what you were told to believe.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm sure that's what you were told to believe.


This is above you.  As always.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> This is above you.  As always.


QED, your opinion isn't worth the virtual space it's written on.


----------



## nononono (Feb 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I'm sure that's what you were told to believe.



*Hey....History denier...do some research.*

*Before another " Trap " snaps down on your nose.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> QED, your opinion isn't worth the virtual space it's written on.


QED alright.  TDS too.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QED alright.  TDS too.


You, like always, have no ground to stand on . . . and if you did you would be afraid to stand there.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You, like always, have no ground to stand on . . . and if you did you would be afraid to stand there.


Circle


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 20, 2019)




----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

*
MONEY TO BERN
Socialist Sanders lives three-home high life while preaching wealth redistribution
*


----------



## Booter (Feb 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker! The Republican Congress was responsible for the surplus while slick willy and Treasury Secretary Bob Ruben were bailing the banks out of Mexican real estate investments during the Tequila Crisis. Bush and Obama made trillion dollar deficits fashionable.  Make sure you know what your sources are cherry picking Bootsie.


You consider the following to be cherry picking?

What contributed to the $779 billion deficit in 2018? 
• Bush Tax Cuts: $488 billion
• Trump Tax Cuts: $164 billion 
• Direct costs of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: $127 billion
• Base defense increases: $156 billion

Those are real numbers and they are big numbers and they are they are they result of Republican Policies.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

Booter said:


> You consider the following to be cherry picking?
> 
> What contributed to the $779 billion deficit in 2018?
> • Bush Tax Cuts: $488 billion
> ...


1. Why didn't Obama stop the tax cuts and the wars?
2. Why couldn't you beat a buffoon like Trump?
3. Did you forget Obama care?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 21, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> 1. Why didn't Obama stop the tax cuts and the wars?
> 2. Why couldn't you beat a buffoon like Trump?
> 3. Did you forget Obama care?


As to #2 maybe as t was sponsored by Russia maybe the Dems could look to get sponsored by China?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> As to #2 maybe as t was sponsored by Russia maybe the Dems could look to get sponsored by China?


*Russia Collusion: Hillary Clinton, DNC, & FBI are the Real ...*
https://*www.nationalreview.com*/2018/03/*russia*-collusio


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 21, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *Russia Collusion: Hillary Clinton, DNC, & FBI are the Real ...*
> https://*www.nationalreview.com*/2018/03/*russia*-collusio


Wait was that lil' joke or Racist Joe?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Wait was that lil' joke or Racist Joe?


I don't know who that imposter is, maybe you, but probably the resident coward.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 21, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I don't know who that imposter is, maybe you, but probably the resident coward.


I can't tell the difference . . . you make a mockery of yourself constantly. Kinda like how I think the real t is much more hilarious than the SNL version, but Alex and crew do show the unaware where to look.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I can't tell the difference . . . you make a mockery of yourself constantly. Kinda like how I think the real t is much more hilarious than the SNL version, but Alex and crew do show the unaware where to look.


Fake News.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 21, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


That's your department.


----------



## nononono (Feb 21, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *
> MONEY TO BERN
> Socialist Sanders lives three-home high life while preaching wealth redistribution*




*He needs his ass kicked hard........*


----------



## nononono (Feb 21, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's your department.



*You're really backed into a corner mentally aren't you.......*

*Poor Poor Rodent....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 21, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You're really backed into a corner mentally aren't you.......*
> 
> *Poor Poor Rodent....*


He's in charge of fake news and you are in charge of the scumbag duties.


----------



## nononono (Feb 21, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He's in charge of fake news and you are in charge of the scumbag duties.


*Nah....you've got it all wrong...*

*Grab your " Bag " you " Scum " and tend to your Democratic Donkey Dookies.....*


----------



## messy (Feb 21, 2019)

I’m convinced Nono is really Friesland doing an Andy Kaufman thing. 
Brilliant.


----------



## nononono (Feb 21, 2019)

messy said:


> I’m convinced Nono is really Friesland doing an Andy Kaufman thing.
> Brilliant.


*I'm my own persona....*

*Friedhands is a very unique " Andy Kaufman " style Train Wreck....*

*You on the other hand are tormenting that open space between your *
*ears by skipping classes....that's gunna be a " Messy " Train Wreck*
*all unto its self and something you will carry for the rest of your life*
*if you don't hurry up and get to class....*

*Now go on un Git !*
*I said Git !*


----------



## messy (Feb 21, 2019)

nononono said:


> *I'm my own persona....*
> 
> *Friedhands is a very unique " Andy Kaufman " style Train Wreck....*
> 
> ...


I love it. An invented character who’s around the bend and a conspiracy freak. Too good, Fries!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

messy said:


> I love it. An invented character who’s around the bend and a conspiracy freak. Too good, Fries!


Fries is Racist Joe at least, not NoNo. Fries is probably you too.


----------



## messy (Feb 21, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fries is Racist Joe at least, not NoNo. Fries is probably you too.


I wish. Fries is much funnier than I am. Smarter, too.


----------



## nononono (Feb 21, 2019)

messy said:


> I love it. An invented character who’s around the bend and a conspiracy freak. Too good, Fries!



*You're an all day sucker boot lickin fool.....and a " Messy " one at that ...*


----------



## messy (Feb 21, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You're an all day sucker boot lickin fool.....and a " Messy " one at that ...*


Fries, you rule, but enough already.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 21, 2019)

messy said:


> I wish. Fries is much funnier than I am. Smarter, too.


You've got issues.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 22, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I don't know who that imposter is, maybe you, but probably the resident coward.


I'm not sure either, is the imposter you or Racist Joe?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 22, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You've got issues.


"A man's gotta know his limitations" ~ Harry Callahan


----------



## Booter (Feb 22, 2019)

*Koch-backed group offers to help Pelosi limit Trump tariff powers*

Americans For Prosperity, a free-market advocacy group funded in part by the Koch network, has offered to help House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., pass legislation that would limit President Trump's ability to unilaterally impose new tariffs.

"[W]e hope to work with your office to advance legislation to require congressional approval of any proposed tariffs," said AFP chief government affairs officer Brent Gardner and Freedom Partners Chamber of Commerce executive vice president Nathan Nascimento told Pelosi in a letter sent Friday and made public Wednesday.

The group called on Pelosi to support the Bicameral Congressional Trade Authority Act, legislation jointly introduced in late January by Reps. Mike Gallagher, R-Wis., and Ron Kind, D-Wis. The bill, which has 12 Republican and seven Democratic co-sponsors, would require that any tariff imposed under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act would first have to be approved by Congress. Trump has used the law, which allows tariffs on the grounds of protecting national security, to enact levies on steel and aluminum imports, and is contemplating using it for tariffs on auto and auto parts imports as well.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/koch-backed-group-offers-to-help-pelosi-limit-trump-tariff-powers


----------



## nononono (Feb 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Koch-backed group offers to help Pelosi limit Trump tariff powers*
> 
> Americans For Prosperity, a free-market advocacy group funded in part by the Koch network, has offered to help House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., pass legislation that would limit President Trump's ability to unilaterally impose new tariffs.
> 
> ...




*Quite obvious that he is putting a HUGE crimp in the Globalists ability to *
*offshore manufacturing that rightfully should be done here in the United *
*States to the benefit of America/Unions and Workers !!!*

*The fact that the Koch Brothers/Rhinos would stoop to scrape the shit off of *
*the toilet and then solicit it for help is quite telling.....*


----------



## Booter (Feb 22, 2019)

*“Socialism” vs. “capitalism” is a false dichotomy*
We need go-go capitalism to afford a generous welfare state, and people won’t support go-go capitalism without a safety net. “Socialists” and Republicans forget different parts of this lesson.

*The GOP’s market rigging and rejection of the social safety net drives voters toward “socialism”*
No less a classical liberal than F.A. Hayek supported a robust safety net capable of “providing for those common hazards of life against which few can make adequate provision.” It’s true, as Williamson says, that “There isn’t any obvious and non-arbitrary place to draw the line on those common hazards of life.” But he’s wrong that “the fundamental difference between Right and Left is where to draw that line (or those lines) and how to go about helping those we decide to help.”

A Republican Party that remains doggedly devoted to Grover Norquist’s goal of shrinking government until it’s small enough to drown in a bathtub isn’t pro-lifeboat. It’s pro-drowning. Moreover, cannibalizing Obamacare, setting public assistance ever further out of reach, and exploding the deficit with massive tax cuts doesn’t make the ruling political right a friend of free markets. Trump’s tariff-hiking, winner-picking economic nationalism, which looks to communist China as a model, is an immiserating morass of rank corruption. But that’s what the GOP currently stands for, whether conservative thinkers like it or not.

The right’s Pavlovian reaction to Ocasio-Cortez’s budget-busting democratic socialism has trapped it in a comforting haze of commie-fighting nostalgia. It leaves Republicans blind to the electoral threat posed by Warren’s Nordic-style social democracy, because they can’t see the difference; they can only see reds. Warren’s coalescing vision of the market-friendly welfare state doesn’t exactly amount to the second coming of Milton Friedman, but it’s far more intellectually sound and politically attractive than anything Republicans currently have on offer.

If the governing GOP is unable to hear what Hayekian conservatives like Williamson are saying and just keep on smashing the lifeboats, and fail to offer a compelling alternative to Warren’s vision for unrigging the economy, not only will they be totally overwhelmed on their left flank on social insurance, they might also find themselves outflanked on the issue of fair, open, competitive markets. They’ll get routed by the left _on capitalism,_ still screeching about Venezuelan bread lines.

https://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/8/16/17698602/socialism-capitalism-false-dichotomy-kevin-williamson-column-republican-ocasio-cortez


----------



## nononono (Feb 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> *“Socialism” vs. “capitalism” is a false dichotomy*
> We need go-go capitalism to afford a generous welfare state, and people won’t support go-go capitalism without a safety net. “Socialists” and Republicans forget different parts of this lesson.
> 
> *The GOP’s market rigging and rejection of the social safety net drives voters toward “socialism”*
> ...



*No Brains ...No Headaches.....you're vying for the empty cranium award...*

*Don't look now but you and the Rodent are neck and neck.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 23, 2019)

Booter said:


> You consider the following to be cherry picking?
> 
> What contributed to the $779 billion deficit in 2018?
> • Bush Tax Cuts: $488 billion
> ...





Booter said:


> *“Socialism” vs. “capitalism” is a false dichotomy*
> We need go-go capitalism to afford a generous welfare state, and people won’t support go-go capitalism without a safety net. “Socialists” and Republicans forget different parts of this lesson.
> 
> *The GOP’s market rigging and rejection of the social safety net drives voters toward “socialism”*
> ...


Oh look!  The prediction train just pulled in to town.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 23, 2019)

Booter said:


> *“Socialism” vs. “capitalism” is a false dichotomy*
> We need go-go capitalism to afford a generous welfare state, and people won’t support go-go capitalism without a safety net. “Socialists” and Republicans forget different parts of this lesson.
> 
> *The GOP’s market rigging and rejection of the social safety net drives voters toward “socialism”*
> ...


Agree!! The market rigging of 6 straight years of QE.  And the Fed just told us at their last meeting that the debt has now been monetized.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 23, 2019)

Booter said:


> You consider the following to be cherry picking?
> 
> What contributed to the $779 billion deficit in 2018?
> • Bush Tax Cuts: $488 billion
> ...


Know the difference between debt and deficit?  If you did then you might be interested to know that the first trillion dollar deficit happened under Bush and the next four under Obama.  Want a source?   Read the Feds balance sheets between 09 and 16.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Know the difference between debt and deficit?  If you did then you might be interested to know that the first trillion dollar deficit happened under Bush and the next four under Obama.  Want a source?   Read the Feds balance sheets between 09 and 16.









https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_us_deficit_chart_10_G.html


----------



## messy (Feb 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_us_deficit_chart_10_G.html


I believe it was Dick Cheney who said “who cares about deficits?” Republicans run huge deficits.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_us_deficit_chart_10_G.html


2013 is an odd number to start from.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 25, 2019)

messy said:


> I believe it was Dick Cheney who said “who cares about deficits?” Republicans run huge deficits.


You believe? Watching too many movies.


----------



## messy (Feb 25, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You believe? Watching too many movies.


What movie? He said it, you idiot.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 25, 2019)

messy said:


> What movie? He said it, you idiot.


A little context, emotional one.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_us_deficit_chart_10_G.html


 You Fries U grads crack me up.







same source dumb ass


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> 2013 is an odd number to start from.


No it's not.  Fries U grads!!  What a deal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Feb 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_us_deficit_chart_10_G.html


Here's another one genius


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 26, 2019)

Because socialism only fails where it is tried.

WATCH: People Search Garbage Truck For Food In Socialist Venezuela
 
https://www.dailywire.com/news/43992/watch-people-search-garbage-truck-food-socialist-ryan-saavedra


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 27, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Because socialism only fails where it is tried.
> 
> WATCH: People Search Garbage Truck For Food In Socialist Venezuela
> View attachment 4063
> https://www.dailywire.com/news/43992/watch-people-search-garbage-truck-food-socialist-ryan-saavedra


How did the food get in there? Some bodies eating well . . . and on the bottom right hand corner of the screen is that a reluctant American patriot?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 27, 2019)

http://blog.peerform.com/top-ten-most-socialist-countries-in-the-world/


----------



## nononono (Feb 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> https://www.usgovernmentspending.com/fed_us_deficit_chart_10_G.html



*You don't even comprehend what you're posting.....quite amusing !*


----------



## Booter (Feb 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Know the difference between debt and deficit?  If you did then you might be interested to know that the first trillion dollar deficit happened under Bush and the next four under Obama.  Want a source?   Read the Feds balance sheets between 09 and 16.


I'm still waiting for a source from you to support your statement that Obama ran over a Trillion dollar deficit every year he was in office.  You shouldn't need more than a minute with Google to bring that up - so lets see it.  Or were you just talking out of your ass again?


----------



## nononono (Feb 27, 2019)

Booter said:


> I'm still waiting for a source from you to support your statement that Obama ran over a Trillion dollar deficit every year he was in office.  You shouldn't need more than a minute with Google to bring that up - so lets see it.  Or were you just talking out of your ass again?



*Hey " Boot Butt " you posted a garbled message from your buttocks above.....*

*Observe below....*

*https://www.thebalance.com/national-debt-under-obama-3306293*

*The National Debt under the Obama Administration was increased by $ 9 Trillion Dollars
over 8 years....

Ready " Boot Butt "....

9 Trillion / 8 years = 1 Trillion + for each year in office.....


What's that " Boot Butt "...?

I can't seem to decipher the garbled comment coming from your 
lower exhaust chute....the muscle appears to be inhibiting your
shitty speech pattern.....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 27, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You don't even comprehend what you're posting.....quite amusing !*


Can you point out any problems with what I posted or just like always talking out your ass?


----------



## nononono (Feb 28, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Can you point out any problems with what I posted or just like always talking out your ass?



*I don't " Talk " on this forum, I type comments/responses/opinions.....*
*When conversing face to face with a fellow human I use my vocal cords and *
*the accompanying muscles to communicate verbally.*

*Now if YOU have mastered the technique of waste gas vocalization by sphincter*
*muscle manipulation that has got to be a sight to witness....*

*As always you project what you do yourself or are attempting to accomplish....*

*Rodent...do some research before projecting your continual " Foot in Mouth " stunts.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 28, 2019)

nononono said:


> *I don't " Talk " on this forum, I type comments/responses/opinions.....*
> *When conversing face to face with a fellow human I use my vocal cords and *
> *the accompanying muscles to communicate verbally.*
> 
> ...


So I'll take that as a yep you are just talking out yer ass and can't point out any problems with the post of mine you referenced.


----------



## nononono (Feb 28, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So I'll take that as a yep you are just talking out yer ass and can't point out any problems with the post of mine you referenced.



*You're mumbling again ....*
*Take yur thumb and slide the " Panties " to the side.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 28, 2019)

Booter said:


> I'm still waiting for a source from you to support your statement that Obama ran over a Trillion dollar deficit every year he was in office.  You shouldn't need more than a minute with Google to bring that up - so lets see it.  Or were you just talking out of your ass again?


Don't hold your breath . . .


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 28, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You're mumbling again ....*
> *Take yur thumb and slide the " Panties " to the side.*


As Jack Nicholson's character in "As Good As It Gets" said about how he writes women so well, "I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability" that fits you to a t.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Feb 28, 2019)

Common knowledge...even a duck knows the deficit went from 11.5 trillion to 20 trillion under Obama...

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2017-10-02/former-president-barack-obamas-real-economic-record-isnt-pretty


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Feb 28, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Don't hold your breath . . .


No, both of you please hold your breath.


----------



## nononono (Feb 28, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> As Jack Nicholson's character in "As Good As It Gets" said about how he writes women so well, "I think of a man and I take away reason and accountability" that fits you to a t.



*As usual you cannot compile/type independent thoughts.*
*Copying others is the Lemming Rodent way.....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 28, 2019)

nononono said:


> *As usual you cannot compile/type independent thoughts.*
> *Copying others is the Lemming Rodent way.....*


The message and sentiment remains the same.


----------



## nononono (Feb 28, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The message and sentiment remains the same.



*Why thank you....you're beginning to understand context.*


*




*


----------



## messy (Feb 28, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> Common knowledge...even a duck knows the deficit went from 11.5 trillion to 20 trillion under Obama...
> 
> https://www.usnews.com/opinion/economic-intelligence/articles/2017-10-02/former-president-barack-obamas-real-economic-record-isnt-pretty


You people are so stupid. He spent us out of a recession that could have been a depression. We recovered and picked wayyyyy up. Why are Republicans, other than the rich ones, so incredibly stupid about money and finance and economics. Iz and you and Ricky...no wonder you’re all so poor. Learn how it works and you’ll make some dough...or you can be an idiot like Ricky who says the stock market is a ripoff. LOL!!!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 28, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The message and sentiment remains the same.


Don't pat yourself on the back because you, don't, understand that is.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 1, 2019)

Media
*‘Yikes’! Reports about how much taxpayer money ‘Bill de Blasio’s wife can’t account for’ are jaw-dropping*


----------



## Booter (Mar 1, 2019)

*DRAINING THE SWAMP!!!*








*A DONALD TRUMP APPOINTEE — ALSO A SAUDI GOVERNMENT LOBBYIST — IS REASSESSING HIS ROLES*

*https://publicintegrity.org/federal-politics/a-donald-trump-appointee-also-a-saudi-government-lobbyist-is-reassessing-his-roles/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

Booter said:


> I'm still waiting for a source from you to support your statement that Obama ran over a Trillion dollar deficit every year he was in office.  You shouldn't need more than a minute with Google to bring that up - so lets see it.  Or were you just talking out of your ass again?


You Fries U grads always have problems with the books.  Do you have a source that says he didnʻt run trillion dollar deficits right after Bush did it for the first time?  Or are you just talking out your Bootie again?  Fries U what a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You don't even comprehend what you're posting.....quite amusing !*


Selective comprehension.  Fries U curriculum


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Don't hold your breath . . .


Oh whiskers.  This is above you.  Kinda above Bootsie the bar chart cherry picker who doesnʻt realize he posted the source of his OWN question and then ask me to post one.  Fries U what a deal!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

It's the same old story: just as in the cases of health care and education, instead of getting to the bottom of what's making something expensive, the left's instinct is simply to subsidize it.

The latest example: Elizabeth Warren's plan for federal daycare subsidies.

What could be making daycare so expensive?

Fries U!  What a deal


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 5, 2019)

*FEC Complaint Alleges AOC, Chief of Staff Hid $1 Million

‘Dark Money’ Crusader Accused of ‘ambitious operation to circumvent reporting requirements’*
20,271


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

messy said:


> You people are so stupid. He spent us out of a recession that could have been a depression. We recovered and picked wayyyyy up. Why are Republicans, other than the rich ones, so incredibly stupid about money and finance and economics. Iz and you and Ricky...no wonder you’re all so poor. Learn how it works and you’ll make some dough...or you can be an idiot like Ricky who says the stock market is a ripoff. LOL!!!


You Keynesians crack me up.  He spent us out of the recession that was created in the same manner that the recession was created.  Increase the money supply and all kinds of magic happens.  I should have known your collateralized debt mindset would surface in a macro sense.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

messy said:


> You people are so stupid. He spent us out of a recession that could have been a depression. We recovered and picked wayyyyy up. Why are Republicans, other than the rich ones, so incredibly stupid about money and finance and economics. Iz and you and Ricky...no wonder you’re all so poor. Learn how it works and you’ll make some dough...or you can be an idiot like Ricky who says the stock market is a ripoff. LOL!!!


You Keynesians crack me up.  He spent us out of the recession that was created in the same manner that the recession was created.  Increase the money supply and all kinds of magic happens.  I should have known your collateralized debt mindset would surface in a macro sense.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He spent us out of the recession that was created in the same manner that the recession was created.





Bruddah IZ said:


> He spent us out of the recession that was created in the same manner that the recession was created.


----------



## messy (Mar 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You Keynesians crack me up.  He spent us out of the recession that was created in the same manner that the recession was created.  Increase the money supply and all kinds of magic happens.  I should have known your collateralized debt mindset would surface in a macro sense.


“Keynesians.” Fancy stuff. Guys like you and Ricky are super smart.


----------



## messy (Mar 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It's the same old story: just as in the cases of health care and education, instead of getting to the bottom of what's making something expensive, the left's instinct is simply to subsidize it.
> 
> The latest example: Elizabeth Warren's plan for federal daycare subsidies.
> 
> ...


We need you to give us financial advice! LOL.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 5, 2019)

*Legendary economist on biggest socialism myth*
By Julia LimitonePublished March 05, 2019U.S. EconomyFOXBusiness

*Thomas Sowell: Socialism is a wonderful sounding idea, it's only as a reality it is disastrous*
Economist Thomas Sowell on mounting concerns over the rising popularity of socialism.


The surprising resurgence of socialism Opens a New Window. is putting America’s future at risk, according to legendary economist Opens a New Window.  Thomas Sowell.

Continue Reading Below


“I do have a great fear that in the long run we may not make it,” he told FOX Business’ David Asman on “Cavuto: Coast-to-Coast Opens a New Window. ” on Tuesday.


Sowell is putting the onus on the education system and the media for encouraging people to “test ideas against facts.”

“Socialism is a wonderful sounding idea,” he said. “It’s only as a reality that it’s disastrous.”













*Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez Opens a New Window. , who is a self-described Democratic socialist, and whether she will continue to rise in popularity, he replied: “It depends.”

“If they go by rhetoric, she’s a rising star,” he added

https://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/legendary-economist-on-biggest-socialism-myth
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


Fries U!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

messy said:


> “Keynesians.” Fancy stuff. Guys like you and Ricky are super smart.


Shhhhhh itʻs not that fancy. Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 5, 2019)

messy said:


> We need you to give us financial advice! LOL.


No you donʻt.  Just keep on paying off your amortized loan.


----------



## messy (Mar 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No you donʻt.  Just keep on paying off your amortized loan.


Between the value increase on my houses, the deductibility of my mortgage and the 8% or so I make on the money that I use every month to pay the mortgage with, how much am I ahead by purchasing these assets with an amortized loan? As opposed to something else I could have done with those down payments.
I just mean my residences, not the house I use for Airbnb. 
Or if I didn't have the down payments, like say...you, I'd pay my landlord's mortgage for him every month. You're an ekonomikle jeanious!


----------



## espola (Mar 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No you donʻt.  Just keep on paying off your amortized loan.


It appears from your usage that you don't understand the meaning of the word "amortized".


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 6, 2019)

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...............

*WHOLE FOODS cuts worker hours after AMAZON introduces minimum wage...*


----------



## messy (Mar 6, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm...............
> 
> *WHOLE FOODS cuts worker hours after AMAZON introduces minimum wage...*


How do you think a company pays for an acquisition of another company, especially when the purchased company isn't growing its business?
But they're smart to convince the dummies that it's because of minimum wage increase.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 6, 2019)

Start of another tough day for t, reports say the trade deficit has grown to the largest in 10 years


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 6, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Start of another tough day for t, reports say the trade deficit has grown to the largest in 10 years


I thought you were all for big trade deficits?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 6, 2019)

messy said:


> How do you think a company pays for an acquisition of another company, especially when the purchased company isn't growing its business?
> But they're smart to convince the dummies that it's because of minimum wage increase.


Let me call ricky and have him read it to you and then I will have Iz explain the economics.


----------



## messy (Mar 6, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Let me call ricky and have him read it to you and then I will have Iz explain the economics.


You sound like someone who gets the joke.
I wonder if they’re insulted.


----------



## Booter (Mar 6, 2019)

*US trade deficit surges to 10-year high in Dec. vs est of $57.3B*

The trade deficit between the U.S. and its global partners was $59.8 billion in December and $621 billion for the entire year.
That increase comes despite the Trump administration's efforts to lower the imbalance through a series of tariffs implemented through the year.
The goods deficit came to $891.3 billion for the year, the highest on record.

The trade deficit with China in December was $38.7 billion, by far the most of any nation. The next highest was the European Union at $15.8 billion and Mexico at $8.8 billion.

Adjusted for inflation, the goods trade deficit rose $10 billion to a record $91.6 billion in December and likely will weigh on the final calculations for gross domestic product. The first estimate for fourth-quarter GDP was 2.6 percent.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/06/us-trade-deficit-surges-to-59point8b-in-dec-vs-est-of-57point3b.html

Can't imagine how this happened with the Grifter Don the Con Trump as President.  It's a good thing that as Izzy says we are not in a Trade War with China because if we were we would be getting slaughtered.  Izzy your hero Trump is really fucking up with those tariffs.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 6, 2019)

Booter said:


> *US trade deficit surges to 10-year high in Dec. vs est of $57.3B*
> 
> The trade deficit between the U.S. and its global partners was $59.8 billion in December and $621 billion for the entire year.
> That increase comes despite the Trump administration's efforts to lower the imbalance through a series of tariffs implemented through the year.
> ...


I thought you were all for the trade deficit?


----------



## Booter (Mar 6, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I thought


fake news.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 6, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I thought you were all for big trade deficits?


Just another example of your flawed thought process, or lack thereof. You are well below the Mendoza line when comes to being correct, on anything.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 6, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Just another example of your flawed thought process, or lack thereof. You are well below the Mendoza line when comes to being correct, on anything.


You are a dick, that should help my score.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 6, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are a dick, that should help my score.


Is that a tear welling up and running down your cheek?


----------



## messy (Mar 6, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I thought you were all for the trade deficit?


For or against, it’s a very impressive stat. All that talk about China kicking our ass and he’s really giving them the store, isn’t he? Do you think he owes them money, too? We haven’t seen his tax returns so we don’t know who he owes, do we?
But we’ve seen his test scores and grades, right? Wait, we haven’t?
What is he hiding with all this?


----------



## espola (Mar 6, 2019)

messy said:


> For or against, it’s a very impressive stat. All that talk about China kicking our ass and he’s really giving them the store, isn’t he? Do you think he owes them money, too? We haven’t seen his tax returns so we don’t know who he owes, do we?
> But we’ve seen his test scores and grades, right? Wait, we haven’t?
> What is he hiding with all this?


He is hiding the real Donald Trump.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 7, 2019)

espola said:


> He is hiding the real Donald Trump.


His hardcore supporters don't care. With them it's like being in an abusive relationship, they never let on in public what happens behind closed doors . . . and some of them seem to enjoy the abuse.


----------



## nononono (Mar 7, 2019)

messy said:


> Between the value increase on my houses, the deductibility of my mortgage and the 8% or so I make on the money that I use every month to pay the mortgage with, how much am I ahead by purchasing these assets with an amortized loan? As opposed to something else I could have done with those down payments.
> I just mean my residences, not the house I use for Airbnb.
> Or if I didn't have the down payments, like say...you, I'd pay my landlord's mortgage for him every month. You're an ekonomikle jeanious!



*Which " Girlfriend " are you using today....The Righty or The Lefty .....*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 9, 2019)

This pussy will.fit right in.

WATCH: Democratic presidential candidate is too afraid to admit if he's a capitalist or not
 
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.theblaze.com/news/2019/03/09/watch-democratic-presidential-candidate-is-too-afraid-to-admit-if-hes-a-capitalist-or-not/amp&ved=2ahUKEwid0PfnkfXgAhVFA6wKHXFNCiAQlO8DMAN6BAgJEBE&usg=AOvVaw2BIwW0nPNosYpGGfQrROyP


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 9, 2019)

Leftists Can't Do Math or Milk Cows
 
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://townhall.com/columnists/stevesheldon/2019/03/08/leftists-cant-do-math-or-milk-cows-n2542860?amp=true&ved=2ahUKEwjJ1avv0fXgAhVQQq0KHVBSAaEQlO8DMAN6BAgPEBE&usg=AOvVaw19rQ8E1sbY_-dO631Zn-ia


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 10, 2019)

WATCH: Howard Schultz Shreds AOC, Introduces Democrats To Reality
https://www.dailywire.com/news/44468/watch-howard-schultz-shreds-aoc-introduces-ryan-saavedra


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 10, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I thought you were all for the trade deficit?


How come every time you think/have a "thought" it's a fabricated lie of your own making? . . . it's just what you do.


----------



## nononono (Mar 10, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How come every time you think/have a "thought" it's a fabricated lie of your own making? . . . it's just what you do.



*What's quite funny is you posted rhetoric sourced from another humans*
*grey matter.....Rodent your lacking.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 11, 2019)

Finnish government resigns over failure to reform social welfare programs
MARCH 11, 2019
Finland's aging population and shrinking workforce has caused taxes to skyrocket.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/finnish_government_resigns_over_failure_to_reform_social_welfare_programs.html


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 11, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Finnish government resigns over failure to reform social welfare programs
> MARCH 11, 2019
> Finland's aging population and shrinking workforce has caused taxes to skyrocket.
> https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/03/finnish_government_resigns_over_failure_to_reform_social_welfare_programs.html


Funny that the Fins aren't complaining, you and American stinker are.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Leftists Can't Do Math or Milk Cows
> View attachment 4153
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://townhall.com/columnists/stevesheldon/2019/03/08/leftists-cant-do-math-or-milk-cows-n2542860?amp=true&ved=2ahUKEwjJ1avv0fXgAhVQQq0KHVBSAaEQlO8DMAN6BAgPEBE&usg=AOvVaw19rQ8E1sbY_-dO631Zn-ia


Right.  Can’t do, much less know, ROA and ROE equations on the contents of their safety deposit boxes.  All the while lauding the merits of collateralized debt.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> This pussy will.fit right in.
> 
> WATCH: Democratic presidential candidate is too afraid to admit if he's a capitalist or not
> View attachment 4149
> https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.theblaze.com/news/2019/03/09/watch-democratic-presidential-candidate-is-too-afraid-to-admit-if-hes-a-capitalist-or-not/amp&ved=2ahUKEwid0PfnkfXgAhVFA6wKHXFNCiAQlO8DMAN6BAgJEBE&usg=AOvVaw2BIwW0nPNosYpGGfQrROyP


He needs not admit that he is Capitalist.  Watch him for a day and you’ll know.


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Right.  Can’t do, much less know, ROA and ROE equations on the contents of their safety deposit boxes.  All the while lauding the merits of collateralized debt.


Why don’t we compare economic growth under Clinton and Obama administrations with Bush and Trump administrations? It’s like comparing me vs. you! Dems know far more how it’s done. You talk, we do.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Why don’t we compare economic growth under Clinton and Obama administrations with Bush and Trump administrations? It’s like comparing me vs. you! Dems know far more how it’s done. You talk, we do.


You do take money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Why don’t we compare economic growth under Clinton and Obama administrations with Bush and Trump administrations? It’s like comparing me vs. you! Dems know far more how it’s done. You talk, we do.


Fries U!  What a deal!  6 straight years of QE under Obama and the Tequila Crisis under Clinton which Newt had to sort out for slick willy and then Treasury Sec. Bob Rubin.  You clowns crack me up.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U!  What a deal!  6 straight years of QE under Obama and the Tequila Crisis under Clinton which Newt had to sort out for slick willy and then Treasury Sec. Bob Rubin.  You clowns crack me up.


Google does the economy do better during Dem or Rep admins, don't be afraid . . . and if you look hard enough you will find the spin you wanted too.


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U!  What a deal!  6 straight years of QE under Obama and the Tequila Crisis under Clinton which Newt had to sort out for slick willy and then Treasury Sec. Bob Rubin.  You clowns crack me up.


So you acknowledge that the economy grew more under Clinton and Obama than under Bush and Trump? You can argue why that happened, but it's simple. Democrats are better at finance. That's, for example, why I'm so much wealthier than you. I'm a Democrat.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> So you acknowledge that the economy grew more under Clinton and Obama than under Bush and Trump? You can argue why that happened, but it's simple. Democrats are better at finance. That's, for example, why I'm so much wealthier than you. I'm a Democrat.


They keep waiting for the trickle down to get to them . . . it'll happen anytime now, then they'll all be rich!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Google does the economy do better during Dem or Rep admins, don't be afraid . . . and if you look hard enough you will find the spin you wanted too.


Not afraid at all.  I just told you why google says they do better.  You people like patting your Dumbocrats on the back for putting the country in debt like both Clinton and Obama did.  All you have to do is look at Bootsie’ s cherry picking of the data.  You people crack me up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> So you acknowledge that the economy grew more under Clinton and Obama than under Bush and Trump? You can argue why that happened, but it's simple. Democrats are better at finance. That's, for example, why I'm so much wealthier than you. I'm a Democrat.


You Keynesians like Growing the debt to grow the economy.  Not real smart.


----------



## nononono (Mar 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Google does the economy do better during Dem or Rep admins, don't be afraid . . . and if you look hard enough you will find the spin you wanted too.


*Bing " Lemming Democrats ".....Sherrod Brown and Nina Turner show up....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

The economic outlook for 2019, from the perspective of Austrian business cycle theory. The yield curve is close to inverting, and if it continues we should expect a recession by the end of 2019 or, failing that, almost certainly in 2020. There are two types of Fed tightening during this recovery, namely interest rate hikes and a rolloff of the Fed’s bonds. Powell can’t indefinitely postpone the bond rolloff because as interest rates rise, the Fed is paying ever more billions in interest to the commercial banks.—Lara & Murphy


The result of 6 straight years of QE.  Fries U!  What a deal!  Here we go spigot boy!  They’ll be calling you to turn the handle soon


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You Keynesians like Growing the debt to grow the economy.  Not real smart.


Actually, while you're at it look at what Bush and Trump did to the debt!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Not afraid at all.  I just told you why google says they do better.  You people like patting your Dumbocrats on the back for putting the country in debt like both Clinton and Obama did.  All you have to do is look at Bootsie’ s cherry picking of the data.  You people crack me up.


It happens over and over again, I detect a trend, vote for Democrats if you want a a strong economy, period.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It happens over and over again, I detect a trend, vote for Democrats if you want a a strong economy, period.


Yes


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The economic outlook for 2019, from the perspective of Austrian business cycle theory. The yield curve is close to inverting, and if it continues we should expect a recession by the end of 2019 or, failing that, almost certainly in 2020. There are two types of Fed tightening during this recovery, namely interest rate hikes and a rolloff of the Fed’s bonds. Powell can’t indefinitely postpone the bond rolloff because as interest rates rise, the Fed is paying ever more billions in interest to the commercial banks.—Lara & Murphy
> 
> 
> The result of 6 straight years of QE.  Fries U!  What a deal!  Here we go spigot boy!  They’ll be calling you to turn the handle soon


Are you saying yet another republican is going to drive us into yet another recession?


----------



## Booter (Mar 13, 2019)

*Trump vowed to eliminate the debt in 8 years. He's on track to leave it at least 50 percent higher*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 13, 2019)

Another Fries U grad.
AOC Doubles Down on Insane Questioning, Doesn't Understand Liability


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 13, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump vowed to eliminate the debt in 8 years. He's on track to leave it at least 50 percent higher*


You are correct, I think he is spending that extra money on that big hole in Cuba called Gitmo.


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are correct, I think he is spending that extra money on that big hole in Cuba called Gitmo.


You say such dumb shit, it’s like you’ve given up.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> You say such dumb shit, it’s like you’ve given up.


Nothing can be as dumb as an Obama lib complaining about the debt, except another Obama lib defending him.
Congratulations Mr Tolerant.


----------



## nononono (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Actually, while you're at it look at what Bush and Trump did to the debt!



*Hey sleazy " Messy " while YOU ARE AT IT ...look at where *
*Obama ( The Golden Child ) left us with the Military.....*
*How about DEFENSELESS !!!*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Are you saying yet another republican is going to drive us into yet another recession?


 . . . and then they'll blame the Democrat voted in that fixes it, yet again.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Yes
> View attachment 4205


You certainly are assigning quite a bit of power to people with 1 vote and 1 opinion.


----------



## nononono (Mar 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You certainly are assigning quite a bit of power to people with 1 vote and 1 opinion.



*The power of the Honest Vote....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Are you saying yet another republican is going to drive us into yet another recession?


6 years of QE is driving us in that direction.  That’s just what Obama allowed.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump vowed to eliminate the debt in 8 years. He's on track to leave it at least 50 percent higher*


Suckers.  Only you people believed that 9 trillion in Obama debt could be eliminated in 8 years.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> You say such dumb shit, it’s like you’ve given up.


Reminds me of your understanding of how your collateralized debt is an asset.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 6 years of QE is driving us in that direction.  That’s just what Obama allowed.


QE giveth and QE taketh away?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 13, 2019)

messy said:


> Actually, while you're at it look at what Bush and Trump did to the debt!


Which one had their Presidency subsidized by 6 years of tax payer funded QE.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 6 years of QE is driving us in that direction.  That’s just what Obama allowed.


QE giveth and QE taketh away?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Which one had their Presidency subsidized by 6 years of tax payer funded QE.


So we'll have to do it again?


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Which one had their Presidency subsidized by 6 years of tax payer funded QE.


It’s simple math, my friend. How to grow an economy. I guess I grow my business with QE. If I gave it to a Republican, he’d fuck it up. LOL


----------



## messy (Mar 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Reminds me of your understanding of how your collateralized debt is an asset.


You’re so bummed that you’re now trying to invent things about me? 
Did you know that debt is debt and an asset is an asset? Did you know that you frequently use debt to purchase an asset? Didn’t you use the example of a credit line? Or a fixed loan? That’s debt. 
A house is an asset.
It’s not confusing.
To set the record straight, in case you misunderstood me before, I don’t believe that my collateralized debt is an asset. It’s just debt.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re so bummed that you’re now trying to invent things about me?
> Did you know that debt is debt and an asset is an asset? Did you know that you frequently use debt to purchase an asset? Didn’t you use the example of a credit line? Or a fixed loan? That’s debt.
> A house is an asset.
> It’s not confusing.
> To set the record straight, in case you misunderstood me before, I don’t believe that my collateralized debt is an asset. It’s just debt.


Just when I think you’ve learned something you type the above.  Your home value dropped thanks to Powell.  You had no control over that.  That is how collateralized debt works.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

messy said:


> It’s simple math, my friend. How to grow an economy. I guess I grow my business with QE. If I gave it to a Republican, he’d fuck it up. LOL


Bush did TARP, and Obama upped him big time with 6 straight years of QE to nearly double the debt and preserve TBTF.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So we'll have to do it again?


why do you ask?


----------



## messy (Mar 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Just when I think you’ve learned something you type the above.  Your home value dropped thanks to Powell.  You had no control over that.  That is how collateralized debt works.


1. I don't know who Powell is and 2. My home values haven't dropped.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 14, 2019)

messy said:


> 1. I don't know who Powell is and 2. My home values haven't dropped.


Just can't make this stuff up.

Federal Reserve · Chairman
Jerome Powell
William Martin was the longest serving chair, holding the position from 1951 to 1970. The current Chairman is *Jerome Powell* , who was sworn in on February 5, 2018. [3] [4] [5] [6] He was nominated to the position by President Donald Trump on November 2, 2017, and was later confirmed by the Senate.
*Chair of the Federal Reserve - Wikipedia*
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chairman_of_the_Federal_Reserve


----------



## Booter (Mar 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Suckers.  Only you people believed that 9 trillion in Obama debt could be eliminated in 8 years.


Obama Debt?
G.W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts being made permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars - that was all Obama's doing?

What the numbers show is that the total debt increased the most at 184% over 8 years and at the fastest rate under President Reagan at almost 14% per year. In fact, the three Republican presidents had the fastest growing debt on a yearly basis.

Reagan

Started Presidency: $965 billion
Ended Presidency: $2.74 trillion
Increased 184% or 13.9% per year
H.W. Bush

Started Presidency: $2.74 trillion
Ended Presidency: $4.23 trillion
Increased 54% or 11.5% per year (only in office for four years)
Clinton

Started Presidency: $4.23 trillion
Ended Presidency: $5.77 trillion
Increased 36% or 4.0% per year
W. Bush

Started Presidency: $5.77 trillion
Ended Presidency: $11.1 trillion
Increased 93% or 8.5% per year
Obama

Started Presidency: $11.1 trillion
Ended Presidency: $19.85 trillion
Increased 78% or 7.5% per year
President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President. The Great Recession is probably the biggest of them as can be seen in the yearly deficit numbers.

Source: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/GFDEBTN


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

messy said:


> 1. I don't know who Powell is and 2. My home values haven't dropped.


1. Not surprised.  2.  Sucker


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> Obama Debt?
> G.W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts being made permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars - that was all Obama's doing?
> 
> What the numbers show is that the total debt increased the most at 184% over 8 years and at the fastest rate under President Reagan at almost 14% per year. In fact, the three Republican presidents had the fastest growing debt on a yearly basis.
> ...


Remember what happened the last time I parsed your data source?  This is gonna be fun.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> Obama Debt?
> G.W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts being made permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars - that was all Obama's doing?
> 
> What the numbers show is that the total debt increased the most at 184% over 8 years and at the fastest rate under President Reagan at almost 14% per year. In fact, the three Republican presidents had the fastest growing debt on a yearly basis.
> ...


Fake News Booty.


----------



## messy (Mar 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 1. Not surprised.  2.  Sucker


I’m at least happy that you agreed with my comment about how much more the economy has grown under Dems than GOP the last 30 years or so.


----------



## Booter (Mar 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Remember what happened the last time I parsed your data source?  This is gonna be fun.


I remember you stating that Obama's deficit was over $1 trillion every year - but you couldn't provide a source for that because as usual you were just talking out of your ass.  I'm not sure what is fun about that.


----------



## nononono (Mar 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So we'll have to do it again?


*You're not a numbers guy are you......*

*The debt can go away with the " Swipe " of a pen......( Or a " Key " punch ...)*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> I remember you stating that Obama's deficit was over $1 trillion every year - but you couldn't provide a source for that because as usual you were just talking out of your ass.  I'm not sure what is fun about that.


diz won't let his own disingenuousness, lies nor ignorance slow him down . . . if he did he'd still be sitting on a Pearl City curb crying about getting his lunch money taken by a couple island girls.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

Booter said:


> I remember you stating that Obama's deficit was over $1 trillion every year - but you couldn't provide a source for that because as usual you were just talking out of your ass.  I'm not sure what is fun about that.


You remember incorrectly.  I said Bush was the first to have a trillion dollar deficit.  Obama had the next four trillion dollar deficits for a total of 9 trillion in debt when he left office.  Divide that by 8 years or 2 terms and you come up with what Fries U grads don’t get.  Besides, you posted the link to show that very thing bootsie.  Do you yet know the difference between debt and deficits?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 14, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You remember incorrectly.  I said Bush was the first to have a trillion dollar deficit.  Obama had the next four trillion dollar deficits for a total of 9 trillion in debt when he left office.  Divide that by 8 years or 2 terms and you come up with what Fries U grads don’t get.  Besides, you posted the link to show that very thing bootsie.  Do you yet know the difference between debt and deficits?


Liar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Liar.


Show me


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 14, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> diz won't let his own disingenuousness, lies nor ignorance slow him down . . . if he did he'd still be sitting on a Pearl City curb crying about getting his lunch money taken by a couple island girls.


This is above you whiskers.  And they weren’t real girls.


----------



## Booter (Mar 15, 2019)

*15 Years After the Iraq Invasion, What Are the Costs?*
*Americans spend $32 million per hour on wars started during the Bush administration.*

*First, the economic costs: According to estimates by the Costs of War project at Brown University’s Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs, the war on terror has cost Americans a staggering $5.6 trillion since 2001, when the U.S. invaded Afghanistan.*

$5.6 trillion. This figure includes not just the Pentagon’s war fund, but also future obligations such as social services for an ever-growing number of post-9/11 veterans.

It’s hard for most of us to even begin to grasp such an enormous number.

 Since 2001, every American taxpayer has spent almost $24,000 on the wars — equal to the average down payment on a house, a new Honda Accord, or a year at a public university.

As stupefying as those numbers are, the budgetary costs pale in comparison with the human toll.

*As of 2015, when the Costs of War project made its latest tallies, up to 165,000 Iraqi civilians had died as a direct consequence of U.S. war, plus around 8,000 U.S. soldiers and military contractors in Iraq.*

Those numbers have only continued to rise. Up to 6,000 civilians were killed by U.S.-led strikes in Iraq and Syria in 2017 –– more civilians than in any previous year, according to the watchdog group AirWars.

In addition to those direct deaths, at least four times as many people in Iraq have died from the side effects of war, such as malnutrition, environmental degradation, and deteriorated infrastructure.

https://fpif.org/15-years-after-the-iraq-invasion-what-are-the-costs/

GW Bush - what a fucking asshole!


----------



## Booter (Mar 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You remember incorrectly.  I said Bush was the first to have a trillion dollar deficit.  Obama had the next four trillion dollar deficits for a total of 9 trillion in debt when he left office.  Divide that by 8 years or 2 terms and you come up with what Fries U grads don’t get.  Besides, you posted the link to show that very thing bootsie.  Do you yet know the difference between debt and deficits?


Izzy you are pathetic, here's what you said "Sorry pal Obama ran over a trillion every year he was in office."  Are you lying or are you ignorant?
Actually, what you say above is not even true.  Care to provide a source for any of your latest round if wrong numbers?


----------



## Booter (Mar 15, 2019)

*HOW MUCH HIGHER ARE TRUMP’S BUDGET DEFICITS THAN OBAMA’S?*

The U.S. federal deficit for July totalled $76.9 billion, pushing the total figure for the first 10 months of the fiscal year to $684 billion—up almost 21 percent on this time in 2017.

A combination of increased spending and reduced tax intake have conspired to push the deficit higher, with President Donald Trump’s administration now estimating that the total figure will top $1 trillion in 2019, CBS News reported.

Trump vowed to cut the deficit when running for president in 2016, regularly bashing Barack Obama’s economic policies that saw the shortfall swell to well above $1 trillion during his time in office. He even promised to wipe out the national debt, though offered no suggestion of how that might be achieved. But now that he is in the Oval Office, the president seems less worried about the runaway numbers.

Trump seems to have lost interest in the deficit as soon as he won the presidency. Once the deficit crosses the $1 trillion mark again, the Trump administration expects it to stay there for three years.

For the current budget year, the White House is projecting a total deficit of $890 billion, which would be the highest figure for six years. This would be 33.7 percent up from last year’s deficit, 

https://www.newsweek.com/how-much-higher-are-trumps-budget-deficits-obamas-1069476


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy you are pathetic, here's what you said "Sorry pal Obama ran over a trillion every year he was in office."  Are you lying or are you ignorant?
> Actually, what you say above is not even true.  Care to provide a source for any of your latest round if wrong numbers?


Sorry, but I got to side with Iz, you lie constantly.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy you are pathetic, here's what you said "Sorry pal Obama ran over a trillion every year he was in office."  Are you lying or are you ignorant?
> Actually, what you say above is not even true.  Care to provide a source for any of your latest round if wrong numbers?


Show me.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 16, 2019)

Another Fries U grad.

Ortiz: Ocasio-Cortez Again Proves She's Clueless on Economics
10 hours ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/03/15/ortiz-ocasio-cortez-again-proves-shes-clueless-on-economics/amp/&ved=2ahUKEwjw3ovz2YbhAhVjBjQIHZ-KDEkQlO8DMAJ6BAgKEA0&usg=AOvVaw35ZfF0gyp1P-s2wBunK6i5&ampcf=1


----------



## messy (Mar 16, 2019)

What’s clear is that both Obama and Clinton were much better for the economy than Bush and Trump. 
I remember how much more I made during Obama than during Bush and now, not so much. Trump is slowing us down and growing the deficit and hurting trade. Such a shame.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 16, 2019)

C
[QUOTE="messy said:


> What’s clear is that both Obama and Clinton were much better for the economy than Bush and Trump.
> I remember how much more I made during Obama than during Bush and now, not so much. Trump is slowing us down and growing the deficit and hurting trade. Such a shame.


Fries U!! What a deal!!


----------



## nononono (Mar 17, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Liar.



*Mirror....*


----------



## Booter (Mar 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U!! What a deal!!


Izzy, maybe take a look at your 401K and Mutual Fund statements over the years - oh wait never mind.


----------



## Booter (Mar 19, 2019)

*US economic growth is likely to slow sharply this year and next, according to CNBC’s Fed Survey*

KEY POINTS

The average forecast for gross domestic product growth this year is just 2.3 percent, according to the CNBC Fed Survey for March, because of the trade battle and slowing global growth.
Sixty percent still see a rate hike this year, but that’s down from 78 percent in the January survey. And now 14 percent of respondents forecast a rate cut in 2019.
The CNBC Fed Survey was given March 14 to 17 with 43 respondents from the economics, equities and fixed income fields.
Weaker global growth and tariffs are seen as the major culprits.
A weak outlook for growth abroad knocked about 40 basis points (or 0.4 percentage points) off of GDP forecasts this year, according to respondents, who include economists, fund managers and strategists. Tariffs — both those put in place by the Trump administration and retaliatory tariffs from other countries — are estimated to take another 20 basis points off of growth.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/19/us-economic-growth-is-set-to-slow-sharply-this-year-and-next-according-to-cnbcs-fed-survey.html


----------



## messy (Mar 19, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy, maybe take a look at your 401K and Mutual Fund statements over the years - oh wait never mind.


That’s a crackup. Let’s pitch in and give the dummy some QE!


----------



## messy (Mar 19, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s a crackup. Let’s pitch in and give the dummy some QE!


I have debt but no deficit. If Iz wasn’t such a dummy he’d know what I was talking about, but he would need to learn the definition of “asset.”


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 19, 2019)

Booter said:


> *US economic growth is likely to slow sharply this year and next, according to CNBC’s Fed Survey*
> 
> KEY POINTS
> 
> ...


CNBC?


----------



## Booter (Mar 20, 2019)

*Trump's Twin Deficits Are Exploding*

Candidate Trump campaigned on wiping out the yearly federal deficit, the governments $19 trillion in total debt and reducing the trade deficit. Reality is harsher than campaigning, especially when President Trump signed a huge corporate tax cut (which contained a minor cut for individuals). This has led to the federal deficit on track to reach $1 trillion per year.

Trump has talked loudly but delivered little real results when it comes to impacting trade. Under his watch the trade deficit has grown over $100 billion, going from $502 billion in 2016 to $621 billion in 2018, an increase of 19%. The deficit for Goods has increased $140 billion from $751 billion to $891 billion. At its current pace, the Goods deficit could also hit $1 trillion in 2020 .

*Federal deficit marches on to $1 trillion under Trump
*
There were two reports out last week that indicate the Federal deficit is on track to hit $1 trillion either in 2019 or 2020. The first is the U.S. Treasury’s Monthly Statement, which showed the following for the month of January.

*The Goods trade deficit could also hit $1 trillion under Trump*

The Census Bureau released December and 2018’s trade information and it shows that the U.S. trade deficit continues to increase. While Trump will rail that the U.S. is “losing”, in many ways this indicates that the American economy is performing better than other countries. It also shows that American companies and consumers are voting with their pocketbook since the products that are being imported are at a lower price or just not being made in the U.S.

*https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2019/03/09/trumps-twin-deficits-are-exploding/#2219f3627ffa*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 20, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump's Twin Deficits Are Exploding*
> 
> Candidate Trump campaigned on wiping out the yearly federal deficit, the governments $19 trillion in total debt and reducing the trade deficit. Reality is harsher than campaigning, especially when President Trump signed a huge corporate tax cut (which contained a minor cut for individuals). This has led to the federal deficit on track to reach $1 trillion per year.
> 
> ...


Horrible, almost as bad as Obama.
He did spend most of his life as a democrat.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 22, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy, maybe take a look at your 401K and Mutual Fund statements over the years - oh wait never mind.


Okay.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 22, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s a crackup. Let’s pitch in and give the dummy some QE!


Oh itʻs coming.  Certainly by 2020 so all you Suckers can say capitalism doesnʻt work


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 22, 2019)

messy said:


> I have debt but no deficit. If Iz wasn’t such a dummy he’d know what I was talking about, but he would need to learn the definition of “asset.”


If you knew what debt comprised of you wouldnʻt post what you just posted.  Fries U!  What a deal!!  And yes remind us of your collateralized debt masquerading as an asset.  You people crack me up.


----------



## messy (Mar 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh itʻs coming.  Certainly by 2020 so all you Suckers can say capitalism doesnʻt work


It doesn't. Social democracies are the only systems that work for any given nation. But as I mentioned, people can't get very rich in those systems. No butlers or chauffeurs in Norway. And yes, those few that exist may not fully bear the costs of their own defense.


----------



## Booter (Mar 25, 2019)

The Trump Tax Law Did Not Benefit Workers 

Trump promised workers that his massive tax cuts for the rich and big corporations would benefit workers, create economic growth, and pay for itself. None of that happened.

Corporate profit growth hit a 6-year high, and corporations used their massive tax breaks for a record-high $1 trillion of stock buybacks.

Workers did not benefit. 60 percent of voters said they had not seen an increase in their paychecks as a result of the Trump tax law.

The Trump tax law has not created jobs. In fact, the 1,000 largest public companies actually eliminated nearly 140,000 jobs since the tax law was passed.

The federal deficit swelled by more than 40 percent compared to a year ago largely because of a sharp decline in corporate tax revenues, and the CBO said the Trump tax law would add $1.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade.

While workers were left behind, Trump and his family benefit greatly from the Trump tax law.

Ivanka and Jared stand to benefit from a tax break they pushed, which offers massive tax breaks to real estate developers.

Kushner’s family business bought $13 million in additional properties after they were designated part of an “opportunity zone” by Trump’s tax law.

Trump and his family benefit substantially from massive tax cuts given to the richest Americans, and from tax breaks given to “pass-through” entities like the Trump Organization


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 25, 2019)

Booter said:


> The Trump Tax Law Did Not Benefit Workers
> 
> Trump promised workers that his massive tax cuts for the rich and big corporations would benefit workers, create economic growth, and pay for itself. None of that happened.
> 
> ...


Fake News.


----------



## Booter (Mar 25, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.



The federal deficit swelled by more than 40 percent compared to a year ago largely because of a sharp decline in corporate tax revenues, and the CBO said the Trump tax law would add $1.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade.
I really wish this was fake news.  Shitstain, if your head was not so deep in the sand or so far up your ass you would know this is all too true.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 25, 2019)

Booter said:


> The federal deficit swelled by more than 40 percent compared to a year ago largely because of a sharp decline in corporate tax revenues, and the CBO said the Trump tax law would add $1.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade.
> I really wish this was fake news.  Shitstain, if your head was not so deep in the sand or so far up your ass you would know this is all too true.


He knows it's true, but won't/can't admit it, not out loud at any rate.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

messy said:


> It doesn't. Social democracies are the only systems that work for any given nation. But as I mentioned, people can't get very rich in those systems. No butlers or chauffeurs in Norway. And yes, those few that exist may not fully bear the costs of their own defense.


Which social democracies has Fries U taught you work?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

Booter said:


> The Trump Tax Law Did Not Benefit Workers
> 
> Trump promised workers that his massive tax cuts for the rich and big corporations would benefit workers, create economic growth, and pay for itself. None of that happened.
> 
> ...


You Fries U grads crack me up.  First collusion, now the above.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


Real News interpreted with a Fries U education.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

Booter said:


> The federal deficit swelled by more than 40 percent compared to a year ago largely because of a sharp decline in corporate tax revenues, and the CBO said the Trump tax law would add $1.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade.
> I really wish this was fake news.  Shitstain, if your head was not so deep in the sand or so far up your ass you would know this is all too true.


Look no further than interest on 6 years of QE under Obama to see why deficits are swelling.  Fries U grads and deficits go together like.......


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He knows it's true, but won't/can't admit it, not out loud at any rate.


Oh whiskers, wiggle those crumbs free.


----------



## espola (Mar 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Look no further than interest on 6 years of QE under Obama to see why deficits are swelling.  Fries U grads and deficits go together like.......


It looks like you really don't know what QE is.


----------



## messy (Mar 25, 2019)

espola said:


> It looks like you really don't know what QE is.


He doesn’t know what any of it is. 
It’s classic. I think when he hits Walmart he goes to the nutter books that talk about the federal reserve and Opus Dei. 
I’ve never seen someone so patently ignorant about all things money-related who talks so much about it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 25, 2019)

Booter said:


> The federal deficit swelled by more than 40 percent compared to a year ago largely because of a sharp decline in corporate tax revenues, and the CBO said the Trump tax law would add $1.9 trillion to the debt over the next decade.
> I really wish this was fake news.  Shitstain, if your head was not so deep in the sand or so far up your ass you would know this is all too true.


The CBO?
What did they say about Obama care?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

espola said:


> It looks like you really don't know what QE is.


Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

messy said:


> He doesn’t know what any of it is.
> It’s classic. I think when he hits Walmart he goes to the nutter books that talk about the federal reserve and Opus Dei.
> I’ve never seen someone so patently ignorant about all things money-related who talks so much about it.


Still wearing your collateralized debt cape while  paying double digit interest to the bank every month I see.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 25, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The CBO?
> What did they say about Obama care?


Fries U grads!  3 peas in a pod!


----------



## Booter (Mar 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Look no further than interest on 6 years of QE under Obama to see why deficits are swelling.  Fries U grads and deficits go together like.......


Hanai Pua


----------



## Booter (Mar 26, 2019)

*Trump's Big "Win": The Largest Budget Deficit With A Strong Economy*

*Trump will break the record*
When you take into account how the economy is doing it shows that President Trump’s budget deficits as a percentage of GDP will exceed any other President’s during a time of economic expansion. From the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget or CFRB, the chart’s blue line shows the deficit as a percentage of GDP. At the projected 4.6% for fiscal 2019 it will the be largest in a non-recession year and is expected to stay above this level in the future.

*Obama had to navigate the Great Recession*
When President Obama entered office the economy was in a free fall. The deficit hit 9.8% in fiscal 2019 but that was directly related to the Great Recession. As can be seen in the durable goods orders and housing charts below, they fell dramatically and bottomed just after Obama became President.
This led to much lower tax revenue (2.4% of GDP per the CFRB) as people were laid off and companies made less money or even had losses. It also created higher spending (2.9% of GDP) for programs such as unemployment and food stamps.

*Trump’s deficit will increase even as the economy grows*
Multiple organizations ranging from the Congressional Budget Office to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget are projecting that the Federal deficit will increase even as the economy grows. Their projections are for it to increase less in 2019 than 2018, but still have many years of growth even though the current economic expansion is about to hit a decade.

*Trump seems to believe (or at least that is what he says and his advisors have told him) that reducing taxes and cutting regulations will grow the economy enough to solve the debt problem. Stephen Moore from the Heritage Foundation and Larry Kudlow, Trump’s Director of the National Economic Council, are two proponents. Unfortunately, in the first year of the tax cuts, the deficit increased from $666 billion in fiscal 2017 to $779 billion in fiscal 2018, an increase of $113 billion or 17%. It looks like they are on a path to $1 trillion or more as far as the eye can see.*
*
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2019/01/18/trumps-big-win-the-largest-budget-deficit-with-a-strong-economy/#45957b2549d1*


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Mar 26, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump's Big "Win": The Largest Budget Deficit With A Strong Economy*
> 
> *Trump will break the record*
> When you take into account how the economy is doing it shows that President Trump’s budget deficits as a percentage of GDP will exceed any other President’s during a time of economic expansion. From the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget or CFRB, the chart’s blue line shows the deficit as a percentage of GDP. At the projected 4.6% for fiscal 2019 it will the be largest in a non-recession year and is expected to stay above this level in the future.
> ...


Time to cut government spending.
Simple.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 26, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Time to cut government spending.
> Simple.


https://nypost.com/2019/03/26/house-denies-pentagon-request-for-1b-to-fund-trumps-border-wall/

https://www.thebalance.com/trump-vs-obama-economic-policies-4142333


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 26, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump's Big "Win": The Largest Budget Deficit With A Strong Economy*
> 
> *Trump will break the record*
> When you take into account how the economy is doing it shows that President Trump’s budget deficits as a percentage of GDP will exceed any other President’s during a time of economic expansion. From the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget or CFRB, the chart’s blue line shows the deficit as a percentage of GDP. At the projected 4.6% for fiscal 2019 it will the be largest in a non-recession year and is expected to stay above this level in the future.
> ...


Nothing like ignoring 6 years of QE.  Fries U!  What a deal!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 26, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Time to cut government spending.
> Simple.


Socialist believe that government will spend taxpayers wages better than they can.  Fries U grads believe the same.  They forget how deficits are created.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 26, 2019)

Booter said:


> Hanai Pua


Fries U!  What a deal!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U!  What a deal!


Looks like the student body is growing.


----------



## Booter (Mar 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Socialist believe that government will spend taxpayers wages better than they can.  Fries U grads believe the same.  They forget how deficits are created.


LMFAO - Izzy personally benefits more from Socialism than anyone on this board.

From us taxpayers - You're welcome!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Socialist believe that government will spend taxpayers wages better than they can.  Fries U grads believe the same.  They forget how deficits are created.


. . . and you seem to believe large corporations are concerned about what is in humanities best interests when history says otherwise.


----------



## espola (Mar 26, 2019)

Booter said:


> LMFAO - Izzy personally benefits more from Socialism than anyone on this board.
> 
> From us taxpayers - You're welcome!


I don't know about that.  I haven't added up all the Medicare payments and discounts I got last year for 2 nights in the hospital and associated doctor visits, but it must be close to what VA pays a useless paper-shuffler.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 27, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Looks like the student body is growing.


In membership ONLY.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 27, 2019)

Booter said:


> LMFAO - Izzy personally benefits more from Socialism than anyone on this board.
> 
> From us taxpayers - You're welcome!


You cowards fail to see the diff between earned and entitled.  Youʻve always been a COWARD and continue to prove it with your own post as you condemn ALL service members.  Shame on you COWARD.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and you seem to believe large corporations are concerned about what is in humanities best interests when history says otherwise.


That annual 2cent raise really sucks doesnʻt it Union boy?  Earn your position on that roster and your personal history will improve.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 27, 2019)

espola said:


> I don't know about that.  I haven't added up all the Medicare payments and discounts I got last year for 2 nights in the hospital and associated doctor visits, but it must be close to what VA pays a useless paper-shuffler.


Useless patients often contradict themselves as you do.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and you seem to believe large corporations are concerned about what is in humanities best interests when history says otherwise.


History?


----------



## Booter (Mar 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You cowards fail to see the diff between earned and entitled.  Youʻve always been a COWARD and continue to prove it with your own post as you condemn ALL service members.  Shame on you COWARD.


Hey screw you and your delusional bullshit.  That is not the case at all - what a load of crap!!!! The Military is Socialism you moron!  The United States military is the largest and most funded socialist program in the world.  It operates thanks to our taxpayer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From the richest citizens to the homeless who sleep under the bridge. We are all protected by our military whether we pay taxes or not. This is complete socialism.  So are our schools, Police and Fire Departments, Garbage collection, roadways, CIA, FBI, Libraries, Prison system, student loans, public parks, court system, medicaid, FDA, CDC...etc.  
What is clear about you is your total hypocrisy when it comes to government spending.  Like most conservatives government spending is good when it benefits them directly but if it helps anyone else then you rail against it.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 27, 2019)

Booter said:


> Hey screw you and your delusional bullshit.  That is not the case at all - what a load of crap!!!! The Military is Socialism you moron!  The United States military is the largest and most funded socialist program in the world.  It operates thanks to our taxpayer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From the richest citizens to the homeless who sleep under the bridge. We are all protected by our military whether we pay taxes or not. This is complete socialism.  So are our schools, Police and Fire Departments, Garbage collection, roadways, CIA, FBI, Libraries, Prison system, student loans, public parks, court system, medicaid, FDA, CDC...etc.
> What is clear about you is your total hypocrisy when it comes to government spending.  Like most conservatives government spending is good when it benefits them directly but if it helps anyone else then you rail against it.


What does all this babble have to do with you being a fucking coward?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 27, 2019)

Booter said:


> Hey screw you and your delusional bullshit.  That is not the case at all - what a load of crap!!!! The Military is Socialism you moron!  The United States military is the largest and most funded socialist program in the world.  It operates thanks to our taxpayer dollars and protects the country as a whole. From the richest citizens to the homeless who sleep under the bridge. We are all protected by our military whether we pay taxes or not. This is complete socialism.  So are our schools, Police and Fire Departments, Garbage collection, roadways, CIA, FBI, Libraries, Prison system, student loans, public parks, court system, medicaid, FDA, CDC...etc.
> What is clear about you is your total hypocrisy when it comes to government spending.  Like most conservatives government spending is good when it benefits them directly but if it helps anyone else then you rail against it.


Youʻll be a COWARD all your life Bootsie!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Mar 27, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What does all this babble have to do with you being a fucking coward?


Bootsie missed the part about the military being an all voluntary force.  We are actually ramping up for another force reduction.  Bootsie is about as clueless as they come.


----------



## messy (Mar 27, 2019)

Bootsie wins


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Bootsie missed the part about the military being an all voluntary force.  We are actually ramping up for another force reduction.  Bootsie is about as clueless as they come.


Venezuela.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You cowards fail to see the diff between earned and entitled.  Youʻve always been a COWARD and continue to prove it with your own post as you condemn ALL service members.  Shame on you COWARD.


Oh poor baby, seems you are hurt and stewing, poor thing. Your cowardice has been on display for years in here, and it's only gotten worse. People like you and your fellow buffoons in here are the worst kind of cowards, you are afraid of truth. You avoid it like the plague. You have made up your own world, one you can feel safe in and blame"others" for all the world's ills. You are a pussy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Bootsie missed the part about the military being an all voluntary force.  We are actually ramping up for another force reduction.  Bootsie is about as clueless as they come.


Pinkos usually are.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Bootsie wins


Just like Hillary did.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Bootsie missed the part about the military being an all voluntary force.  We are actually ramping up for another force reduction.  Bootsie is about as clueless as they come.


Booty misses a whole lot.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh poor baby, seems you are hurt and stewing, poor thing. Your cowardice has been on display for years in here, and it's only gotten worse. People like you and your fellow buffoons in here are the worst kind of cowards, you are afraid of truth. You avoid it like the plague. You have made up your own world, one you can feel safe in and blame"others" for all the world's ills. You are a pussy.


You are just a bit emotional today, you need a hug?


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Bootsie wins


So the racist is picking a side. Is your Dad on the same racist side?


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh poor baby, seems you are hurt and stewing, poor thing. Your cowardice has been on display for years in here, and it's only gotten worse. People like you and your fellow buffoons in here are the worst kind of cowards, you are afraid of truth. You avoid it like the plague. You have made up your own world, one you can feel safe in and blame"others" for all the world's ills. You are a pussy.


Ssys the guy who puts people on ignore but still reads their post....you are the biggest puss on here!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 27, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You are just a bit emotional today, you need a hug?


That's OK, I'm pretty sure you'd try something creepy.


----------



## messy (Mar 28, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> So the racist is picking a side. Is your Dad on the same racist side?


Hey does your “family” put you down on their tax return as a dependent?


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 28, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey does your “family” put you down on their tax return as a dependent?


Hey, did your "Dad" help you with that response?


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 29, 2019)

messy said:


> Bootsie wins


Hey Mr Racist 2% white guy. When are you going to give me your name and number so I can call you? You do know your name and phone number? That is unless you're trying to hide something...


----------



## Booter (Mar 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Bootsie missed the part about the military being an all voluntary force.  We are actually ramping up for another force reduction.  Bootsie is about as clueless as they come.


Izzy, the Military is Socialism.  It doesn't matter if it's voluntary.  Police, firemen, dog catchers and garbage collectors are all voluntary services and are all Socialism.  And there is nothing wrong with it.  It's just funny to see you rail against Socialism when the majority of your life has been sponsored by Socialism.  Your reaction to this being pointed out to you is even funnier (I was in the Military and you weren't so you hate all servicemen and are a COWARD. LOL!!!).  I suppose one explanation is you, like the other nutters in here, really don't understand Socialism.  Or you are a hypocrite.  Maybe it's a combination of the two.

Socialism.

There is nothing more feared and hated in America.

The word alone sends shivers down the spine of the American people.

Those three syllables conger up images of Big Brother Government ruling over us all, telling us what to eat, wear, buy, and think. Our children in national uniform being indoctrinated with propaganda in government education camps that use to be schools, turning them into little slaves. While their parents work twelve hour shifts in the concentration camp that slaughters rich successful billionaires, as the poor and needy get a million dollars a month in welfare. A murderous government waging a war against freedom and liberty to gain complete control over everyone and everything.

You know, the way things were under that socialists Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

They imagine the USSR and how Democrats are turning America into it because our government will give money to poor people so they don't starve to death. (Giving money to billion dollar corporations is NOT socialism somehow. You would be a communist and a hippie to think otherwise.)

Socialism is alive and well in America and it has been here for a very long time!

Oh, that's not all. it gets much worse! I hope your sitting down...

As it turns out, You love socialism and you use it everyday, and you may not even know it! It may have even saved your life. I know, this is bad...

Now relax and breath. It's going to be okay! We are going to get through this.

You see, we are still a capitalist nation. In America, you can still make a billion dollars, get a giant tax cut, and pay your employees barely enough to survive while you sail in your yacht to escape any guilt that might inconvenience you. So don't freak out just yet!

The thing is, socialism is all over America and people actually like it. Even you Izzy... Yes you!

*I know, I know. You're a conservative that believes in freedom and the constitution. You hate handouts and believe in hard work and the individual. You think government should get out of the way and let you live your lives and allow you to prosper on your own. You know that all rich people must have worked hard and all poor people are lazy. There is no other reason why they could be poor considering life is completely fair and all people are born into situations and environments that allow them to have all the opportunities and blessings that you had. There is no fathomable way they could have 2 or 3 jobs they work very hard at but still can't make ends meet. You got it all figured out.*

But still, even you get your kicks from a little socialism every now and then.

Don't think of this as an intervention, think of it as a coming out of the closet party. We know you are a closet socialist. It's okay, you are amongst friends and we support you. Besides, we always knew...

*Socialism is taxpayer funds being used collectively to benefit society as a whole, despite income, contribution, or ability.

Sounds horrible, huh?*

75 Ways Socialism Has Improved America: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2012/3/29/1078852/-75-Ways-Socialism-Has-Improved-America


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 29, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy, the Military is Socialism.  It doesn't matter if it's voluntary.  Police, firemen, dog catchers and garbage collectors are all voluntary services and are all Socialism.  And there is nothing wrong with it.  It's just funny to see you rail against Socialism when the majority of your life has been sponsored by Socialism.  Your reaction to this being pointed out to you is even funnier (I was in the Military and you weren't so you hate all servicemen and are a COWARD. LOL!!!).  I suppose one explanation is you, like the other nutters in here, really don't understand Socialism.  Or you are a hypocrite.  Maybe it's a combination of the two.
> 
> Socialism.
> 
> ...


The dailykos?
Socialism only fails wherever it is tried.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 29, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The dailykos?
> Socialism only fails wherever it is tried.


So should we stop what we have done for the last century or two?


----------



## messy (Mar 29, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Hey Mr Racist 2% white guy. When are you going to give me your name and number so I can call you? You do know your name and phone number? That is unless you're trying to hide something...


definitely trying to hide something. you?


----------



## messy (Mar 29, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The dailykos?
> Socialism only fails wherever it is tried.


which part? medicare, social security or public education?  or do you mean public sewer systems? Or how about the Water companies? That socialism, you mean? Doesn't work?


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 30, 2019)

messy said:


> definitely trying to hide something. you?


Why are you hiding something? You throw out a $10k challenge and now you get bashful?


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 30, 2019)

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/01/democratic-socialism-government-bernie-sanders-primary-president


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 30, 2019)

messy said:


> which part? medicare, social security or public education?  or do you mean public sewer systems? Or how about the Water companies? That socialism, you mean? Doesn't work?


I am not sure Medicare, social security and public education are shiny examples.of socialism working.
Why not throw the VA and the post office in there too.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 30, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I am not sure Medicare, social security and public education are shiny examples.of socialism working.
> Why not throw the VA and the post office in there too.


Like with everything a system is one thing the execution thereof yet another. Mismanagement, like we see coming out of the White House, is what dooms the viability. Have you ever read the US Constitution?


----------



## messy (Mar 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Why are you hiding something? You throw out a $10k challenge and now you get bashful?


I missed seeing your phone number


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 30, 2019)

messy said:


> I missed seeing your phone number


I'm not the one putting $$$$ out there on a bet now am I? Nor am I the one messaging you saying I've been making 7 figures a year.. Sounds like you're a racist puss who has something to hide. Why don't you want me calling you? Afraid I'll find something out about you?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 30, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Like with everything a system is one thing the execution thereof yet another. Mismanagement, like we see coming out of the White House, is what dooms the viability. Have you ever read the US Constitution?


Sounds like an argument against socialism.


----------



## messy (Mar 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I'm not the one putting $$$$ out there on a bet now am I? Nor am I the one messaging you saying I've been making 7 figures a year.. Sounds like you're a racist puss who has something to hide. Why don't you want me calling you? Afraid I'll find something out about you?


Dude you took a private conversation about my earnings public. What a douche. Now if you don't make over a mil a year outside of daddy, send me my grand and shut your pie hole.


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 30, 2019)

messy said:


> Dude you took a private conversation about my earnings public. What a douche. Now if you don't make over a mil a year outside of daddy, send me my grand and shut your pie hole.


Lollll! You already bragged about your 7 figure earnings before...so who's the douche now!

You think you can lie on here and just because YOU CHOSE to send me a message that I'm beholden to some code? That is further proof that shows you're the liar...
 don't expect me to  suddenly become your bro and have your back.

But you're a racist so I guess you want to hide your identity...


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 30, 2019)

messy said:


> I missed seeing your phone number


You sure Legend doesn't have it? Or maybe...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 30, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Sounds like an argument against socialism.


You aren't much of a thinker are you?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 30, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You aren't much of a thinker are you?


Not like you, union boy.
You are the brown shirt Hillary supporting left-wing talking point spouting bitch.


----------



## messy (Mar 30, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Lollll! You already bragged about your 7 figure earnings before...so who's the douche now!
> 
> You think you can lie on here and just because YOU CHOSE to send me a message that I'm beholden to some code? That is further proof that shows you're the liar...
> don't expect me to  suddenly become your bro and have your back.
> ...


Hey big mouth loser. I never once said anything about 7 figures publicly. Why are you freaking out? Are you going to pay me or not??? My question on our formerly private conversation was whether you could claim that, and if you could maybe you’ll win the bet. Can you? Or not? If not, send me my money and shut the fuck up. Or are you the chicken shit daddy’s boy that you brag about whose “family” makes so much money, while you don’t?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 30, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Not like you, union boy.
> You are the brown shirt Hillary supporting left-wing talking point spouting bitch.


Squeal litte piggy squeal! LOL!!!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 30, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Not like you, union boy.
> You are the brown shirt Hillary supporting left-wing talking point spouting bitch.


. . . project much?


----------



## nononono (Mar 30, 2019)

messy said:


> That’s a crackup. Let’s pitch in and give the dummy some QE!




*Qwack down..*


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey big mouth loser. I never once said anything about 7 figures publicly. Why are you freaking out? Are you going to pay me or not??? My question on our formerly private conversation was whether you could claim that, and if you could maybe you’ll win the bet. Can you? Or not? If not, send me my money and shut the fuck up. Or are you the chicken shit daddy’s boy that you brag about whose “family” makes so much money, while you don’t?


Your nerve must be exposed. I'm so in your head now.. but honestly there's not a lot there. Just a bunch of racist thoughts, insecurity,  daddy issues and gender confusion....


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey big mouth loser. I never once said anything about 7 figures publicly. Why are you freaking out? Are you going to pay me or not??? My question on our formerly private conversation was whether you could claim that, and if you could maybe you’ll win the bet. Can you? Or not? If not, send me my money and shut the fuck up. Or are you the chicken shit daddy’s boy that you brag about whose “family” makes so much money, while you don’t?


Since you're claiming to have all this financial knowledge I thought I would put you to the test. It's just a simple word problem..

You have three guy's,  all with different incomes. 

A. Has a Federal tax debt of $50k
B. Has a Federal tax debt of $100k
C. Has a Federal tax debt of $500k

All three paid their quarterlies so no tax penalties or interest.

All three receive W2s from a single company.

None of them of any outside income.

None of them have any additional taxes due.

What is the individual  income for A, B and C?


----------



## nononono (Mar 31, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . project much?



*Your expertise........*


----------



## messy (Mar 31, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Since you're claiming to have all this financial knowledge I thought I would put you to the test. It's just a simple word problem..
> 
> You have three guy's,  all with different incomes.
> 
> ...


Call my accountant. 

Is the tax due inclusive of the quarterlies they paid? I will assume yes.

I would guess that the person (you said guys, so that’s individuals) who has a 50K tax debt isn’t in the highest bracket, so that’s what maybe 30% (I’m not looking it up) so he made about $170K?

Is the 100K guy in the highest bracket so he made like 300K?

The 500K guy made like 1.2m?

I hope I’m close. 

Glad I didn’t bet on this.


----------



## messy (Mar 31, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Your nerve must be exposed. I'm so in your head now.. but honestly there's not a lot there. Just a bunch of racist thoughts, insecurity,  daddy issues and gender confusion....


Send me my check, punkass.
I notice in neither our formerly private conversation nor in this one you took public you didn’t answer about your income level without your parents.

It’s ok. My higher annual income is not why I’m a smart, cool guy and you’re a total tool.


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Call my accountant.
> 
> Is the tax due inclusive of the quarterlies they paid? I will assume yes.
> 
> ...


And you posted that you paid $500k in Fed. taxes. Tell me again that you never boasted about your 7 figure income...


----------



## messy (Mar 31, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> And you posted that you paid $500k in Fed. taxes. Tell me again that you never boasted about your 7 figure income...


I see. Yes you backed into that one and caught me! Good memory, Multi!
I wish it was only 500...


----------



## Multi Sport (Mar 31, 2019)

messy said:


> I see. Yes you backed into that one and caught me! Good memory, Multi!
> I wish it was only 500...


At least you admit it. Something E should learn to do..


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Bootsie wins


Fries U!!  What a deal!  Howʻs your collateralized debt coming along?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy, the Military is Socialism.  It doesn't matter if it's voluntary.  Police, firemen, dog catchers and garbage collectors are all voluntary services and are all Socialism.  And there is nothing wrong with it.  It's just funny to see you rail against Socialism when the majority of your life has been sponsored by Socialism.  Your reaction to this being pointed out to you is even funnier (I was in the Military and you weren't so you hate all servicemen and are a COWARD. LOL!!!).  I suppose one explanation is you, like the other nutters in here, really don't understand Socialism.  Or you are a hypocrite.  Maybe it's a combination of the two.
> 
> Socialism.
> 
> ...


The ramblings of a coward.  Please continue the worn out arguments of a bitter socialist Coward.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> The dailykos?
> Socialism only fails wherever it is tried.


Notice he made no mention of the V word?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So should we stop what we have done for the last century or two?


Why?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

messy said:


> which part? medicare, social security or public education?  or do you mean public sewer systems? Or how about the Water companies? That socialism, you mean? Doesn't work?


The social security that is a source of retirement nirvana?  How about the medicare system that is full of fraud and crony capitalism with health care and health insurance combined in to one package that ignores risk pools.  Or the public water system that charges you more when you use less because of the bond ratings?  You Fries U grads crack me up when you cheerlead your crony capitalist public systems.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Notice he made no mention of the V word?


They used to.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Like with everything a system is one thing the execution thereof yet another. Mismanagement, like we see coming out of the White House, is what dooms the viability. Have you ever read the US Constitution?


You had us at “Like with everything...”.  Just lump it all together right whiskers?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Call my accountant.
> 
> Is the tax due inclusive of the quarterlies they paid? I will assume yes.
> 
> ...


Whatʻs your accountantsʻs name and phone number?  Lol!


----------



## messy (Apr 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Whatʻs your accountantsʻs name and phone number?  Lol!


I don’t get it. That was neither a joke nor an insult so what was it?
Ya know, I can’t imagine why you’re not more successful...


----------



## messy (Apr 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The social security that is a source of retirement nirvana?  How about the medicare system that is full of fraud and crony capitalism with health care and health insurance combined in to one package that ignores risk pools.  Or the public water system that charges you more when you use less because of the bond ratings?  You Fries U grads crack me up when you cheerlead your crony capitalist public systems.


Is that esoteric macro nonsense that is indecipherable supposed to make you look like you know what you’re talking about? 
Like I said in another post, no wonder you’re so successful...Ignatius J. Reilly.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 1, 2019)

messy said:


> I don’t get it. That was neither a joke nor an insult so what was it?
> Ya know, I can’t imagine why you’re not more successful...


Imagine that.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You had us at “Like with everything...”.  Just lump it all together right whiskers?


You show you have no idea what I am referring to, like always. It's just a basic concept, yet it flies right over your head. I can tell some of the nutters in here act ignorant by choice, for you it's not a choice.


----------



## nononono (Apr 1, 2019)

messy said:


> Send me my check, punkass.
> I notice in neither our formerly private conversation nor in this one you took public you didn’t answer about your income level without your parents.
> 
> It’s ok. My higher annual income is not why I’m a smart, cool guy and you’re a total tool.



*An arrogant liar....Hmmmm.*

*" Messy " Financial at his best.*


----------



## Booter (Apr 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The ramblings of a coward.  Please continue the worn out arguments of a bitter socialist Coward.


Izzy, you are the Socialist.  The Military is the purest application of Socialism there is.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy, you are the Socialist.  The Military is the purest application of Socialism there is.


Volunteer.
You dick.


----------



## Booter (Apr 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The social security that is a source of retirement nirvana?  How about the medicare system that is full of fraud and crony capitalism with health care and health insurance combined in to one package that ignores risk pools.  Or the public water system that charges you more when you use less because of the bond ratings?  You Fries U grads crack me up when you cheerlead your crony capitalist public systems.


Izzy would rather have a private water company just like they had in Flint, MI.  What's a few extra neurotoxins each day when you have a melon like Izzy's?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Volunteer.
> You dick.


How is it funded you idiot?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy would rather have a private water company just like they had in Flint, MI.  What's a few extra neurotoxins each day when you have a melon like Izzy's?


He wants what they tell him he wants.


----------



## nononono (Apr 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy would rather have a private water company just like they had in Flint, MI.  What's a few extra neurotoxins each day when you have a melon like Izzy's?



*Oh My.....Boot Butt are you sippin some Rodent desired snake oils....again.*


----------



## nononono (Apr 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How is it funded you idiot?



*SSSSsssssssssssssssss .......................snaps the Snake.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How is it funded you idiot?



so·cial·ism
[ˈsōSHəˌlizəm]
NOUN
a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> so·cial·ism
> [ˈsōSHəˌlizəm]
> NOUN
> a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


Don't explain it. It's funny watching these guys think they know what they're talking about...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> so·cial·ism
> [ˈsōSHəˌlizəm]
> NOUN
> a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


Avoiding giving an answer to the actual question I see, what's that problem?

How is the US military funded?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Avoiding giving an answer to the actual question I see, what's that problem?
> 
> How is the US military funded?


You don't know?
It's funded just like your union.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I don’t get it. That was neither a joke nor an insult so what was it?
> Ya know, I can’t imagine why you’re not more successful...


Your first sentence has always been right.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Is that esoteric macro nonsense that is indecipherable supposed to make you look like you know what you’re talking about?
> Like I said in another post, no wonder you’re so successful...Ignatius J. Reilly.


Your Fries U education in ALL its glory.  What a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You show you have no idea what I am referring to, like always. It's just a basic concept, yet it flies right over your head. I can tell some of the nutters in here act ignorant by choice, for you it's not a choice.


You show you have no idea what youʻre talking about.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy, you are the Socialist.  The Military is the purest application of Socialism there is.


The Venezuelan military?  Please go on.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Volunteer.
> You dick.


They DQ cowards at MEPS.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He wants what they tell him he wants.


Ahhh you singing your own socialist song.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How is it funded you idiot?


By involuntary taxation.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Avoiding giving an answer to the actual question I see, what's that problem?
> 
> How is the US military funded?


By Congress.


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> so·cial·ism
> [ˈsōSHəˌlizəm]
> NOUN
> a political and economic theory of social organization which advocates that the means of production, distribution, and exchange should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.


That is so scary!!!  Wait isn't that how the Military is? And police and fire departments?  Parks? City streets? court systems?..etc...etc.  Joey, are you against all these things?  Why do you support cutting taxes for the super rich which leads to defunding all of these programs which greatly benefit all members of our society?  In the military a senior general makes 10x what a Private earns.  In the private sector CEO's at major companies earn 300X more than a cleaner at their office.  Which is a better system for society as a whole?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> That is so scary!!!  Wait isn't that how the Military is? And police and fire departments?  Parks? City streets? court systems?..etc...etc.  Joey, are you against all these things?  Why do you support cutting taxes for the super rich which leads to defunding all of these programs which greatly benefit all members of our society?  In the military a senior general makes 10x what a Private earns.  In the private sector CEO's at major companies earn 300X more than a cleaner at their office.  Which is a better system for society as a whole?


Capitalism.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> That is so scary!!!  Wait isn't that how the Military is? And police and fire departments?  Parks? City streets? court systems?..etc...etc.  Joey, are you against all these things?  Why do you support cutting taxes for the super rich which leads to defunding all of these programs which greatly benefit all members of our society?  In the military a senior general makes 10x what a Private earns.  In the private sector CEO's at major companies earn 300X more than a cleaner at their office.  Which is a better system for society as a whole?


As I have said here before, capitalism is failing because of the requirement to go to war to expand markets. In lieu of that, Trump has decided that if you take restraints off of corporate America, so they can exploit the environment at no cost and not provide health care or union protection (the NLRB has been a savior to organized labor over the years)so labor is cheaper, we can grow the economy without expanding to foreign markets. He even tries to invent “coal” as a viable option to plunder, when it isn’t any more. These are short term fixes, of course.


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Here's some Socialism I don't agree with:
*Trump’s farmer bailout just hit $7.7 billion *

As the Trump administration continues trade talks with China, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has paid out a total of $7.7 billion in aid to farmers to offset the effects of tariffs.

And the GOP is totally against socialism? But not to millionaire farmers who contribute a ton to their reelection apparently. Why not practice free trade and outright capitalism and forgo government interference?


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Here's some Socialism I don't agree with:
> *Trump’s farmer bailout just hit $7.7 billion *
> 
> As the Trump administration continues trade talks with China, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has paid out a total of $7.7 billion in aid to farmers to offset the effects of tariffs.
> ...


Major socialism.


----------



## espola (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Here's some Socialism I don't agree with:
> *Trump’s farmer bailout just hit $7.7 billion *
> 
> As the Trump administration continues trade talks with China, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has paid out a total of $7.7 billion in aid to farmers to offset the effects of tariffs.
> ...


Devin's cow approves of this message.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Farmers are losers who need the government to bail them out. Like GM. 
We have socialism for dairy and Ag and oil.


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

*Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley applies for federal bailout for farmers hurt by Trump's trade war*
*The Iowa senator needs a bailout after Trump's trade policies have caused farmers to take a major hit*

"China’s targeted, retaliatory tariffs on soybeans, meats, and other farm commodities will hammer American farmers already suffering from low farm prices. And China’s new duties on imports of U.S. vehicles—which have been surging in recent years—will now make it harder for American plants and workers to compete in that key market," Ed Gerwin, a senior fellow for trade and global opportunity at the Progressive Policy Institute, told Salon by email in July.

Gerwin added, "President Trump has made a big deal about the benefits of recent tax cuts for business and average Americans. But he can’t hide the fact that these escalating tariffs are tax increases that will hurt American competitiveness, cost consumers, and destroy jobs."


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley applies for federal bailout for farmers hurt by Trump's trade war*
> *The Iowa senator needs a bailout after Trump's trade policies have caused farmers to take a major hit*
> 
> "China’s targeted, retaliatory tariffs on soybeans, meats, and other farm commodities will hammer American farmers already suffering from low farm prices. And China’s new duties on imports of U.S. vehicles—which have been surging in recent years—will now make it harder for American plants and workers to compete in that key market," Ed Gerwin, a senior fellow for trade and global opportunity at the Progressive Policy Institute, told Salon by email in July.
> ...


Fake News.


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Trump’s tariffs are not only a new tax for Americans, but a policy of directly picking winners and losers in the economy. The interests of steel workers, for example, are being placed above the interest of consumers and farmers. This leads to the government using tax dollars to prop up farmers. Of course this spending means that tax-paying consumers are hit yet again, with their tax dollars being used for this new welfare program.

Government interventionism doesn’t simply stop there. The natural result of these new government barriers is for businesses to seek ways around them, such as Harley’s decision to move some manufacturing to Europe. This, of course, sparked backlash from President Trump, threatening further retaliation for such a move. As we've seen time and time again, the more Trump digs in to his support for protectionism, the more he will seek to interfere with the actions of individual companies.

Of course defenders of the President will argue that Trump’s tariffs are simply meant as a negotiating ploy designed to give America “better trade deals.” The future is impossible to predict, perhaps that will be the end result. Memes about 4d chess, however, are of little help to those Americans hurt by Trump’s tariff policy. And increasingly the Trump administration has signaled its willingness to embrace a prolonged trade war.

Such policies are, in the long run, as great a threat to the American economy as that posed by the Sanderistas.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> These are short term fixes, of course.


Like obamacare.


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


A comment from your fake brain?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Trump’s tariffs are not only a new tax for Americans, but a policy of directly picking winners and losers in the economy. The interests of steel workers, for example, are being placed above the interest of consumers and farmers. This leads to the government using tax dollars to prop up farmers. Of course this spending means that tax-paying consumers are hit yet again, with their tax dollars being used for this new welfare program.
> 
> Government interventionism doesn’t simply stop there. The natural result of these new government barriers is for businesses to seek ways around them, such as Harley’s decision to move some manufacturing to Europe. This, of course, sparked backlash from President Trump, threatening further retaliation for such a move. As we've seen time and time again, the more Trump digs in to his support for protectionism, the more he will seek to interfere with the actions of individual companies.
> 
> ...


Really Fake News.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> That is so scary!!!  Wait isn't that how the Military is? And police and fire departments?  Parks? City streets? court systems?..etc...etc.  Joey, are you against all these things?  Why do you support cutting taxes for the super rich which leads to defunding all of these programs which greatly benefit all members of our society?  In the military a senior general makes 10x what a Private earns.  In the private sector CEO's at major companies earn 300X more than a cleaner at their office.  Which is a better system for society as a whole?


Some sucker will always gravitate to the 300x more than a janitor argument.  Might as well be a Fries U grad.  What a deal!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Major socialism.


Welcome to the party Alice.  You Fries U grads are always late to the subsidy party.  But somebody has to pick your cherries.  Might as well be a Fries U grad.  What a deal!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Farmers are losers who need the government to bail them out. Like GM.
> We have socialism for dairy and Ag and oil.


We actually shipped those losers off to Venezuela.  We kept the Capitalist farmers here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley applies for federal bailout for farmers hurt by Trump's trade war*
> *The Iowa senator needs a bailout after Trump's trade policies have caused farmers to take a major hit*
> 
> "China’s targeted, retaliatory tariffs on soybeans, meats, and other farm commodities will hammer American farmers already suffering from low farm prices. And China’s new duties on imports of U.S. vehicles—which have been surging in recent years—will now make it harder for American plants and workers to compete in that key market," Ed Gerwin, a senior fellow for trade and global opportunity at the Progressive Policy Institute, told Salon by email in July.
> ...


ahhh my favorite little cowardly cherry picker.  At least you were smart enough to not link your post so I can parse through like I did with the National Debt and subsidies to the health and housing industries.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> We actually shipped those losers off to Venezuela.  We kept the Capitalist farmers here.


The government aid ones stayed? US socialism. How much did we give them? Love people on the federal payroll. Socialism works for losers.
Wait...you’re on the federal payroll, aren’t you?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> The government aid ones stayed? US socialism. How much did we give them? Love people on the federal payroll. Socialism works for losers.
> Wait...you’re on the federal payroll, aren’t you?


You sure are asking a lot of questions.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You sure are asking a lot of questions.


Yes, and the answers aren't flattering, this we already know.


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Some sucker will always gravitate to the 300x more than a janitor argument.  Might as well be a Fries U grad.  What a deal!!


Izzy in your case lets make that 400x.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy in your case lets make that 400x.


Actually our socialist Federal Government pays people pretty well with good benefits. 
Post Office folks and VA employees loooove that socialism. 
Be happy he “works” for his gubmint check...makes him feel like he’s not just accepting welfare.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You sure are asking a lot of questions.


He is on the federal payroll, isn’t he?


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ahhh my favorite little cowardly cherry picker.  At least you were smart enough to not link your post so I can parse through like I did with the National Debt and subsidies to the health and housing industries.


Izzy can't find this article without the link - he's a real smart guy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> He is on the federal payroll, isn’t he?


Yes, and he thanks you.
Have you thanked him?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yes, and the answers aren't flattering, this we already know.


Is this the union boy?


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Most republicans are socialists, they just don’t know it. There are thousands of socialist programs in the United States, all of which we rely on to maintain stability and basic services. In Republicanland (the land in which republican politics dwell; where irony and contradiction lose all meaning) the GOP base has been taught to hate socialism… while at the same time using socialist programs every day of their lives. All citizens in America experience socialism in one way or another – politics simply doesn’t allow republicans to admit it.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Most republicans are socialists, they just don’t know it. There are thousands of socialist programs in the United States, all of which we rely on to maintain stability and basic services. In Republicanland (the land in which republican politics dwell; where irony and contradiction lose all meaning) the GOP base has been taught to hate socialism… while at the same time using socialist programs every day of their lives. All citizens in America experience socialism in one way or another – politics simply doesn’t allow republicans to admit it.


Care to generalize anymore or is there something else you can add to this bullshit?


----------



## Booter (Apr 2, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> Care to generalize anymore or is there something else you can add to this bullshit?


I can try to dumb it down for you.  Let's start with this - Did you drive on a city street today? Or receive any mail?  Take a shower?


----------



## nononono (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Avoiding giving an answer to the actual question I see, what's that problem?
> 
> How is the US military funded?



*How is your Pension funded........*


----------



## nononono (Apr 2, 2019)

QUOTE="Booter, post: 258229, member: 2211"

I can try to dumb it down for you.  
*We are aware of your " Dumbness "...*

Let's start with this - 

Did you drive on a city street today? 
*The crappy streets that should have been repaired...*
*But the money was stolen for Local/State Pensions....Hmmmmm.*

Or receive any mail? 
*The crappy US Postal Service that is constantly being outperformed by " Private "*
*And being bailed out by " Public " with funds that should go to infrastructure....*

Take a shower?
*The crappy Municipal Water Districts/State Water resource Management that is funneling*
*tax payers money into failing " Pension " plans instead of infrastructure maintenance/repair/improvements*


/QUOTE


*You and your ilk have dumbed down the populace enough with your idiocy.....*
*It's time you grow up and pay the piper....!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> The government aid ones stayed? US socialism. How much did we give them? Love people on the federal payroll. Socialism works for losers.
> Wait...you’re on the federal payroll, aren’t you?


Yup, Capitalist insiders clean out redundancy and inefficiency.  Following the Presidents example of eliminating processes and equipment that socialist implemented during the obama years.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Major socialism.


Agree that 6 consecutive years of QE to the housing and banking industry under Obama is pretty major.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Most republicans are socialists, they just don’t know it. There are thousands of socialist programs in the United States, all of which we rely on to maintain stability and basic services. In Republicanland (the land in which republican politics dwell; where irony and contradiction lose all meaning) the GOP base has been taught to hate socialism… while at the same time using socialist programs every day of their lives. All citizens in America experience socialism in one way or another – politics simply doesn’t allow republicans to admit it.


social programs and socialist are not the same thing bootsie.  Just like Venezuela and U.S. are not the same thing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> I can try to dumb it down for you.  Let's start with this - Did you drive on a city street today? Or receive any mail?  Take a shower?


All built by the private sector and not maintained well by the public sector.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Agree that 6 consecutive years of QE to the housing and banking industry under Obama is pretty major.


and oil and agriculture and also you, right?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy in your case lets make that 400x.


Iʻm happy with that!  I can give you a raise as my janitor.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> Izzy can't find this article without the link - he's a real smart guy.


If you need a link to verify the housing crisis, Youʻve made my point for me.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> I can try to dumb it down for you.  Let's start with this - Did you drive on a city street today? Or receive any mail?  Take a shower?


Try? Lol!  Pretty effortless Iʻd say.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yup, Capitalist insiders clean out redundancy and inefficiency.  Following the Presidents example of eliminating processes and equipment that socialist implemented during the obama years.


Trouble with English?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> QUOTE="Booter, post: 258229, member: 2211"
> 
> I can try to dumb it down for you.
> *We are aware of your " Dumbness "...*
> ...


Fries U grads desperate and dumb.  Entertaining nonetheless.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Trouble with English?


Fries U!  What a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> and oil and agriculture and also you, right?


Neither of which have caused the worst financial  crisis.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Neither of which have caused the worst financial  crisis.


You mean the depression of ‘29? Hoover!
Or the recession of ‘08? W?
Or do you know?
Which administration put you its payroll? Now that’s proof of the entitlement state!
You couldn’t get a private sector job. One meeting with me and I’d have sent your cuckoo ass packing. Can’t you get the gubmint to send you to trade school or something?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 2, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> Care to generalize anymore or is there something else you can add to this bullshit?


Ignorance is bliss . . . so you must be constantly elated.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> All built by the private sector and not maintained well by the public sector.


Like I said previously, you aren't ignorant by choice.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Yes, and he thanks you.
> Have you thanked him?


what does he do? because he never says anything that makes any sense, i have no idea. do you?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> what does he do? because he never says anything that makes any sense, i have no idea. do you?


He makes more sense than you.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> He makes more sense than you.


Ha! You don't know what he does, either, and you're friends with him! 
I have a rule in this part of the country full of bullshitters...if you can't tell me your job in 25 words or less, you're a phony.
Now can you tell me his job? The title? The duties?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Ha! You don't know what he does, either, and you're friends with him!
> I have a rule in this part of the country full of bullshitters...if you can't tell me your job in 25 words or less, you're a phony.
> Now can you tell me his job? The title? The duties?


Yes.


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Yes.


I didn’t think so. Thanks for confirming.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I didn’t think so. Thanks for confirming.


You think I would tell you what I know about another poster? Aren't you the one that was complaining about someone outing your fake earnings?


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You think I would tell you what I know about another poster? Aren't you the one that was complaining about someone outing your fake earnings?


He has tried to explain it himself. It makes no sense. Not to you, either.
Something about the VA and "redundancies." Hilarious. Total non-job.


----------



## espola (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> He has tried to explain it himself. It makes no sense. Not to you, either.
> Something about the VA and "redundancies." Hilarious. Total non-job.


He said something about looking for people or positions that produced no useful work.   We gave him a suggestion.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 2, 2019)

espola said:


> He said something about looking for people or positions that produced no useful work.   We gave him a suggestion.


Mirror time.


----------



## nononono (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> and oil and agriculture and also you, right?


*Both failed under Obama " The Golden Child ".....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You mean the depression of ‘29? Hoover!
> Or the recession of ‘08? W?
> Or do you know?
> Which administration put you its payroll? Now that’s proof of the entitlement state!
> You couldn’t get a private sector job. One meeting with me and I’d have sent your cuckoo ass packing. Can’t you get the gubmint to send you to trade school or something?


Clueless as ever.  Like all financial crisis, the seeds of, are sown a decade in advance during the boom years fueled by an increase in the money supply.  I did have  private sector job.  But I figured out that the government needed a private sector type to clear out the dead weight gov workers that you despise.  Last year we cleared out 14 non-producers.  Trade school?  Wouldnʻt mind being a welder.  Bit of a pyro I am.  Not a job for cowards.


----------



## nononono (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Trouble with English?


*" Messy " " Messy ".....you really need to study History and Intent.*


----------



## nononono (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ignorance is bliss . . . so you must be constantly elated.



*And you must be elated constantly with your blissful ignorance......*


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Clueless as ever.  Like all financial crisis, the seeds of, are sown a decade in advance during the boom years fueled by an increase in the money supply.  I did have  private sector job.  But I figured out that the government needed a private sector type to clear out the dead weight gov workers that you despise.  Last year we cleared out 14 non-producers.  Trade school?  Wouldnʻt mind being a welder.  Bit of a pyro I am.  Not a job for cowards.


I like the idea of the economist welder here, joining forces with the climatologist plumber.
It’s our non-expert idiocracy in bloom, right here in our little website.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> He has tried to explain it himself. It makes no sense. Not to you, either.
> Something about the VA and "redundancies." Hilarious. Total non-job.


Why does it concern you so?


----------



## messy (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Why does it concern you so?


When somebody sits in judgment of all others on issues of finance and economics and they seem not to have any idea of what they’re talking about other than spouting weirdo theories from pop culture books and articles, you wonder if they have any experience with such matters. It appears he does not. 
His views and “judgments” are all backwards and bear no relation to individual or social economic and financial real world situations. Now I know why. He’s had no real world situations. And he has no investments. But he judges like a mofo!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> *" Messy " " Messy ".....you really need to study History and Intent.*


Fries U keeps him busy with other than.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Why does it concern you so?


Because dizzy is a hypocrite.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> When somebody sits in judgment of all others on issues of finance and economics and they seem not to have any idea of what they’re talking about other than spouting weirdo theories from pop culture books and articles, you wonder if they have any experience with such matters. It appears he does not.
> His views and “judgments” are all backwards and bear no relation to individual or social economic and financial real world situations. Now I know why. He’s had no real world situations. And he has no investments. But he judges like a mofo!


Finance and Econ are your judges.  If you canʻt do a simple ROA or ROE calculation, much less know what the acronym stands for, that is your judge.  Deal with it.  If you donʻt understand collateralized debt is not an asset, that is your judge.  The real world judges you, not me.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Because dizzy is a hypocrite.


The ramblings of a union boy at the bottom of his union roster.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> He has tried to explain it himself. It makes no sense. Not to you, either.
> Something about the VA and "redundancies." Hilarious. Total non-job.


”Something about”..... this is why you Fries U grads fail in life.  You miss the details.  Please continue.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> ”Something about”..... this is why you Fries U grads fail in life.  You miss the details.  Please continue.


What did you do to these self proclaimed smart guys?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I like the idea of the economist welder here, joining forces with the climatologist plumber.
> It’s our non-expert idiocracy in bloom, right here in our little website.


Somebody had to raise the standards in this website.  Damn Fries U grads canʻt even pass the ASVAB much less take an oath to be more than a coward all their lives.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Finance and Econ are your judges.  If you canʻt do a simple ROA or ROE calculation, much less know what the acronym stands for, that is your judge.  Deal with it.  If you donʻt understand collateralized debt is not an asset, that is your judge.  The real world judges you, not me.


Please don't confuse them anymore.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Please don't confuse them anymore.


Never intentional but I must admit.


----------



## Booter (Apr 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> social programs and socialist are not the same thing bootsie.  Just like Venezuela and U.S. are not the same thing.


Now we're getting somewhere!!!   In our great nation the means of production remains securely in the hands of private capital. Private capital is the chief employer in the U.S., not the government. The U.S. government is simply the point of transfer and distribution of taxes paid to provide the programs and federal infrastructure necessary in a large and complex society and economy as we are. Private capital cannot be relied upon to provide needed safety nets or security, in most cases.  Albeit labor unions can promote these things.

Ours is a balance between public and private. Maintaining that balance is the challenge we face, as many on the right want to tip the balance in favor of the private at the expense of the public, and the left wants to maintain a balance that benefits all.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 3, 2019)

Booter said:


> Now we're getting somewhere!!!   In our great nation the means of production remains securely in the hands of private capital. Private capital is the chief employer in the U.S., not the government. The U.S. government is simply the point of transfer and distribution of taxes paid to provide the programs and federal infrastructure necessary in a large and complex society and economy as we are. Private capital cannot be relied upon to provide needed safety nets or security, in most cases.  Albeit labor unions can promote these things.
> 
> Ours is a balance between public and private. Maintaining that balance is the challenge we face, as many on the right want to tip the balance in favor of the private at the expense of the public, *and the left wants to maintain a balance that benefits all*.


Expand on that thought...


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 3, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Expand on that thought...


He used all that up.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 4, 2019)

Booter said:


> Ours is a balance between public and private. Maintaining that balance is the challenge we face, as many on the right want to tip the balance in favor of the private at the expense of the public, and the *left wants to maintain a *balance that benefits all.


Explain this part more..


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 4, 2019)

Booter said:


> Now we're getting somewhere!!!   In our great nation the means of production remains securely in the hands of private capital. Private capital is the chief employer in the U.S., not the government. The U.S. government is simply the point of transfer and distribution of taxes paid to provide the programs and federal infrastructure necessary in a large and complex society and economy as we are. Private capital cannot be relied upon to provide needed safety nets or security, in most cases.  Albeit labor unions can promote these things.
> 
> Ours is a balance between public and private. Maintaining that balance is the challenge we face, as many on the right want to tip the balance in favor of the private at the expense of the public, and the left wants to maintain a balance that benefits all.


dizzy has argued around in a circle back on himself and is now biting on his own tail, predictably.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 4, 2019)

_Pathetic: Divided House Dems Won't Even Try to Pass a Budget, Demand Across-the-Board Spending Increases
Guy Benson |  @guypbenson | April 04, 2019
 

 on motions to recommit (will any Democrats sign onto a GOP-led discharge petitionto force an anti-infanticide vote?), followed by a disgraceful and shambolic attempt to condemn anti-Semitism within their ranks.  With hardcore progressives now going to war with the DCCC over its incumbent protection policies, and Pelosi tossing cold water on radical proposals like the Green New Deal and single-payer healthcare, it looks like House leadership has decided that attempting to craft and introduce an annual budget would rip their caucus apart.  So they're not going to try.  Governance:


Democrats are finally in charge of the House. *But they’re likely to skip one of their most fundamental responsibilities: passing a budget. Eager to steer clear of another public intraparty battle, House Democrats are expected to avoid a vote on a budget this year*, multiple Democratic lawmakers and aides tell POLITICO. House Democrats are still drafting a budget, which would offer their first chance as a new majority to formally outline their broader agenda. But the resolution — which is purely a political messaging document and is not signed into law — would also *stoke major ideological clashes within the caucus over “Medicare for All,” the “Green New Deal” and defense spending...Indeed, in a worst-case scenario for Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her party, the budget could be an embarrassing flop on the House floor*...Most Democrats say publicly they want a chance to vote on their party’s fiscal blueprint after eight years of rejecting GOP budgets. Privately, however, lawmakers and aides say that a budget is unlikely to come for a final vote. I*t’s an acknowledgment of the divisions within the caucus even on key principles, and a sign of how difficult it will be to craft actual legislation* in the months to come.

For years, Pelosi repeatedly attacked Republican-produced budgets by calling them a reflection of core values. The GOP is calling her out:



Despite intense internal disagreements and disparate agendas, recent Republican majorities managed to produce budgets. Congress is, in fact, required by law to pass budgets annually.  Pelosi's Democrats won't even try because their ideological rifts are too deep. This is a pitiful abdication of responsibility, a political dodge, and a poor reflection on their seriousness as legislators. "Show me your budget, show me your values," Pelosi intoned, over and over again. Where is her party's budget? Where are their values? Apparently, they can't agree on these fundamental questions, so they're punting. It's worth pointing out that Senate Democrats took the same craven approach for four consecutive years (2010-2014) when they were most recently in the majority, at the behest of Chuck Schumer.  The point was to shield members from tough votes. They ended up losing control of the upper chamber anyway. Rather than offering voters a blueprint of what they would like to do with the federal budget (leftists want wild spending, moderates are worried about taxes and GOP attacks), House Democrats are merely signaling that they want large, automatic spending increases -- with no details or priorities specified:

House *Democrats formally punted on releasing a budget blueprint on Tuesday, instead unveiling a bill that would increase military and domestic spending caps by more than $350 billion over the next two years.* The proposal frustrated fiscal hawks on both sides of the aisle and Democrats on the party’s left flank who balked at the prospect of increasing military spending. It also meant that House Democrats, without a blueprint to counter the one the Trump administration released last month, had *effectively opted out of outlining their own budget priorities in the face of a divided government and division within their caucus.*_


----------



## Booter (Apr 4, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Expand on that thought...


Make sure you read it all.

Under President Obama’s leadership, and thanks to the hard work and determination of the American people, we have come a long way from the Great Recession and the Republican policies that triggered it. American businesses have now added 14.8 million jobs since private-sector job growth turned positive in early 2010. Twenty million people have gained health insurance coverage. The American auto industry just had its best year ever. And we are getting more of our energy from the sun and wind, and importing less oil from overseas.

But too many Americans have been left out and left behind. They are working longer hours with less security. Wages have barely budged and the racial wealth gap remains wide, while the cost of everything from childcare to a college education has continued to rise. And for too many families, the dream of homeownership is out of reach. As working people struggle, the top one percent accrues more wealth and more power. Republicans in Congress have chosen gridlock and dysfunction over trying to find solutions to the real challenges we face. It’s no wonder that so many feel like the system is rigged against them.

Democrats believe that cooperation is better than conflict, unity is better than division, empowerment is better than resentment, and bridges are better than walls.

It’s a simple but powerful idea: we are stronger together.

Democrats believe we are stronger when we have an economy that works for everyone—an economy that grows incomes for working people, creates good-paying jobs, and puts a middle-class life within reach for more Americans. Democrats believe we can spur more sustainable economic growth, which will create good-paying jobs and raise wages. And we can have more economic fairness, so the rewards are shared broadly, not just with those at the top. We need an economy that prioritizes long-term investment over short-term profit-seeking, rewards the common interest over self-interest, and promotes innovation and entrepreneurship.

We believe that today’s extreme level of income and wealth inequality—where the majority of the economic gains go to the top one percent and the richest 20 people in our country own more wealth than the bottom 150 million—makes our economy weaker, our communities poorer, and our politics poisonous.

And we know that our nation’s long struggle with race is far from over. More than half a century after Rosa Parks sat and Dr. King marched and John Lewis bled, more than half a century after César Chávez, Dolores Huerta, and Larry Itliong organized, race still plays a significant role in determining who gets ahead in America and who gets left behind. We must face that reality and we must fix it.

We believe a good education is a basic right of all Americans, no matter what zip code they live in. We will end the school-to-prison pipeline and build a cradle-to-college pipeline instead, where every child can live up to his or her God-given potential.

We believe in helping Americans balance work and family without fear of punishment or penalty. We believe in at last guaranteeing equal pay for women. And as the party that created Social Security, we believe in protecting every American’s right to retire with dignity.

We firmly believe that the greed, recklessness, and illegal behavior on Wall Street must be brought to an end. Wall Street must never again be allowed to threaten families and businesses on Main Street.

Democrats believe we are stronger when we protect citizens’ right to vote, while stopping corporations’ outsized influence in elections. We will fight to end the broken campaign finance system, overturn the disastrous _Citizens United_ decision, restore the full power of the Voting Rights Act, and return control of our elections to the American people.

Democrats believe that climate change poses a real and urgent threat to our economy, our national security, and our children’s health and futures, and that Americans deserve the jobs and security that come from becoming the clean energy superpower of the 21st century.

Democrats believe we are stronger and safer when America brings the world together and leads with principle and purpose. We believe we should strengthen our alliances, not weaken them. We believe in the power of development and diplomacy. We believe our military should be the best-trained, best-equipped fighting force in the world, and that we must do everything we can to honor and support our veterans. And we know that only the United States can mobilize common action on a truly global scale, to take on the challenges that transcend borders, from international terrorism to climate change to health pandemics.

Above all, Democrats are the party of inclusion. We know that diversity is not our problem—it is our promise. As Democrats, we respect differences of perspective and belief, and pledge to work together to move this country forward, even when we disagree. With this platform, we do not merely seek common ground—we strive to reach higher ground.

We are proud of our heritage as a nation of immigrants. We know that today’s immigrants are tomorrow’s teachers, doctors, lawyers, government leaders, soldiers, entrepreneurs, activists, PTA members, and pillars of our communities.

We believe in protecting civil liberties and guaranteeing civil rights and voting rights, women’s rights and workers’ rights, LGBT rights, and rights for people with disabilities. We believe America is still, as Robert Kennedy said, “a great country, an unselfish country, and a compassionate country.”

These principles stand in sharp contrast to the Republicans, who have nominated as the standard-bearer for their party and their candidate for President a man who seeks to appeal to Americans’ basest differences, rather than our better natures.

The stakes have been high in previous elections. But in 2016, the stakes can be measured in human lives—in the number of immigrants who would be torn from their homes; in the number of faithful and peaceful Muslims who would be barred from even visiting our shores; in the number of allies alienated and dictators courted; in the number of Americans who would lose access to health care and see their rights ripped away.

This election is about more than Democrats and Republicans. It is about who we are as a nation, and who we will be in the future.

Two hundred and forty years ago, in Philadelphia, we started a revolution of ideas and of action that continues to this day. Since then, our union has been tested many times, through bondage and civil war, segregation and depression, two world wars and the threat of nuclear annihilation. Generations of Americans fought and marched and organized to widen the circle of opportunity and dignity—and we are fighting still.

Despite what some say, America is and has always been great—but not because it has been perfect. What makes America great is our unerring belief that we can make it better. We can and we will build a more just economy, a more equal society, and a more perfect union—because we are stronger together.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 4, 2019)

Booter said:


> Now we're getting somewhere!!!   In our great nation the means of production remains securely in the hands of private capital. Private capital is the chief employer in the U.S., not the government. The U.S. government is simply the point of transfer and distribution of taxes paid to provide the programs and federal infrastructure necessary in a large and complex society and economy as we are. Private capital cannot be relied upon to provide needed safety nets or security, in most cases.  Albeit labor unions can promote these things.
> 
> Ours is a balance between public and private. Maintaining that balance is the challenge we face, as many on the right want to tip the balance in favor of the private at the expense of the public, and the left wants to maintain a balance that benefits all.


Clueless old debunked argument.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 4, 2019)

Booter said:


> Make sure you read it all.
> 
> Under President Obama’s leadership, and thanks to the hard work and determination of the American people, we have come a long way from the Great Recession and the Republican policies that triggered it. American businesses have now added 14.8 million jobs since private-sector job growth turned positive in early 2010. Twenty million people have gained health insurance coverage. The American auto industry just had its best year ever. And we are getting more of our energy from the sun and wind, and importing less oil from overseas.
> 
> ...


6 straight years of QE under Obama is not growth unless youʻre talking about the near doubling of the national debt.


----------



## messy (Apr 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Clueless old debunked argument.


What “argument” are you talking about?
You must have been replying to a different post than the one you linked. Booter didn’t make an argument.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 4, 2019)

messy said:


> What “argument” are you talking about?
> You must have been replying to a different post than the one you linked. Booter didn’t make an argument.


Dizzy don't care, he just spins to argue and argues to spin. He's an "anti", it's what he does . . . all the while ignoring the hypocrisy within his argument.


----------



## Booter (Apr 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 6 straight years of QE under Obama is not growth unless youʻre talking about the near doubling of the national debt.


The funny thing is all that money I made on investments during the Obama years does not have an asterisk on it.

We all know how sad you are that we never had another Great Depression.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 5, 2019)

Booter said:


> Make sure you read it all.
> 
> Under President Obama’s leadership, and thanks to the hard work and determination of the American people, we have come a long way from the Great Recession and the Republican policies that triggered it. American businesses have now added 14.8 million jobs since private-sector job growth turned positive in early 2010. Twenty million people have gained health insurance coverage. The American auto industry just had its best year ever. And we are getting more of our energy from the sun and wind, and importing less oil from overseas.
> 
> ...


Are these your words or a copy and paste from?

I asked you to expand on your thoughts about "the left maintaining a balance that benefits us all." 

Maintaining huh... Does this include illegals getting the full benefits of our Healthcare System? Does this include people who chose not to work even though they are fully capable but would rather receive a government handout? Does this include a balance of benefits for the unborn? Does this include maintaining a balance of freedom of speech at colleges across the country?


----------



## messy (Apr 5, 2019)

Booter said:


> The funny thing is all that money I made on investments during the Obama years does not have an asterisk on it.
> 
> We all know how sad you are that we never had another Great Depression.


I think you lost him with "that money I made on investments." He doesn't comprehend such a concept.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 5, 2019)

Booter said:


> The funny thing is all that money I made on investments during the Obama years does not have an asterisk on it.
> 
> We all know how sad you are that we never had another Great Depression.


Hanapaa!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 5, 2019)

messy said:


> I think you lost him with "that money I made on investments." He doesn't comprehend such a concept.


Still wearing that collateralized amortized debt cape I see.  Fries U! What a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 5, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Are these your words or a copy and paste from?
> 
> I asked you to expand on your thoughts about "the left maintaining a balance that benefits us all."
> 
> Maintaining huh... Does this include illegals getting the full benefits of our Healthcare System? Does this include people who chose not to work even though they are fully capable but would rather receive a government handout? Does this include a balance of benefits for the unborn? Does this include maintaining a balance of freedom of speech at colleges across the country?


Cowards arenʻt bothered by such issues.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 7, 2019)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end

Interventionism.  The kinder gentler socialism. What both Americans and Venezuelans miss but for different reasons


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 7, 2019)

*Six Things to Consider About Inflation*

As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”

The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”

To address this conundrum, there are _six related factors_ that are noteworthy:

https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 7, 2019)

*Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.


----------



## nononono (Apr 7, 2019)

messy said:


> When somebody sits in judgment of all others on issues of finance and economics and they seem not to have any idea of what they’re talking about other than spouting weirdo theories from pop culture books and articles, you wonder if they have any experience with such matters. It appears he does not.
> His views and “judgments” are all backwards and bear no relation to individual or social economic and financial real world situations. Now I know why. He’s had no real world situations. And he has no investments. But he judges like a mofo!


*Either you are a complete jerk.....*
*or*
*You are quite the stupid poster......*

*What is it " Messy " Financial......*

*PS: Where is the $ 58 Billion that came up missing in " Just " Afghanistan under the *
*eight years of Obama's watch there.......*
*And that is just 1/3 of the total that is unaccounted for there.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 8, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Either you are a complete jerk.....*
> *or*
> *You are quite the stupid poster......*
> 
> ...


Messy is a bit of am embarassment to himself and doesnʻt know it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 8, 2019)

*Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasurystatisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 8, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Messy is a bit of am embarassment to himself and doesnʻt know it.


Ironic, you of all people trying to claim that, project much.


----------



## messy (Apr 8, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Messy is a bit of am embarassment to himself and doesnʻt know it.


That must be it.
Either that or I’m totally aware (as are others) that you spout a bunch of theoretical macroeconomics and those of us who know better recognize that you really have no idea what you’re talking about.
You have neither academic credentials nor business credentials. You’ve told us!


----------



## espola (Apr 8, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Are these your words or a copy and paste from?
> 
> I asked you to expand on your thoughts about "the left maintaining a balance that benefits us all."
> 
> Maintaining huh... Does this include illegals getting the full benefits of our Healthcare System? Does this include people who chose not to work even though they are fully capable but would rather receive a government handout? Does this include a balance of benefits for the unborn? Does this include maintaining a balance of freedom of speech at colleges across the country?


Triggered much?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ironic, you of all people trying to claim that, project much.


Clueless affirming the clueless


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> That must be it.
> Either that or I’m totally aware (as are others) that you spout a bunch of theoretical macroeconomics and those of us who know better recognize that you really have no idea what you’re talking about.
> You have neither academic credentials nor business credentials. You’ve told us!


Fries U grads love credentials but hate simple ROE and ROA equations.  Too chicken to do the numbers so you have to call a credentialed professional to solidify a bet.  You chickens crack me up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

*Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.


----------



## messy (Apr 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries U grads love credentials but hate simple ROE and ROA equations.  Too chicken to do the numbers so you have to call a credentialed professional to solidify a bet.  You chickens crack me up.


Let's be clear. When you say "chickens," is that because we make so much more money than you,. or is it because we offered a bet about financial terms that you would not take. Which one is it?


----------



## messy (Apr 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.


On my feed, this weirdo post shows up just under an ad for the new Twilight Zone tv show. How perfect is that?


----------



## messy (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> Triggered much?


I think he’s mad that 3-month-old fetuses don’t have their own bathrooms. They’re stuck with the one mom chooses. Why is that?


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> I think he’s mad that 3-month-old fetuses don’t have their own bathrooms. They’re stuck with the one mom chooses. Why is that?


You having a rough morning already or just hanging out with Drunk Rat and getting wasted?


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> Triggered much?


Did you find the source yet? Do you need me to hold your hand again and direct you, again? 

Clueless much?


----------



## espola (Apr 9, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Did you find the source yet? Do you need me to hold your hand again and direct you, again?
> 
> Clueless much?


Go right ahead.  Show everyone what a  fool I am.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> Go right ahead.  Show everyone what a  fool I am.


https://relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/environment/2019/03/trees-release-methane-what-it-means-climate-change

Please continue...


----------



## espola (Apr 9, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> https://relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/environment/2019/03/trees-release-methane-what-it-means-climate-change
> 
> Please continue...


Is this something new to you?  It starts out "In 1907...".


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> Let's be clear. When you say "chickens," is that because we make so much more money than you,. or is it because we offered a bet about financial terms that you would not take. Which one is it?


You impersonating Trump again! Lol!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You impersonating Trump again! Lol!


Deflection.


----------



## nononono (Apr 9, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Ironic, you of all people trying to claim that, project much.


*Here's the rub...Rodent.*

*Other than your ability to regurgitate, you cannot properly articulate*
*what ( is actually false ) it is you accuse BI of......*

*That's the TRUE Irony of your posts.....!*


----------



## nononono (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> Go right ahead.  Show everyone what a  fool I am.


*Your posting History does a rather nice job of displaying/substantiating what you are *
*trying to deny...........*


----------



## messy (Apr 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You impersonating Trump again! Lol!


I think you forgot the word "are," or the contraction "You're."  Unless you write in pidgin, which is quite possible considering your education and income level. Whenever there is not "cut and paste" of some weirdo pop econ text, you get a little lost, huh? I unnerstan, bruddah.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> I think you forgot the word "are," or the contraction "You're."  Unless you write in pidgin, which is quite possible considering your education and income level. Whenever there is not "cut and paste" of some weirdo pop econ text, you get a little lost, huh? I unnerstan, bruddah.


Youʻre impersonating Trump.....again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Deflection.


Youʻre holding messyʻs collateralized debt for him again?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> I think you forgot the word "are," or the contraction "You're."  Unless you write in pidgin, which is quite possible considering your education and income level. Whenever there is not "cut and paste" of some weirdo pop econ text, you get a little lost, huh? I unnerstan, bruddah.


Fries U!  What a deal!  What is pop econ?


----------



## nononono (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> I think you forgot the word "are," or the contraction "You're."  Unless you write in pidgin, which is quite possible considering your education and income level. Whenever there is not "cut and paste" of some weirdo pop econ text, you get a little lost, huh? I unnerstan, bruddah.


*BI @ College level....Yes !*
*" Messy " @ College level...No !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 9, 2019)

nononono said:


> *BI @ College level....Yes !*
> *" Messy " @ College level...No !*


weʻre in a sad place if  ROA and ROE is college level.  Look at AOC.  Econ retard like the rest of the Fries U grads.


----------



## nononono (Apr 9, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> weʻre in a sad place if  ROA and ROE is college level.  Look at AOC.  Econ retard like the rest of the Fries U grads.


*AOC has a BA in AB dispersal.....that and Camel Toe.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 9, 2019)

messy said:


> Let's be clear. When you say "chickens," is that because we make so much more money than you,. or is it because we offered a bet about financial terms that you would not take. Which one is it?


When did you get that mouse?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> Go right ahead.  Show everyone what a  fool I am.


The nutters in here, void the ability to convey rational thought, lean on ad hominem. Aka, they just say shot they can't back . . . or just come unhinged like LE lashing out for no reason other than him being a t apologist nutter.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 9, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The nutters in here, void the ability to convey rational thought, lean on ad hominem. Aka, they just say shot they can't back . . . or just come unhinged like LE lashing out for no reason other than him being a t apologist nutter.


Shit AKA shot.
Dummy.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> Is this something new to you?  It starts out "In 1907...".


It's new to you so I guess you're not very smart.. but we knew that already.


----------



## espola (Apr 9, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> It's new to you so I guess you're not very smart.. but we knew that already.


I guess that means that you didn't read what I posted.


----------



## espola (Apr 9, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The nutters in here, void the ability to convey rational thought, lean on ad hominem. Aka, they just say shot they can't back . . . or just come unhinged like LE lashing out for no reason other than him being a t apologist nutter.


I thought he might have something interesting to discuss.  Foolish me.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> I guess that means that you didn't read what I posted.


No it means that it was new to you, just like I posted.

Please continue...


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> I thought he might have something interesting to discuss.  Foolish me.


Look at you trying to act like an adult. So when did I make my initial post again? And what were your replies again? 


Please continue...


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 9, 2019)

espola said:


> I thought he might have something interesting to discuss.  Foolish me.



Maybe if you didn't play foolish games you wouldn't be viewed as a fool.


QUOTE="Multi Sport, post: 257076, member: 737"]Have you ever heard of *National Geographic?* Are you calling them a liar?

Go back to bed...creep.[/QUOTE]



espola said:


> Source?





Multi Sport said:


> You really need me don't you? I mean, I know you're old and creepy but senile as well?
> 
> Hint...read my previous post.





espola said:


> Still nothing.


----------



## espola (Apr 9, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Maybe if you didn't play foolish games you wouldn't be viewed as a fool.
> 
> 
> QUOTE="Multi Sport, post: 257076, member: 737"]Have you ever heard of *National Geographic?* Are you calling them a liar?
> ...


Still nothing.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> Still nothing.


Keep trying Sunshine..


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> I thought he might have something interesting to discuss.  Foolish me.


That's why I ignore the completely useless and nonrespondent posters . . . the others are just to funny to ignore.


----------



## espola (Apr 10, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's why I ignore the completely useless and nonrespondent posters . . . the others are just to funny to ignore.


I used to get guilty pleasure out of taunting a few of them, especially when it looked like they didn't get it.  Then after I died I realized I didn't have time for that crap.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 10, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's why I ignore the completely useless and nonrespondent posters . . . the others are just to funny to ignore.


Keep telling yourself that Ratboy....


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> I used to get guilty pleasure out of taunting a few of them, especially when it looked like they didn't get it.  Then after I died I realized I didn't have time for that crap.


And nothing has changed. Even with your death you're still the same guy...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> I used to get guilty pleasure out of taunting a few of them, especially when it looked like they didn't get it.  Then after I died I realized I didn't have time for that crap.


Death has a way of clearing one's mind allowing one to easily separate the wheat from the chaff.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> I used to get guilty pleasure out of taunting a few of them, especially when it looked like they didn't get it.  Then after I died I realized I didn't have time for that crap.


What are you trying to do now, sherlock?
You make me laugh.


----------



## Multi Sport (Apr 10, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> What are you trying to do now, sherlock?
> You make me laugh.


He always makes me laugh...


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 10, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> What are you trying to do now, sherlock?
> You make me laugh.


That's your insecurity you are viewing the world through.


----------



## espola (Apr 10, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> What are you trying to do now, sherlock?
> You make me laugh.


Have you figured out why they are laughing at you yet?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> Have you figured out why they are laughing at you yet?


If they is you, yes.


----------



## espola (Apr 10, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> If they is you, yes.


Do you think George Washington was stupid?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 10, 2019)

espola said:


> Do you think George Washington was stupid?


He will need to check with his sources to see what his opinion is today.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 10, 2019)

Anyone see Maxine Waters show her brilliance on student loans?

YouTube · Lets be Frank
1:13
MAXINE WATERS HAS NO IDEA STUDENT LOANS ARE GOVERNMENT OWENED
7 hours ago
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=#&ved=2ahUKEwinpNflisfhAhUKLa0KHfjiBC8QwqsBMAF6BAgIEAg&usg=AOvVaw0VTJzWxrN8ZFOD4xbU2nov


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 11, 2019)

espola said:


> Do you think George Washington was stupid?


My second favorite President, and he was not stupid.
He would be my favorite if he had named Mt Vernon, Mt Warshington, though.


----------



## espola (Apr 11, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> My second favorite President, and he was not stupid.
> He would be my favorite if he had named Mt Vernon, Mt Warshington, though.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 11, 2019)

espola said:


>


Just to set the record straight for you and Seth, Washington referred to DC as "federal city", and it is actually designated as the "District of Columbia", officially.
Had Washington been smarter, he would have named it Washington Tower.
He's still my second fav.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 11, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> My second favorite President, and he was not stupid.
> He would be my favorite if he had named Mt Vernon, Mt Warshington, though.


So you admire unchecked ego to the point of, and in the sake of, redundant stupidity, check.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 11, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you admire unchecked ego to the point of, and in the sake of, redundant stupidity, check.


I entertain you two dipsticks, dont I?


----------



## espola (Apr 11, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I entertain you two dipsticks, dont I?


I am so entertained that I laugh at you almost every day.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 11, 2019)

espola said:


> I am so entertained that I laugh at you almost every day.


The plumber and these others revel in looking like totally naive rubes, t's favorite kind of people.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 11, 2019)

espola said:


> I am so entertained that I laugh at you almost every day.


Just one of you now?


----------



## nononono (Apr 11, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you admire unchecked ego to the point of, and in the sake of, redundant stupidity, check.


*You admire yourself, but you are unchecked for heavens sake....quite redundant *
*it seems and egotistical to a point.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 11, 2019)

espola said:


> I guess that means that you didn't read what I posted.


Did you read what you posted?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 11, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That's why I ignore the completely useless and nonrespondent posters . . . the others are just to funny to ignore.


to, too, two. Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 11, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you admire unchecked ego to the point of, and in the sake of, redundant stupidity, check.


Patch up your dragnet yet?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> to, too, two. Lol!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> to, too, two. Lol!


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 12, 2019)

Anyone remember this?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Anyone remember this?
> 
> View attachment 4450


Isn't that the night the lights went out on the both coasts?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

In the final count, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote of the 2016 presidential election was nearly three million votes. According to the independent, non-partisan*Cook Political Report*, Clinton's final tally came in at 65,844,610, compared to Donald Trump's 62,979,636, with a difference of 2,864,974.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Donald Trump owes his victory in the Electoral College to three states he won by the smallest number of votes: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. So it's fair to say that the 2016 presidential election was decided by about 77,000 votes out of than 136 million ballots cast. According to the final tallies, Trump won Pennsylvania by 0.7 percentage points (44,292 votes), Wisconsin by 0.7 points (22,748 votes), Michigan by 0.2 points (10,704 votes). If Clinton had won all three states, she would have won the Electoral College 278 to 260. She fell short in all three, of course, and that's why we are now getting accustomed to the reality of President-elect Donald J. Trump. (This article has been updated to reflect final results.)


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

https://www.wired.com/story/did-russia-affect-the-2016-election-its-now-undeniable/


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/10/01/how-russia-helped-to-swing-the-election-for-trump


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 12, 2019)

Market was at 18400 the night before the election.
Then the fake news said the markets would crash.
What happened next?

Did the russians fix that too?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Market was at 18400 the night before the election.
> Then the fake news said the markets would crash.
> What happened next?
> 
> Did the russians fix that too?


You tell me, you and your fellow comrades seem to know where to put your thumb on the scale.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Market was at 18400 the night before the election.
> Then the fake news said the markets would crash.
> What happened next?
> 
> Did the russians fix that too?


Why do you hate America and working Americans so much? What do you see the market as an indicator of? . . . the rich getting richer? How have wages done? Healthcare? Cost of living? Gas prices? Quality of jobs?

 . . . and how about that "tax break"? Not so good unless you made over 250k.


----------



## nononono (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> In the final count, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote of the 2016 presidential election was nearly three million votes. According to the independent, non-partisan*Cook Political Report*, Clinton's final tally came in at 65,844,610, compared to Donald Trump's 62,979,636, with a difference of 2,864,974.



*HRC = 65,844,610*
*DJT  = 62,979,636*
*------------------------*
*Diff  =  2,864,974*

*The difference is the over 3,000,000 illegal votes here in California*
*attributed the the Criminal " Motor Voter Law " enacted before the*
*election.....*
*She thought she had it in the bag with those illegal votes here in California.*
*When a voter audit was enacted by the Federal Government of the illegal*
*votes the AG would not let the auditors access the voter data.....*
*Geee how nice....*
*You can spin it any way you want Rodent, but the Democratic Party tried to*
*steal the election from Donald J. Trump and failed....not only did they*
*fail at election theft, but now it's been proven that their attempt at a coup*
*of a duly elected President failed also.....*
*Those are Treasonous actions and the standard punishment for Treason is ....*

*Death by :*

*




*


----------



## nononono (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Why do you hate America and working Americans so much? What do you see the market as an indicator of? . . . the rich getting richer? How have wages done? Healthcare? Cost of living? Gas prices? Quality of jobs?
> 
> . . . and how about that "tax break"? Not so good unless you made over 250k.



*The only entity that hates America is YOUR party....and YOU appear to *
*willingly carry their water daily.....That makes YOU complicit....*
*This is where you wiggle and weasel.....*

*Go on.....*


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Why do you hate America and working Americans so much? What do you see the market as an indicator of? . . . the rich getting richer? How have wages done? Healthcare? Cost of living? Gas prices? Quality of jobs?
> 
> . . . and how about that "tax break"? Not so good unless you made over 250k.


I love all of you people.

#MAGA


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> In the final count, Hillary Clinton's lead in the popular vote of the 2016 presidential election was nearly three million votes. According to the independent, non-partisan*Cook Political Report*, Clinton's final tally came in at 65,844,610, compared to Donald Trump's 62,979,636, with a difference of 2,864,974.


Congratulations. I hope you dumb fucks go for the popular vote again in 2020.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Donald Trump owes his victory in the Electoral College to three states he won by the smallest number of votes: Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. So it's fair to say that the 2016 presidential election was decided by about 77,000 votes out of than 136 million ballots cast. According to the final tallies, Trump won Pennsylvania by 0.7 percentage points (44,292 votes), Wisconsin by 0.7 points (22,748 votes), Michigan by 0.2 points (10,704 votes). If Clinton had won all three states, she would have won the Electoral College 278 to 260. She fell short in all three, of course, and that's why we are now getting accustomed to the reality of President-elect Donald J. Trump. (This article has been updated to reflect final results.)


You Dick.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You tell me, you and your fellow comrades seem to know where to put your thumb on the scale.


Just win baby.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Why do you hate America and working Americans so much? What do you see the market as an indicator of? . . . the rich getting richer? How have wages done? Healthcare? Cost of living? Gas prices? Quality of jobs?
> 
> . . . and how about that "tax break"? Not so good unless you made over 250k.


Get a better job asshole.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You Dick.
> View attachment 4452


"You dick!" Was Spicoli to Mr.Hand.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

*Wyoming’s coal plants are so unprofitable Republicans turned to a ‘socialist program’ to save them*
*Wyoming lawmakers pass bill forcing ratepayers to buy dirty, uneconomic coal power.*

“They’re asking the citizens of Wyoming who pay [for] energy to pay more to keep coal plants going,” University of Wyoming economist Jason Shogren told the Wyoming Tribune Eagle. “In one sense, it’s a very socialist program.”

https://thinkprogress.org/republicans-socialism-coal-c319a2ece149/


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> *Wyoming’s coal plants are so unprofitable Republicans turned to a ‘socialist program’ to save them*
> *Wyoming lawmakers pass bill forcing ratepayers to buy dirty, uneconomic coal power.*
> 
> “They’re asking the citizens of Wyoming who pay [for] energy to pay more to keep coal plants going,” University of Wyoming economist Jason Shogren told the Wyoming Tribune Eagle. “In one sense, it’s a very socialist program.”
> ...


Fake News


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Get a better job asshole.


Tell dizzy, he's the one who can't make a dime during boom times (no doubt due to QE and his noble avoidance of investing during such times, his high moral principles wouldn't allow it) and can't afford anything. I'm doing fine thank you very much. You seeing the world solely through the prism of your own experiences, aka your outlook on life, you think everyone thinks only about themselves like you do . . . so I can see how it's hard for you to understand (most things are).


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


----------



## espola (Apr 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> View attachment 4454


If you are going to start putting on fascist symbols you shouldn't be surprised when people start calling you a fascist.


----------



## nononono (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "You dick!" Was Spicoli to Mr.Hand.
> 
> View attachment 4453



*The fact that you felt the need to " Spell " out Sean Penn's only good line*
*says a lot about your mentality.....*


----------



## nononono (Apr 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If you are going to start putting on fascist symbols you shouldn't be surprised when people start calling you a fascist.


*So pontificates the Filthy Thief.....*


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Apr 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If you are going to start putting on fascist symbols you shouldn't be surprised when people start calling you a fascist.


Fake news.


----------



## espola (Apr 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Fake news.


Look - there's another one.


----------



## nononono (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> *Wyoming’s coal plants are so unprofitable Republicans turned to a ‘socialist program’ to save them*
> *Wyoming lawmakers pass bill forcing ratepayers to buy dirty, uneconomic coal power.*
> 
> “They’re asking the citizens of Wyoming who pay [for] energy to pay more to keep coal plants going,” University of Wyoming economist Jason Shogren told the Wyoming Tribune Eagle. “In one sense, it’s a very socialist program.”
> ...



*The Rodent was stoned from 10th thru 12th grade, then a period of rebellion until*
*street life forced the Union net.....*

*Did you even read the full article and understand the reasoning.......*
*Here's a quote from the article :*

" The Trump administration has proposed bailouts for the industry; it has 
tried urging utilities not to shut down coal plants; and the Department of 
Energy is providing up to $38 million in funding to improve the performance
and reliability of existing coal plants. "

*That means the " Trump " administration is PAYING for performance upgrades*
*to make the plants more efficient. In other words recycling the energy back thru*
* the stacks and reducing the emissions while making the productivity of the plant *
*profitable to remain in existence.....Coal fired plants provide that opportunity...*


*Do some research Rodent.....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

Coal is dead, has been for well over a decade. Wind, solar, renewable clean energy is the future, nothing you say can or will change that.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 12, 2019)

. . . and t is a socialist when it fits his narrative.


----------



## espola (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Coal is dead, has been for well over a decade. Wind, solar, renewable clean energy is the future, nothing you say can or will change that.


Coal still has significant uses as a refining element in iron and steel production.  As a fuel, it has been replaced by natural gas and renewables.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . and t is a socialist when it fits his narrative.


Fries u reject.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Coal is dead, has been for well over a decade. Wind, solar, renewable clean energy is the future, nothing you say can or will change that.


The New Green Deal would change all of that.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fries u reject.


t wasn't a good student by all accounts, except his.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The New Green Deal would change all of that.


The New Green Deal is a starting point, a bargaining position so to speak . . .


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 13, 2019)

MAGA: H&R Block average customer paid 25% less tax in 2018
APRIL 13, 2019
Making April 15 hurt a little less. 
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/04/maga_hr_block_average_customer_paid_25_less_tax_in_2018.html


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> t wasn't a good student by all accounts, except his.


Sucker....still


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The New Green Deal is a starting point, a bargaining position so to speak . . .


How long has wind and solar been around? Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

espola said:


> Coal still has significant uses as a refining element in iron and steel production.  As a fuel, it has been replaced by natural gas and renewables.


Circle.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

*Number Five:* In the same vein, *you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.”* This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector willsomehow get its hands on it first anyway!)


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

messy said:


> On my feed, this weirdo post shows up just under an ad for the new Twilight Zone tv show. How perfect is that?


Totally agree!  Keynesianism is the twilight zone.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

messy said:


> I think he’s mad that 3-month-old fetuses don’t have their own bathrooms. They’re stuck with the one mom chooses. Why is that?


Fries u!  what a deal


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

espola said:


> I thought he might have something interesting to discuss.  Foolish me.


I think that was the point.....fool.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

espola said:


> I used to get guilty pleasure out of taunting a few of them, especially when it looked like they didn't get it.  Then after I died I realized I didn't have time for that crap.


Crap doesnʻt have time for crap.  Sounds about right.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 13, 2019)

There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because laws make them so. Thus in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it.--Frederic Bastiat writing on government-sanctioned counterfeiting: 1. governmentpaper money and fractional reserve banking


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 14, 2019)

Laced said:


> Money is a government-issued instrument, without which the modern market cannot function. Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird without wings.


Nothing could be further from the truth.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

Laced said:


> For example, freedom of contract is nothing more than an abstract concept without government enforcement through its court.


Government actually abrogates contracts.  An example would be the 6 straight years of QE under Obama.


----------



## messy (Apr 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Government actually abrogates contracts.  An example would be the 6 straight years of QE under Obama.


What contract was broken when the administration loosened the money supply to successfully avoid another Great Depression?
Please recite the parties to the contract and the plaintiff's efforts, presumably through legal action, to enforce it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> What contract was broken when the administration loosened the money supply to successfully avoid another Great Depression?
> Please recite the parties to the contract and the plaintiff's efforts, presumably through legal action, to enforce it.


There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate. This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because laws make them so. Thus in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary for the law to decree and sanction it.--Frederic Bastiat writing on government-sanctioned counterfeiting: 1. governmentpaper money and fractional reserve banking


----------



## messy (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> What contract was broken when the administration loosened the money supply to successfully avoid another Great Depression?
> Please recite the parties to the contract and the plaintiff's efforts, presumably through legal action, to enforce it.


I am bumping this question.
No contract was broken? You just lied? And you weren’t even responsive to Laced’s accurate point about contracts? Not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya’? Are you mad because you can’t get a private sector job?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> I am bumping this question.
> No contract was broken? You just lied? And you weren’t even responsive to Laced’s accurate point about contracts? Not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya’? Are you mad because you can’t get a private sector job?


Easy bumpy.  This is probably above your understanding.  Hence your question....


----------



## nononono (Apr 15, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Coal is dead, has been for well over a decade. Wind, solar, renewable clean energy is the future, nothing you say can or will change that.


*Do some research Rodent, that’s not even worth a retort.*


----------



## nononono (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> What contract was broken when the administration loosened the money supply to successfully avoid another Great Depression?
> Please recite the parties to the contract and the plaintiff's efforts, presumably through legal action, to enforce it.


*If you’re so confident in your position then state the facts in a post.
It appears you aren’t, thus the open ended prod.......
Another “ Messy “ post.....*


----------



## messy (Apr 15, 2019)

nononono said:


> *If you’re so confident in your position then state the facts in a post.
> It appears you aren’t, thus the open ended prod.......
> Another “ Messy “ post.....*


He said the government “abrogates” contracts as the did with QE, I just asked him what contract?


----------



## espola (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> I am bumping this question.
> No contract was broken? You just lied? And you weren’t even responsive to Laced’s accurate point about contracts? Not the sharpest tool in the shed, are ya’? Are you mad because you can’t get a private sector job?


When I was a kid, a neighbor kid had gone with his dad one day to his truck-driver job.  During the day, the dad bought brake fluid at a gas station and poured it into the truck's bf reservoir.  Whenever we played cars and trucks in the mud after that, the kid would bring up every few minutes that he had to add some brake fluid. 

The invocation of "QE" is Izzy's equivalent of the kid's focus on brake fluid - it's the only sophisticated economics term he knows.

(We eventually told the kid he needed to get his truck's brakes fixed)


----------



## messy (Apr 15, 2019)

espola said:


> When I was a kid, a neighbor kid had gone with his dad one day to his truck-driver job.  During the day, the dad bought brake fluid at a gas station and poured it into the truck's bf reservoir.  Whenever we played cars and trucks in the mud after that, the kid would bring up every few minutes that he had to add some brake fluid.
> 
> The invocation of "QE" is Izzy's equivalent of the kid's focus on brake fluid - it's the only sophisticated economics term he knows.
> 
> (We eventually told the kid he needed to get his truck's brakes fixed)


So far he’s proven inept at economics and finance and now “contracts.” I’m hoping he starts discussing sports so he can hit the trifecta. After all, his avatar is a guy of about 600 lbs.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> So far he’s proven inept at economics and finance and now “contracts.” I’m hoping he starts discussing sports so he can hit the trifecta. After all, his avatar is a guy of about 600 lbs.


So now you are a contract expert? Is there anything you don't know? Besides politics and finance that is.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> He said the government “abrogates” contracts as the did with QE, I just asked him what contract?


Counterfeiting money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> So far he’s proven inept at economics and finance and now “contracts.” I’m hoping he starts discussing sports so he can hit the trifecta. After all, his avatar is a guy of about 600 lbs.


Fries u grads are good with government counterfeiting money for the benefit of the rich.  Never mind the contract.  Never mind the fact that you lost equity when interest rates increased.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 15, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> So now you are a contract expert? Is there anything you don't know? Besides politics and finance that is.


Do you always suck cock, or just in here?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

espola said:


> When I was a kid, a neighbor kid had gone with his dad one day to his truck-driver job.  During the day, the dad bought brake fluid at a gas station and poured it into the truck's bf reservoir.  Whenever we played cars and trucks in the mud after that, the kid would bring up every few minutes that he had to add some brake fluid.
> 
> The invocation of "QE" is Izzy's equivalent of the kid's focus on brake fluid - it's the only sophisticated economics term he knows.
> 
> (We eventually told the kid he needed to get his truck's brakes fixed)


QE is sophisticated?  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Do you always suck cock, or just in here?


Lovers quarrel.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

espola said:


> When I was a kid, a neighbor kid had gone with his dad one day to his truck-driver job.  During the day, the dad bought brake fluid at a gas station and poured it into the truck's bf reservoir.  Whenever we played cars and trucks in the mud after that, the kid would bring up every few minutes that he had to add some brake fluid.
> 
> The invocation of "QE" is Izzy's equivalent of the kid's focus on brake fluid - it's the only sophisticated economics term he knows.
> 
> (We eventually told the kid he needed to get his truck's brakes fixed)


Great story though.  The brakes were totally shot for 6 of Obama’s 8 years.  I guess we could say the brake fluid was the QE!!  I always love your grampish analogy that oppose your own intent.  Self proclaimed that is.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 15, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Do you always suck cock, or just in here?


That's a lot.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lovers quarrel.


I can't help it, I am irresistible, even to homos like homo du.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QE is sophisticated?  Lol!


OBVI, Fries U grad.


----------



## messy (Apr 15, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> So now you are a contract expert? Is there anything you don't know? Besides politics and finance that is.


Keep up, big fella.
One guy said that the government is involved in our economy via judicial enforcement of contracts.
A dumb guy responded "the government abrogates contracts," e.g. QE.
I asked him what contracts that abrogates. Who were the parties? Was there a plaintiff in any claim under that contract? 
Do you think you have to be a contract expert to ask those questions?


----------



## messy (Apr 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Counterfeiting money.


The government prints money, or did you now know that? It's not counterfeit.
Now tell me about those broken contracts again?
A contract is an agreement between or among 2 or more parties which, when violated, the government...in the form of its judicial branch at either the state or Federal levels...provides the forum to enforce the contract. That was Laced's point, which you seemed to have trouble with.
Maybe you think the government prints counterfeit money? Then who prints the real money? Being this stupid every day leaves you in the financial position you're in.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Keep up, big fella.
> One guy said that the government is involved in our economy via judicial enforcement of contracts.
> A dumb guy responded "the government abrogates contracts," e.g. QE.
> I asked him what contracts that abrogates. Who were the parties? Was there a plaintiff in any claim under that contract?
> Do you think you have to be a contract expert to ask those questions?


You tell me what contract is abrogated when the government creates counterfeit money.  The parties should be obvious once you understand the contract.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 15, 2019)

messy said:


> The government prints money, or did you now know that? It's not counterfeit.
> Now tell me about those broken contracts again?
> A contract is an agreement between or among 2 or more parties which, when violated, the government...in the form of its judicial branch at either the state or Federal levels...provides the forum to enforce the contract. That was Laced's point, which you seemed to have trouble with.
> Maybe you think the government prints counterfeit money? Then who prints the real money? Being this stupid every day leaves you in the financial position you're in.


Whatʻs the diff between what the government treasury prints, which is only 3% of all cash in the system, and electronic money?  And how does that money get in to the system?  What instrument does the Fed recieve in exchange for the Fiat money they create?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 18, 2019)

Lol!  Silence.


----------



## messy (Apr 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  Silence.


You didn’t ask a question, stupid.
As always, because you know nothing about money or finance, you uttered a bunch of nonsense that’s incomprehensible.
Ignoring the bottom line of it all that the US dollar is manufactured by the US government.
I know that’s difficult for you to understand.


----------



## messy (Apr 18, 2019)

messy said:


> You didn’t ask a question, stupid.
> As always, because you know nothing about money or finance, you uttered a bunch of nonsense that’s incomprehensible.
> Ignoring the bottom line of it all that the US dollar is manufactured by the US government.
> I know that’s difficult for you to understand.


Further, this started because you didn’t understand about the government regulating commerce via contract enforcement, which is such a simple concept.
Again, we know why you’re broke...I would never hire you in a million years. 
You’re probably also lazy.


----------



## nononono (Apr 18, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Do you always suck cock, or just in here?


*There's that " Deliverance " reference again.......*

*What did you give up for those " Beers " when you were skateboarding....*
*It appears more than your dignity.*


----------



## nononono (Apr 18, 2019)

messy said:


> You didn’t ask a question, stupid.
> As always, because you know nothing about money or finance, you uttered a bunch of nonsense that’s incomprehensible.
> Ignoring the bottom line of it all that the US dollar is manufactured by the US government.
> I know that’s difficult for you to understand.


*What .....you buy a " New " book and now you feel frisky.....*
*You should have just stayed in class .....*
*Your " Bottom Line " is just " Messy " nonsense...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> You didn’t ask a question, stupid.
> As always, because you know nothing about money or finance, you uttered a bunch of nonsense that’s incomprehensible.
> Ignoring the bottom line of it all that the US dollar is manufactured by the US government.
> I know that’s difficult for you to understand.


Lmao!  How’s that manufactured collateralized debt doing?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> Further, this started because you didn’t understand about the government regulating commerce via contract enforcement, which is such a simple concept.
> Again, we know why you’re broke...I would never hire you in a million years.
> You’re probably also lazy.


I wouldn’t want to work for someone who thinks and acts as if debts are an asset for themselves.  But please go on.  Fries U!! What a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

nononono said:


> *What .....you buy a " New " book and now you feel frisky.....*
> *You should have just stayed in class .....*
> *Your " Bottom Line " is just " Messy " nonsense...*


Fries U curriculum has been around for awhile.  The gullible gravitate toward such things.  That’s how I make money.


----------



## messy (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I wouldn’t want to work for someone who thinks and acts as if debts are an asset for themselves.  But please go on.  Fries U!! What a deal!


I have no idea what that means. Your confusing expressions are the sign of a muddled mind.
Simplify.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> I have no idea what that means. Your confusing expressions are the sign of a muddled mind.
> Simplify.


Your collateralized debt is an asset in your mind.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I wouldn’t want to work for someone who thinks and acts as if debts are an asset for themselves.  But please go on.  Fries U!! What a deal!


So you find it more to your advantage financially to pay rent rather than to pay on a mortgage? Do you have a bus pass or own a car?


----------



## nononono (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> *I have no idea what that means.* Your confusing expressions are the sign of a muddled mind.
> Simplify.


*There in lies YOUR whole problem......*

*If you used that line more often and a derivative, you might *
*" possibly " gain more respect in REAL life and on this forum.*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

nononono said:


> *There in lies YOUR whole problem......*
> 
> *If you used that line more often and a derivative, you might *
> *" possibly " gain more respect in REAL life and on this forum.*


dizzy, like yourself are into word soup . . . I notice you, nor diz have ever illuminated any of us with your "simple" translation thereof, because it is garbled BS. People that are good at things make it look easy, you nor diz can achieve that so you choose obfuscation instead.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you find it more to your advantage financially to pay rent rather than to pay on a mortgage? Do you have a bus pass or own a car?


Too complicated for you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> dizzy, like yourself are into word soup . . . I notice you, nor diz have ever illuminated any of us with your "simple" translation thereof, because it is garbled BS. People that are good at things make it look easy, you nor diz can achieve that so you choose obfuscation instead.


Blaming others for your iliteracy suits you.  I thought third grade math would be easy enough.  I was wrong.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Too complicated for you.


Au contraire, seems it is you who have the difficulty making your message clear . . . is it because you have no real message just more obfuscation? You need to muddy the waters so your true self can't be seen, like t.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Blaming others for your iliteracy suits you.  I thought third grade math would be easy enough.  I was wrong.


Projecting again I see. Your math has been under scrutiny for years now with no attempt on your part to add clarity to your assertions (same as for your questionable financial ramblings), just more mud in the water.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Projecting again I see. Your math has been under scrutiny for years now with no attempt on your part to add clarity to your assertions (same as for your questionable financial ramblings), just more mud in the water.


Like you annual 2% raises.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Au contraire, seems it is you who have the difficulty making your message clear . . . is it because you have no real message just more obfuscation? You need to muddy the waters so your true self can't be seen, like t.


You mustnʻt mistake your opacity for the clear understanding of others.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Blaming others for your iliteracy suits you.  I thought third grade math would be easy enough.  I was wrong.


Your propensity to attempt weaving riddles, most likely gleaned from the plumbers similar attempts, comes up short when in the end you don't even know the answer. The punchline, so to speak, comes when the riddler reveals the simplicity of the answer sought. 
 . . . and misspelling "iliteracy' (sic) when questioning my literacy is quite ironic you might admit, but you can't.


----------



## messy (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Projecting again I see. Your math has been under scrutiny for years now with no attempt on your part to add clarity to your assertions (same as for your questionable financial ramblings), just more mud in the water.


listen, poor guy says he's a fan of the president and he doesn't even understand leveraged debt.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mustnʻt mistake your opacity for the clear understanding of others.


Again, the good ones make it look easy, you lack that trait. In fact you can't even show where anyone gets anything wrong, you simply claim so and run off.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> listen, poor guy says he's a fan of the president and he doesn't even understand leveraged debt.


He tries so hard to get affirmation from someone, anyone but only gets the likes of nono, lil joe and the plumber. It's really a sad thing to witness.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Again, the good ones make it look easy, you lack that trait. In fact you can't even show where anyone gets anything wrong, you simply claim so and run off.


Lol!  Multiplication and division not ez enough for you? Lol!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  Multiplication and division not ez enough for you? Lol!


? Keep trying, maybe LE will chime in about how you are an above average D student.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> He tries so hard to get affirmation from someone, anyone but only gets the likes of nono, lil joe and the plumber. It's really a sad thing to witness.


Lmao!  Affirmation does not reside in “someone”.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> ? Keep trying, maybe LE will chime in about how you are an above average D student.


I got you to prove that.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Like you annual 2% raises.


Can you tell me what 2% of $70 is?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> listen, poor guy says he's a fan of the president and he doesn't even understand leveraged debt.


Is that the new name for your asset?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Can you tell me what 2% of $70 is?


Yikes!! Itʻs worse than I thougt.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lmao!  Affirmation does not reside in “someone”.


Nice try dizzy, you can't win so you spin, really is sad to watch (but I'm sure one of the others in your he-man, compensating for your insecurity club will come to your defense). Man up and have some pride in yourself.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yikes!! Itʻs worse than I thougt.


You had a "thougt" (sic)?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You had a "thougt" (sic)?


About a buck forty worth.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Nice try dizzy, you can't win so you spin, really is sad to watch (but I'm sure one of the others in your he-man, compensating for your insecurity club will come to your defense). Man up and have some pride in yourself.


Who says Iʻm trying? Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Your propensity to attempt weaving riddles, most likely gleaned from the plumbers similar attempts, comes up short when in the end you don't even know the answer. The punchline, so to speak, comes when the riddler reveals the simplicity of the answer sought.
> . . . and misspelling "iliteracy' (sic) when questioning my literacy is quite ironic you might admit, but you can't.


To the easily riddled, life is a riddle.


----------



## nononono (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> dizzy, like yourself are into word soup . . . I notice you, nor diz have ever illuminated any of us with your "simple" translation thereof, because it is garbled BS. People that are good at things make it look easy, you nor diz can achieve that so you choose obfuscation instead.



*If you tickle " Nadler " in his " Nethers " he might just burp up a Skittle.*
*If you fondle the " Schiff " on his " Standard " he might just give a Buck.*
*If you pickle the " Lieu " thru the " Diddle " he will most certainly Squirm.*


----------



## messy (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Is that the new name for your asset?


Which asset? The stocks, the bonds, the cash or the houses? You do know they are all "assets," don't you? Maybe not.
And it is true that I have about $2.5m in "collateralized debt" against a couple of those assets...which definitely makes them worth $2.5m less than if I didn't have that debt!
You see how simple that is, Iz? Do you understand how it works?
No need to talk in riddles, like you do because you're so confused.
It's simple and clear.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> listen, poor guy says he's a fan of the president and he doesn't even understand leveraged debt.


When did he say that?


----------



## messy (Apr 19, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> When did he say that?


I don’t have the dates.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> Which asset? The stocks, the bonds, the cash or the houses? You do know they are all "assets," don't you? Maybe not.
> And it is true that I have about $2.5m in "collateralized debt" against a couple of those assets...which definitely makes them worth $2.5m less than if I didn't have that debt!
> You see how simple that is, Iz? Do you understand how it works?
> No need to talk in riddles, like you do because you're so confused.
> It's simple and clear.


I understand your understanding of debt.  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> And it is true that I have about $2.5m in "collateralized debt" against a couple of those assets...which definitely makes them worth $2.5m less than if I didn't have that


Let us know when you pay it off.  Lol!!!


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I understand your understanding of debt.  Lol!


Thing is, you can't display your "understanding", so I guess we just have to take your word for it?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

messy said:


> I don’t have the dates.


Pick one.  Doesnʻt matter.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 19, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Thing is, you can't display your "understanding", so I guess we just have to take your word for it?


Or you could explain what you think I donʻt understand.  Take your time.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Or you could explain what you think I donʻt understand.  Take your time.


Typical, you can't answer the questions you've been asked while claiming it's " too complicated" for me to understand.

Do you see renting as more financially advantageous than paying a mortgage?
Do you have a bus pass or do you own a car?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you find it more to your advantage financially to pay rent rather than to pay on a mortgage? Do you have a bus pass or own a car?


*left unanswered previously.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 20, 2019)

messy said:


> I don’t have the dates.


Because he never did.
I feel for you, but no need to make shit up.
It's ok to admit you are wrong.


----------



## messy (Apr 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> *left unanswered previously.


He actually once called it "a wash." Hard to believe at the time. Now I understand how absolutely ignorant he is about financial matters, so it's not surprising.


----------



## messy (Apr 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Let us know when you pay it off.  Lol!!!


You got it.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 20, 2019)

messy said:


> He actually once called it "a wash." Hard to believe at the time. Now I understand how absolutely ignorant he is about financial matters, so it's not surprising.


Nutters don't do answers.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 20, 2019)

*Donna Brazile Defends Obama over Russian Meddling in 2016 Election*



_





BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP/Getty Images
PENNY STARR 20 Apr 2019 
*Longtime Democrat operative and newly minted Fox News contributor Donna Brazile defended former President Barack Obama and his administration over Russia meddling in the 2016 presidential election, saying she believes they did “everything they could.”*
“I think they did everything they could without sounding all of the alarm bells,” Brazile said on Fox News’s The Daily Briefing.


“If Obama did more on Russian meddling, she said, critics would have accused him of trying to help his former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, in her race against then-candidate Donald Trump,” Fox News reported.

“He was in a box,” Brazile said of the former president. 

“Perhaps President Trump is in a box,” she added, before calling for action to prevent future meddling. 


In the Fox report, Brazile claimed it was the Trump campaign that “exploited” information from WikiLeaks, which has suspected ties to Russia.

“Every day, the Trump campaign would get the WikiLeaks information; they would blast it,” Brazile said. “He used it in his daily rallies and daily meetings.”

“Brazile, who served as interim Democratic National Committee chair during the election, backed away from making any determination about whether her party should pursue impeaching the president,” Fox reported.

The Mueller report concluded that neither President Trump nor anyone in his presidential campaign colluded with Russia but stopped short of clearing the president of obstructing justice.


Special counsel Robert Mueller’s decision to leave the obstruction question open has been snapped up as what Democrats have called a “road map for impeachment.”

One of the Democrat presidential candidates, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), announced on Twitter on Friday that she supports starting impeachment proceedings.

But Brazile backed away from endorsing an effort to get the president removed from office.

“I think it’s premature to talk about what the next step is,” she said. “Before we can move into what I call the impeachment gear, perhaps we should just dive into this report.”


“Like Brazile, DNC Chair Tom Perez appeared to sidestep impeachment questions on Thursday and said it was unclear whether or not obstruction occurred,” Fox reported.
_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Nutters don't do answers.


I found renting advantageous when I couldnʻt afford to take on a death pledge a.k.a. A mortgage.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 20, 2019)

messy said:


> He actually once called it "a wash." Hard to believe at the time. Now I understand how absolutely ignorant he is about financial matters, so it's not surprising.


A wash is when you realize your debt is collateralized by the house that you donʻt own yet consider your asset.  Lol!!  Fries U!! What a deal.  If you were smart youʻde be using your equity to pay off your mortgage.  If only.....


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I found renting advantageous when I couldnʻt afford to take on a death pledge a.k.a. A mortgage.


Oh, that explains everything, sorry you lost your home.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> A wash is when you realize your debt is collateralized by the house that you donʻt own yet consider your asset.  Lol!!  Fries U!! What a deal.  If you were smart youʻde be using your equity to pay off your mortgage.  If only.....


You say that because you don’t understand money...as I constantly tell you.
I will pay off both my mortgages if you explain why paying them off is better for me, financially, then keeping them at, Jesus it’s like 3.125%, and making 7% of my money that’s not invested in my houses. So I make the “spread,” do you understand?
See how that works? I would be a dummy to pay off my mortgages.
You are a dummy, so you don’t have money for even a down payment.
And did you know that I have gained massive appreciation in house values and the bank gets none of that?
Good advice, Iz! You know your stuff!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh, that explains everything, sorry you lost your home.


Lol!  Donʻt be sorry.  I lost it to a buyer and moved on to the next one about 2 years ago.  That one will be paid off in 4 years and 9 months....projected.  Unless I find a better deal during the upcoming recession.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> You say that because you don’t understand money...as I constantly tell you.
> I will pay off both my mortgages if you explain why paying them off is better for me, financially, then keeping them at, Jesus it’s like 3.125%, and making 7% of my money that’s not invested in my houses.
> See how that works? I would be a dummy to pay off my mortgages.
> You are a dummy, so you don’t have money for even a down payment.
> ...


Massive appreciation?  Whatʻs your current LTV?


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  Donʻt be sorry.  I lost it to a buyer and moved on to the next one about 2 years ago.  That one will be paid off in 4 years and 9 months....projected.  Unless I find a better deal during the upcoming recession.


Funny shit. At best, you’re tripping over dollars on the way to nickels because you run scared.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Massive appreciation?  Whatʻs your current LTV?


If that means loan to value, one house has about 20% as a loan and 80% as equity.
The other is about 65% loan/35% equity.
Yes, massive appreciation.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Funny shit. At best, you’re tripping over dollars on the way to nickels because you run scared.


Lol! I love your insults.  They are substitutes for knowledge.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> If that means loan to value, one house has about 20% as a loan and 80% as equity.
> The other is about 65% loan/35% equity.
> Yes, massive appreciation.


So youʻre not paying off the 20% or 65% for tax purposes?  Are they rentals or domicile?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Funny shit. At best, you’re tripping over dollars on the way to nickels because you run scared.


Actually I’ll make a payment on Monday that will eliminate 65k in amortized interest and replace it with 14k in simple interest.  You can do the math.  That’s a lot of nickels!!


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

How mi


Bruddah IZ said:


> Actually I’ll make a payment on Monday that will eliminate 65k in amortized interest and replace it with 14k in simple interest.  You can do the math.  That’s a lot of nickels!!


that tells me nothing unless how tell me how much the payment is, what the new rate is compared to the old rate and whether it’s deductible (as is the mortgage interest).
See how to analyze it?
And again I’m not in real estate. I make my money at my day job.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So youʻre not paying off the 20% or 65% for tax purposes?  Are they rentals or domicile?


Why would I pay them off? I explained already that I make money on the spread and paying them off is what smart people call “a bad investment.”
I get my loan at just over 3% and it’s deductible.
I invest my money at around 7%.
 I get the appreciation on the houses anyway. Why would I use valuable money to pay off my mortgages early?
That’s twice now that I’ve explained this to you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> How mi
> 
> that tells me nothing unless how tell me how much the payment is, what the new rate is compared to the old rate and whether it’s deductible (as is the mortgage interest).
> See how to analyze it?
> And again I’m not in real estate. I make my money at my day job.


The current rate is 3.75% amortized.  The new rate is 3.99% simple interest.  The payment doesn’t matter as much as the method of interest calculation.  Interest is not deductible but you don’t really care about that if you’re netting a substantial reduction in interest payments.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Why would I pay them off? I explained already that I make money on the spread and paying them off is what smart people call “a bad investment.”
> I get my loan at just over 3% and it’s deductible.
> I invest my money at around 7%.
> I get the appreciation on the houses anyway. Why would I use valuable money to pay off my mortgages early?
> That’s twice now that I’ve explained this to you.


Do the analytics.  Take an amortization schedule.  Plug in all your numbers from the loan start date, interest, loan amount and calculate, then amortize.  Then take a portion of your equity.  Say 40k.  Pay 40k to your amortized loan, on paper by subtracting the 40k from your current amortized balance.  Find the number of the month that is associated with the new balance you calculated.  Sum the total of the interest only between your old balance and new.  Then take the 40k and multiply it by the simple interest rate for the HELOC.  You’ll arrive at an annual rate that you’ll divide by 12 to get your monthly interest payment to the HELOC.  The difference between the amortized int. you are scheduled to pay and the simple int. that you pay will be substantial enough to off set whatever tax benefits you perceive to be more beneficial.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Why would I pay them off? I explained already that I make money on the spread and paying them off is what smart people call “a bad investment.”
> I get my loan at just over 3% and it’s deductible.
> I invest my money at around 7%.
> I get the appreciation on the houses anyway. Why would I use valuable money to pay off my mortgages early?
> That’s twice now that I’ve explained this to you.


BTW, money is made less valuable over time.  It’s called inflation.    Amortized loans are designed to get more of your money up front while it is more powerful and less of it when it is least valuable 20 to 30 years later due to inflation....you know?  The whole QE thing.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> BTW, money is made less valuable over time.  It’s called inflation.    Amortized loans are designed to get more of your money up front while it is more powerful and less of it when it is least valuable 20 to 30 years later due to inflation....you know?  The whole QE thing.


You support t right?


----------



## espola (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do the analytics.  Take an amortization schedule.  Plug in all your numbers from the loan start date, interest, loan amount and calculate, then amortize.  Then take a portion of your equity.  Say 40k.  Pay 40k to your amortized loan, on paper by subtracting the 40k from your current amortized balance.  Find the number of the month that is associated with the new balance you calculated.  Sum the total of the interest only between your old balance and new.  Then take the 40k and multiply it by the simple interest rate for the HELOC.  You’ll arrive at an annual rate that you’ll divide by 12 to get your monthly interest payment to the HELOC.  The difference between the amortized int. you are scheduled to pay and the simple int. that you pay will be substantial enough to off set whatever tax benefits you perceive to be more beneficial.


This is hilarious.  

Enough handwaving.  Plug in some numbers.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> BTW, money is made less valuable over time.  It’s called inflation.    Amortized loans are designed to get more of your money up front while it is more powerful and less of it when it is least valuable 20 to 30 years later due to inflation....you know?  The whole QE thing.


An accurate statement! Huzzah!


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Do the analytics.  Take an amortization schedule.  Plug in all your numbers from the loan start date, interest, loan amount and calculate, then amortize.  Then take a portion of your equity.  Say 40k.  Pay 40k to your amortized loan, on paper by subtracting the 40k from your current amortized balance.  Find the number of the month that is associated with the new balance you calculated.  Sum the total of the interest only between your old balance and new.  Then take the 40k and multiply it by the simple interest rate for the HELOC.  You’ll arrive at an annual rate that you’ll divide by 12 to get your monthly interest payment to the HELOC.  The difference between the amortized int. you are scheduled to pay and the simple int. that you pay will be substantial enough to off set whatever tax benefits you perceive to be more beneficial.


#1. I’m not aware of 30-year HELOCs. #2. I believe the deductibility of the interest overcomes the amortization front-loading. You have more to deduct in those early stages as well.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The current rate is 3.75% amortized.  The new rate is 3.99% simple interest.  The payment doesn’t matter as much as the method of interest calculation.  Interest is not deductible but you don’t really care about that if you’re netting a substantial reduction in interest payments.


Your analysis works for a deal that has like a 5-year window. The point of a mortgage is that you can buy something expensive and take a really long time to pay it off. Yes the bank wins but so does the buyer, if he buys in a good area or a rising area. Nothing like real estate appreciation.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Nothing like real estate appreciation.


Yes sir, makes me smile three times over!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

espola said:


> This is hilarious.
> 
> Enough handwaving.  Plug in some numbers.


Amortized Int. 3.75, simple int.  3.99, loan amount 2.5 million.  Get to work “self proclaimed”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> An accurate statement! Huzzah!


Not in your case Mr. “Why would I pay it off”


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> #1. I’m not aware of 30-year HELOCs. #2. I believe the deductibility of the interest overcomes the amortization front-loading. You have more to deduct in those early stages as well.


oh boy.  Just when I thought You couldn’t do better than “collateralized debt is an asset” you come up with the above.  There is no amortization in a HELOC.  Not that fries u teaches you that.  No wonder you don’t enjoy the return on equity that I do without selling.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Your analysis works for a deal that has like a 5-year window. The point of a mortgage is that you can buy something expensive and take a really long time to pay it off. Yes the bank wins but so does the buyer, if he buys in a good area or a rising area. Nothing like real estate appreciation.


Show me how you benefit from not using your equity to pay off your 30 in less than 1/3rd the time, while paying double digit interest until your 320th payment.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Your analysis works for a deal that has like a 5-year window. The point of a mortgage is that you can buy something expensive and take a really long time to pay it off. Yes the bank wins but so does the buyer, if he buys in a good area or a rising area. Nothing like real estate appreciation.


5 year window?  Show me.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Show me how you benefit from not using your equity to pay off your 30 in less than 1/3rd the time, while paying double digit interest until your 320th payment.


1. The taxpayers bear half my interest, so that money costs me 50% of what I pay.
2. The money I am not spending on my house earns me about 7% per year, compounded., whereas the house appreciates less than that BUT I KEEP 100% OF THE APPRECIATION ANYWAY.
3. So why on earth would I take all that money and put it into my house? I would get poorer.


----------



## messy (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> oh boy.  Just when I thought You couldn’t do better than “collateralized debt is an asset” you come up with the above.  There is no amortization in a HELOC.  Not that fries u teaches you that.  No wonder you don’t enjoy the return on equity that I do without selling.


So there is a 30-year time frame to pay off a HELOC? In that case, yes it’s a better deal than a mortgage. But check your premise...I don’t think there’s a 30-year HELOC.


----------



## espola (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Amortized Int. 3.75, simple int.  3.99, loan amount 2.5 million.  Get to work “self proclaimed”


You're not showing your work.


----------



## nononono (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> 1. The taxpayers bear half my interest, so that money costs me 50% of what I pay.
> 2. The money I am not spending on my house earns me about 7% per year, compounded., whereas the house appreciates less than that BUT I KEEP 100% OF THE APPRECIATION ANYWAY.
> 3. So why on earth would I take all that money and put it into my house? I would get poorer.





messy said:


> So there is a 30-year time frame to pay off a HELOC? In that case, yes it’s a better deal than a mortgage. But check your premise...I don’t think there’s a 30-year HELOC.


*Man are you an Idiot....*

*I'll bet you pay your mortgage with " Borrowed " money like the *
*Creepy Porn Lawyer was doing too.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

espola said:


> You're not showing your work.


I’m your teacher.  Take the numbers and follow the instructions I gave the other Fries U grad.  Use your self proclaimed-ness.


----------



## espola (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I’m your teacher.  Take the numbers and follow the instructions I gave the other Fries U grad.  Use your self proclaimed-ness.


Coocoo.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> 1. The taxpayers bear half my interest, so that money costs me 50% of what I pay.
> 2. The money I am not spending on my house earns me about 7% per year, compounded., whereas the house appreciates less than that BUT I KEEP 100% OF THE APPRECIATION ANYWAY.
> 3. So why on earth would I take all that money and put it into my house? I would get poorer.


Lmao!  
1.  No, they don’t bear your interest.  Your interest is a deduction not a tax credit.

2.  The money that you are spending on your interest alone is easily in the double digits which cancels out your 7% per year.  You don’t get to keep 100% of the the appreciation because of interest and inflation over the life of the loan.

3.  Because an amortized loan is for suckers.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

espola said:


> Coocoo.


Your 3rd grade math teacher would be ashamed.


----------



## espola (Apr 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your 3rd grade math teacher would be ashamed.


3rd and 4th grade shared one teacher, Miss Hanchett.  She taught all subjects.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 21, 2019)

messy said:


> So there is a 30-year time frame to pay off a HELOC? In that case, yes it’s a better deal than a mortgage. But check your premise...I don’t think there’s a 30-year HELOC.


Simple interest = HELOC.  Amortized interest = mortgage.  Now tell me why HELOCS are not 30 years.


----------



## messy (Apr 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Simple interest = HELOC.  Amortized interest = mortgage.  Now tell me why HELOCS are not 30 years.


Because banks don't offer them for that duration. 
Do you really think you're the smart guy who recognizes that a short-term, fixed-interest loan is better than a mortgage when buying real estate to hold? That's funny.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

messy said:


> Because banks don't offer them for that duration.
> Do you really think you're the smart guy who recognizes that a short-term, fixed-interest loan is better than a mortgage when buying real estate to hold? That's funny.


It’s so simple that smart guys like you don’t get it.  How can a guy that cheer leads appreciation/equity be so ignorant about HELOCS?


----------



## messy (Apr 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> It’s so simple that smart guys like you don’t get it.  How can a guy that cheer leads appreciation/equity be so ignorant about HELOCS?


So I can get a 30-year HELOC on simple interest terms instead of a mortgage? Wow!  Done. 
You're so smart! 
When your acid wears off, show me where I can get such a loan!  Or maybe you can't, because there's no such thing?


----------



## messy (Apr 22, 2019)

messy said:


> So I can get a 30-year HELOC on simple interest terms instead of a mortgage? Wow!  Done.
> You're so smart!
> When your acid wears off, show me where I can get such a loan!  Or maybe you can't, because there's no such thing?


I'm open-minded, though, so if you can sell me a product that gives me a fixed term loan at similar interest and  I can replace my amortized loan with that, I will look at it.
The issue remains deductibility.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

messy said:


> I'm open-minded, though, so if you can sell me a product that gives me a fixed term loan at similar interest and  I can replace my amortized loan with that, I will look at it.
> The issue remains deductibility.


Nobody that runs a successful business would think or say the things you do.  You sir, are a poser.  As always.


----------



## espola (Apr 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nobody that runs a successful business would think or say the things you do.  You sir, are a poser.  As always.


Liar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

messy said:


> So I can get a 30-year HELOC on simple interest terms instead of a mortgage? Wow!  Done.
> You're so smart!
> When your acid wears off, show me where I can get such a loan!  Or maybe you can't, because there's no such thing?


Of course there is no such thing.  Who said there was?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

espola said:


> Liar.


E-reader


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

messy said:


> I'm open-minded, though, so if you can sell me a product that gives me a fixed term loan at similar interest and  I can replace my amortized loan with that, I will look at it.
> The issue remains deductibility.


Already laid it out for you.  Did you even locate where you are on the amortization schedule according to your current balance?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

Give me your loan amount or any loan amount, interest rate and we’ll assume a 30 year term which is what most have.

Then give me the value of your home via Red Fin, the intro rate for your HELOC or the banks rate if you don’t have a HELOC,  and the rate after one year/intro period.

Then sit back and watch a third grader show you why a deduction is much less valuable than interest elimination.  It’s in the 10’s of thousands at least.


----------



## espola (Apr 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Already laid it out for you.  Did you even locate where you are on the amortization schedule according to your current balance?


Liar.


----------



## espola (Apr 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Give me your loan amount or any loan amount, interest rate and we’ll assume a 30 year term which is what most have.
> 
> Then give me the value of your home via Red Fin, the intro rate for your HELOC or the banks rate if you don’t have a HELOC,  and the rate after one year/intro period.
> 
> Then sit back and watch a third grader show you why a deduction is much less valuable than interest elimination.  It’s in the 10’s of thousands at least.


Where did "interest elimination" come from?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

espola said:


> Where did "interest elimination" come from?


Lol!  Run along now Whisker’s Dad.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 22, 2019)

espola said:


> Liar.


Baaaaa!


----------



## nononono (Apr 22, 2019)

espola said:


> Coocoo.


*Thief....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 23, 2019)

Bye, bye 76k in amortized interest payments!!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 23, 2019)

Looks like the markets approve of and agree Trump was fully exonerated of collusion and obstruction.


----------



## nononono (Apr 23, 2019)

espola said:


> Liar.


*Thief !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 23, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Looks like the markets approve of and agree Trump was fully exonerated of collusion and obstruction.


And all without the total corruption of QE that took place for 6 of Obama’s 8 years in office.  Makes Trump look like a choir boy.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 23, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And all without the total corruption of QE that took place for 6 of Obama’s 8 years in office.  Makes Trump look like a choir boy.


I think they might finally be getting it, nah.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 23, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I think they might finally be getting it, nah.


They like counterfeit money.  Financial misfits the lot of them.


----------



## messy (Apr 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nobody that runs a successful business would think or say the things you do.  You sir, are a poser.  As always.


Didn’t I already tell you that if I concerned myself whether idiots like you believe me or not, my annual income would decrease substantially?
It’s clear that I know you don’t do very well and that you are alarmed by my financial success.
Therefore, you should change your thinking.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 24, 2019)

messy said:


> Didn’t I already tell you that if I concerned myself whether idiots like you believe me or not, my annual income would decrease substantially?
> It’s clear that I know you don’t do very well and that you are alarmed by my financial success.
> Therefore, you should change your thinking.


I hope your financial decisions are better than your political ones.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 24, 2019)

messy said:


> Didn’t I already tell you that if I concerned myself whether idiots like you believe me or not, my annual income would decrease substantially?
> It’s clear that I know you don’t do very well and that you are alarmed by my financial success.
> Therefore, you should change your thinking.


There’s income.  Then there’s how much you get to keep.  I’m happy to watch you get rich on deductions.  Lol!


----------



## messy (Apr 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> There’s income.  Then there’s how much you get to keep.  I’m happy to watch you get rich on deductions.  Lol!


So here’s some math which you won’t do because it exposes you.

1. You own 50% equity in a house worth $500,000 and you borrow 250K with a HELOC, 4% simple interest, 10-year loan.

2. I own 50% equity in a house worth $500K and I borrow 250K with a mortgage at 3.1% and I’m in the 45% tax bracket.

In 10 years, who paid more for the same house?
Answer: you, by far! My interest rate was effectively less than 2% so you paid a lot more!
But you’re the smart guy who buys his house with a simple loan instead of a mortgage. Wow.

Your turn!


----------



## nononono (Apr 24, 2019)

messy said:


> Didn’t I already tell you that if I concerned myself whether idiots like you believe me or not, my annual income would decrease substantially?
> It’s clear that I know you don’t do very well and that you are alarmed by my financial success.
> Therefore, you should change your thinking.



*You can go in the other room and change your diaper, your *
*piss is overwhelming the sodium polyacrylate .*


----------



## nononono (Apr 24, 2019)

messy said:


> So here’s some math which you won’t do because it exposes you.
> 
> 1. You own 50% equity in a house worth $500,000 and you borrow 250K with a HELOC, 4% simple interest, 10-year loan.
> 
> ...


*A. I don't see BI over encumbering his property.*
*B. You are the epitome of a butt sucking " Credit Card " Whore....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 24, 2019)

Q


messy said:


> So here’s some math which you won’t do because it exposes you.
> 
> 1. You own 50% equity in a house worth $500,000 and you borrow 250K with a HELOC, 4% simple interest, 10-year loan.
> 
> ...


Lol!!  I just wiped out 41k in interest in one payment on the rest of my mortgage of 250k.  Thanks for the generous terms.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Q
> 
> Lol!!  I just wiped out 41k in interest in one payment on the rest of my mortgage of 250k.  Thanks for the generous terms.


So you paid much more than I did for the house if you had a 10-year HELOC and I had a 10-year mortgage, because you paid twice as much interest.

That’s a fact, isn’t it?

I know that’s a tough question.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> So you paid much more than I did for the house if you had a 10-year HELOC and I had a 10-year mortgage, because you paid twice as much interest.
> 
> That’s a fact, isn’t it?
> 
> I know that’s a tough question.


No.  You assumed I took 10 years to pay it off.  I didn’t.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

In addition, it took you ten years to get access to the additional 250k in equity.  You gave me the terms to get it in one day.  In reality, the bank only lends 70% CLTV on HELOCS.  So my HELOC could only be for 100k for the 500k valued house.  But you already knew that.  Lol!


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No.  You assumed I took 10 years to pay it off.  I didn’t.


Im glad you mentioned that, because that brings us to the next level of your flawed analysis.

When you spent that extra dollar on that house,  earlier than required by the loan, what did that “buy” you? It bought you more ownership of something that appreciated, say, 3-4% per year? 

I obtained the same appreciation without spending that dollar. That’s my win #1.

Furthermore, I took that extra dollar that you used to buy more equity in the house and instead I invested it in a bond and/or an equity which, based on my last 20 years or so, earned me 7%. That’s my win #2.

See how simple that is? It’s not that you’re dumb, you’re not. You’re (a) overly concerned about the other side of the transaction (I like win/win), (b) overly complicated in your thinking and (c) fearful.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> In addition, it took you ten years to get access to the additional 250k in equity.  You gave me the terms to get it in one day.  In reality, the bank only lends 70% CLTV on HELOCS.  So my HELOC could only be for 100k for the 500k valued house.  But you already knew that.  Lol!


See above. You’re too complicated, son.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

Oh and Btw, you don’t own the equity if you’re asking the bank to borrow it.  At a cost that is.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> Im glad you mentioned that, because that brings us to the next level of your flawed analysis.
> 
> When you spent that extra dollar on that house,  earlier than required by the loan, what did that “buy” you? It bought you more ownership of something that appreciated, say, 3-4% per year?
> 
> ...


Soooooo simple.  I didn’t pay a cent of the 41k in interest that you paid on your amortized loan and got access to an additional 250k to buy another house in addition to the 3 to 4 percent appreciation on the first house.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> See above. You’re too complicated, son.


You find that complicated?  Lol!  Thought you were the HELOC King.  Poser.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> Im glad you mentioned that, because that brings us to the next level of your flawed analysis.
> 
> When you spent that extra dollar on that house,  earlier than required by the loan, what did that “buy” you? It bought you more ownership of something that appreciated, say, 3-4% per year?
> 
> I obtained the same appreciation without spending that dollar. That’s my win #1.


Funny how you consider paying 41k in interest a win.  And don’t forget that whopping 4k a year deduction.  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> Furthermore, I took that extra dollar that you used to buy more equity in the house and instead I invested it in a bond and/or an equity which, based on my last 20 years or so, earned me 7%. That’s my win #2.
> 
> See how simple that is? It’s not that you’re dumb, you’re not. You’re (a) overly concerned about the other side of the transaction (I like win/win), (b) overly complicated in your thinking and (c) fearful.


Uhhhhh.......your #1 win of 41k in amortized interest cancelled out your #2 win because you were actually paying interest on your amortized loan in excess of 7% percent for the first 7.5 years of your 10 year loan.  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> In addition, it took you ten years to get access to the additional 250k in equity.  You gave me the terms to get it in one day.  In reality, the bank only lends 70% CLTV on HELOCS.  So my HELOC could only be for 100k for the 500k valued house.  But you already knew that.  Lol!





messy said:


> See above. You’re too complicated, son.


This is our most classic exchange yet.....SON.  Are we done here?   Off you go to make your millions.  Lol!! Fries U!  What a deal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

Silence


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Silence


Some people do work at their jobs.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Some people do work at their jobs.


Agree.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> See above. You’re too complicated, son.


You’re too complicated, son.

I already showed you how my mortgage was better than your HELOC if you paid off over the term of the loan...by a lot. 

Then I showed you how using my money for purposes other than buying into the house is a much better investment.

But you still don’t understand.

This is why I do well and you play the $2 tables. 

You think you have it figured when everything you said was the wrong way to make dough. But you’re obviously convinced...so I can’t help you, son. 

And trust me, you don’t want to make a comparison...


----------



## nononono (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Uhhhhh.......your #1 win of 41k in amortized interest cancelled out your #2 win because you were actually paying interest on your amortized loan in excess of 7% percent for the first 7.5 years of your 10 year loan.  Lol!



*This " Guy " know as " Messy " Financial is a complete loon.....*

*He's quite blatantly using one financial " Loan " source to pay off another " Loan "*
*source and explain it away with Voodoo Logic....*

*Hence his deserved name " Messy " Financial.....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re too complicated, son.
> 
> I already showed you how my mortgage was better than your HELOC if you paid off over the term of the loan...by a lot.
> 
> ...


Too late.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Too late.


You definitely win the prize for this one, though.

“If I pay into my house the 250K, then I will have more equity in my house to borrow against.”

Instead of using that 250K somewhere else in the first place and not going into debt for it?

Classic confusion. 

“KISS.”  Keep it simple, son.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> You definitely win the prize for this one, though.
> 
> “If I pay into my house the 250K, then I will have more equity in my house to borrow against.”
> 
> ...


Youʻre the only one having difficulty son.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Youʻre the only one having difficulty son.


You’re an idiot. You pay off a house so you can then borrow the money you just paid in? Did you really say that?!!!


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re an idiot. You pay off a house so you can then borrow the money you just paid in? Did you really say that?!!!


14 posts above, as a reminder for all to see.

Instead of paying deductible interest on your loan, you would pay off a house so you could then borrow that same money against the house, at non-deductible interest.

You win!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re an idiot. You pay off a house so you can then borrow the money you just paid in? Did you really say that?!!!


Yes.  Because unlike you, my interest rate is 3.99% to start while you start at 26%.  I get a lower interest rate while retaining access to an additional 250k that you allowed me to have at 100% CLTV.  A bank would never do that.  But a Fries U grad would.  What a deal!  Best deal yet!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> 14 posts above, as a reminder for all to see.
> 
> Instead of paying deductible interest on your loan, you would pay off a house so you could then borrow that same money against the house, at non-deductible interest.
> 
> You win!


A $4100 deduction a year does nothing for someone in the max income bracket.  Poser.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re an idiot. You pay off a house so you can then borrow the money you just paid in? Did you really say that?!!!


Actually you really said that in your post about “owning” equity that you have to pay 41k to borrow!!  This is more fun than I should be allowed to have.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Actually you really said that in your post about “owning” equity that you have to pay 41k to borrow!!  This is more fun than I should be allowed to have.


Whatever that means, dimwit.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  Because unlike you, my interest rate is 3.99% to start while you start at 26%.  I get a lower interest rate while retaining access to an additional 250k that you allowed me to have at 100% CLTV.  A bank would never do that.  But a Fries U grad would.  What a deal!  Best deal yet!!


We both pay off our loan at term, I spend less money.
You pay off your house early, I make more money with my available capital.
Either way I end up with more than you..see how that works?
I do own a third house though. I used my available capital because I wasn’t stupid enough (ahem) to pay off my other houses.
It’s in another state. I own it outright. It was 525K. It’s a rental. I make 25% net/net on my money every year.
I don’t expect you to keep up at this point.
You win!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> Whatever that means, dimwit.


Lol! It means you posted something You didnʻt understand.....again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> We both pay off our loan at term, I spend less money.
> You pay off your house early, I make more money with my available capital.
> Either way I end up with more than you..see how that works?
> I do own a third house though. I used my available capital because I wasn’t stupid enough (ahem) to pay off my other houses.
> ...


With a HELOC I am not tied to the same terms as an amortized loan.  At a minimum I can make interest only payments if I want.  Or I can pay it off in chunks to accelerate repayment to save tens of thousands in interest without early repayment penalties.  You don’t get what a HELOC is do you?  It’s like a credit card on steroids with an asset to back it up.  You don’t get that an early pay back at 22% less interest frees up equity to create additional wealth throughout your 10 year death pledge


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> With a HELOC I am not tied to the same terms as an amortized loan.  At a minimum I can make interest only payments if I want.  Or I can pay it off in chunks to accelerate repayment to save tens of thousands in interest without early repayment penalties.  You don’t get what a HELOC is do you?  It’s like a credit card on steroids with an asset to back it up.  You don’t get that an early pay back at 22% less interest frees up equity to create additional wealth throughout your 10 year death pledge


I "get" all of it...I have about $6m in unsecured credit lines from 3 different financial institutions because they like the way I handle my money.  Of course one can always accelerate mortgage payments too, if they want...but that would be an inefficient use of capital, as I have tried to explain here, but I give up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> I "get" all of it...I have about $6m in unsecured credit lines from 3 different financial institutions because they like the way I handle my money.  Of course one can always accelerate mortgage payments too, if they want...but that would be an inefficient use of capital, as I have tried to explain here, but I give up.


Lol!’  Financial institutions donʻt give multiple lines of credit for $6m to somebody who finds CLTV complicated.  Poser.


----------



## messy (Apr 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!’  Financial institutions donʻt give multiple lines of credit for $6m to somebody who finds CLTV complicated.  Poser.


Right. I’m lying.

As I have told you repeatedly, the fact that you (a) disagree with my analyses and then (b) are so dumbfounded by my financial realities that you have to deny them should prove to you the need to change your thinking. You’re way lost in the weeds on this stuff and can’t see the forest at all.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

messy said:


> Right. I’m lying.
> 
> As I have told you repeatedly, the fact that you (a) disagree with my analyses and then (b) are so dumbfounded by my financial realities that you have to deny them should prove to you the need to change your thinking. You’re way lost in the weeds on this stuff and can’t see the forest at all.


Lol! Tell me about how youʻre getting rich on deductions again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 25, 2019)

Silence


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Silence


Some people have a life, you should try it sometime.


----------



## espola (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  Because unlike you, my interest rate is 3.99% to start while you start at 26%.  I get a lower interest rate while retaining access to an additional 250k that you allowed me to have at 100% CLTV.  A bank would never do that.  But a Fries U grad would.  What a deal!  Best deal yet!!


Where did "26%" come from?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 26, 2019)

Study: The Negative Impacts Of California’s Min Wage Increase On The Restaurant Industry
https://www.dailywire.com/news/46439/study-negative-impacts-californias-min-wage-frank-camp


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

espola said:


> Where did "26%" come from?


My self proclaimed-ness.  Run along Whiskerʻs dad.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Some people have a life, you should try it sometime.


Fine.  Iʻll put you on ignore.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

Silence


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Silence


Again, other people do stuff like work during the day . . . you should try it sometime instead of hopelessly pleading for recognition.


----------



## espola (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Silence


Even worse than silence was your answer to my question about 26%.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

espola said:


> Even worse than silence was your answer to my question about 26%.


Maybe you should try reading.  Thatʻs always been your problem.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

espola said:


> Even worse than silence was your answer to my question about 26%.


Silence.....reeeead


----------



## espola (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Maybe you should try reading.  Thatʻs always been your problem.


Liar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

espola said:


> Liar.


Lol!  Run along skippy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  Run along skippy.


You have a way of showing which questions you have no answer for.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 26, 2019)

yyyyyyyy


----------



## messy (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Silence


Bruddah, the dialogue is over.

You won when you bragged about paying off $250K on your house loan so that you could have $250K in additional home equity to borrow against to buy another house. 

(Instead of just using the 250 to buy the other house, thereby not having additional debt and interest payments.)

All-timer, that was.


----------



## espola (Apr 26, 2019)

messy said:


> Bruddah, the dialogue is over.
> 
> You won when you bragged about paying off $250K on your house loan so that you could have $250K in additional home equity to borrow against to buy another house.
> 
> ...


Silence from Izzy?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You have a way of showing which questions you have no answer for.


Like father, Like son.  Answers require readers.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

messy said:


> Bruddah, the dialogue is over.
> 
> You won when you bragged about paying off $250K on your house loan so that you could have $250K in additional home equity to borrow against to buy another house.
> 
> ...


Your scenario of 100% CLTV has no place in the real world.  “Too complicated” you cry!  Lol!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

espola said:


> Silence from Izzy?


Yes.  Reading from Espola?  Silently.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You have a way of showing which questions you have no answer for.


You and your father have a way of showing which financial concepts you can’t comprehend.


----------



## espola (Apr 26, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You and your father have a way of showing which financial concepts you can’t comprehend.


Liar.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

Laughter


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Like father, Like son.  Answers require readers.


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your scenario of 100% CLTV has no place in the real world.  “Too complicated” you cry!  Lol!!


Question: assume I have a $3m weekend home that I love. I put $1m down and borrowed the rest as a traditional mortgage. My monthlies are $7500 per month. The house, after almost 2 years, worth maybe 3.15m. I can’t rent it out because I use it too much.

Should I have not bought the house? Should I have bought it via some other available method?

Please advise, if you will...


----------



## nononono (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re an idiot. You pay off a house so you can then borrow the money you just paid in? Did you really say that?!!!



*The " Messy " Credit Whore is pontificating again......step back the shits spreadin.*


----------



## nononono (Apr 27, 2019)

espola said:


> Liar.


*THIEF !*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Like father, Like son.  Answers require readers.


No, you answer questions with either questions or deflections, it's what you do.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Apr 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> No, you answer questions with either questions or deflections, it's what you do.


If that's true, he surely learned it from your father figure espola...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Question: assume I have a $3m weekend home that I love. I put $1m down and borrowed the rest as a traditional mortgage. My monthlies are $7500 per month. The house, after almost 2 years, worth maybe 3.15m. I can’t rent it out because I use it too much.
> 
> Should I have not bought the house? Should I have bought it via some other available method?
> 
> Please advise, if you will...


I know I’m in for a good one when you start with “assume”.  Lol!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Question: assume I have a $3m weekend home that I love. I put $1m down and borrowed the rest as a traditional mortgage. My monthlies are $7500 per month. The house, after almost 2 years, worth maybe 3.15m. I can’t rent it out because I use it too much.
> 
> Should I have not bought the house? Should I have bought it via some other available method?
> 
> Please advise, if you will...


Just to be clear, I quote: “rent it out because I (you) use it too much”?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Question: assume I have a $3m weekend home that I love. I put $1m down and borrowed the rest as a traditional mortgage. My monthlies are $7500 per month. The house, after almost 2 years, worth maybe 3.15m. I can’t rent it out because I use it too much.
> 
> Should I have not bought the house? Should I have bought it via some other available method?
> 
> Please advise, if you will...


Should I also assume an interest rate?  Are you drinking?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Question: assume I have a $3m weekend home that I love. I put $1m down and borrowed the rest as a traditional mortgage. My monthlies are $7500 per month. The house, after almost 2 years, worth maybe 3.15m. I can’t rent it out because I use it too much.
> 
> Should I have not bought the house? Should I have bought it via some other available method?
> 
> Please advise, if you will...


First of all, no traditional mortgage bank will give you a loan for 2.11%.


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Should I also assume an interest rate?  Are you drinking?


Not drinking. Yes I use it on the weekends all the time. Interest rate really low (that's why total payment is only $7500 on 2 mil.), but wasn't conservative and only fixed for 7 years total.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> No, you answer questions with either questions or deflections, it's what you do.


That’s how I know the subject is often above you and your non-reading dad.  What a legacy.


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> First of all, no traditional mortgage bank will give you a loan for 2.11%.


I don't think it's only 2.11. Did you run it? I know I pay max. 8K (as I have told you, I have 2 mortgages; they total $15K per month) and this one is fixed for only 7 years.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Not drinking. Yes I use it on the weekends all the time. Interest rate really low (that's why total payment is only $7500 on 2 mil.), but wasn't conservative and only fixed for 7 years total.


So much for your scenario’d “traditional mortgage”.   Lol!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> I don't think it's only 2.11. Did you run it? I know I pay max. 8K (as I have told you, I have 2 mortgages; they total $15K per month) and this one is fixed for only 7 years.


Oh I didn’t know I was supposed to assume the above as well.  Lol!!!  Keep tap dancing poser.


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Oh I didn’t know I was supposed to assume the above as well.  Lol!!!  Keep tap dancing poser.


So as I thought, you understand that in this case, as in so many, the traditional amortized mortgage is the way to buy a house. Yet you criticize it so much. I get to have a house I love and will ultimately sell it at a profit. Do you think I should be renting it instead of having bought it? Houses in that neighborhood rent for about 12-15K per month.
(I will tell you something else you won't believe. I made a deal to buy this house before it was built. I approved designs and finishes and square footage but otherwise let the developer do his thing. I didn't have to pay him until he delivered me the keys two years later).


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> So as I thought, you understand that in this case, as in so many, the traditional amortized mortgage is the way to buy a house. Yet you criticize it so much. I get to have a house I love and will ultimately sell it at a profit. Do you think I should be renting it instead of having bought it? Houses in that neighborhood rent for about 12-15K per month.
> (I will tell you something else you won't believe. I made a deal to buy this house before it was built. I approved designs and finishes and square footage but otherwise let the developer do his thing. I didn't have to pay him until he delivered me the keys two years later).


What I realized is that your definition of traditional mortgage has no place in reality.  Of course I ran the numbers Bozo.  Again, you’re not getting a traditional loan at 2.11%.  Banks lend to each other at 2.42% as of yesterday.  That shit might have flown in 08 with the QE counterfeit river flowing for 6 straight years.  But not anymore.  But I will tell you that banks love rich guys that love stretching their loans out.  Time value of money is what really matters.


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What I realized is that your definition of traditional mortgage has no place in reality.  Of course I ran the numbers Bozo.  Again, you’re not getting a traditional loan at 2.11%.  Banks lend to each other at 2.42% as of yesterday.  That shit might have flown in 08 with the QE counterfeit river flowing for 6 straight years.  But not anymore.  But I will tell you that banks love rich guys that love stretching their loans out.  Time value of money is what really matters.


Happy to show you my mortgage statements.
 I agree with your last sentence. Using all that valuable money now for other purposes when it's worth more, while I pay so little to keep my house which appreciates and I love, totally works for me.
Sounds like it doesn't work for you.


----------



## nononono (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Question: assume I have a $3m weekend home that I love. I put $1m down and borrowed the rest as a traditional mortgage. My monthlies are $7500 per month. The house, after almost 2 years, worth maybe 3.15m. I can’t rent it out because I use it too much.
> 
> Should I have not bought the house? Should I have bought it via some other available method?
> 
> Please advise, if you will...



Here let's start with the basics :

Purchase price of said house is $ 3,000,000.00
You plopped down $ 1,000,000.00 ....
Financed the bal of $ 2,000,000.00.....

What rate are you at ?
What is your Net Income ?
What is your Gross Income ?
What additional expenses have you " saddled " yourself with ?
( Cars, Planes, Boats..Etc...)
What are your monthly basic living expenses ?
Are you self employed ?
( If so, do you purchase thru an LLC or by " Personal. )
or
Are you employed ?
Are you married ?
Are you claiming your " Spouses " income as additional ?
Do you have savings ?
Do you have kids ?

Hypothetically we will go with the " Low " rate to date of 3.5 %
Financing $ 2,000,000.00 at 3.5 % = $ 70,000.00 annually 
With the Principal diminishing each year the amounts change  
Now we will assume you do it for 15 years

You state your monthlies are *$ 7,500.00*
( Is that one House, 2 Houses, 3 Houses, Houses + expenses ? )
*You see " Messy " your numbers Just don't add up.....( See Below )*
...........................................................................................
What is your " Credit Profile "..?

We will assume it is 720 or above ....

At 15 years your monthly would be *$ 14,580.98*
Your interest would be $ 573,577.15 @ 15 years
Your total paid would be $ 2,624,577.15

@ 30 your monthly would be *$ 9,264.23*


*You need to explain your " Messy " Math " Messy ".............*
*I'm being Very Very Polite here " Messy "..........*


----------



## nononono (Apr 27, 2019)

messy said:


> Happy to show you my mortgage statements.
> I agree with your last sentence. Using all that valuable money now for other purposes when it's worth more, while I pay so little to keep my house which appreciates and I love, totally works for me.
> Sounds like it doesn't work for you.


*You don't need to show us ANY monthly statement.......*
*What you need to do is explain your " Messy " Math .......*

*I'll still be Very Very Polite................*


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

nononono said:


> Here let's start with the basics :
> 
> Purchase price of said house is $ 3,000,000.00
> You plopped down $ 1,000,000.00 ....
> ...





nononono said:


> Here let's start with the basics :
> 
> Purchase price of said house is $ 3,000,000.00
> You plopped down $ 1,000,000.00 ....
> ...


What does “the amounts change” mean? Does it mean you are not aware that the monthly mortgage payment amount remains the same?
At 3.5% for 30 years, the monthly mortgage payment is always $8900 or so. I lay much less than that, but I’m only fixed for 7 years. Are you being serious? And why are you asking so many irrelevant questions?


----------



## messy (Apr 27, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You don't need to show us ANY monthly statement.......*
> *What you need to do is explain your " Messy " Math .......*
> 
> *I'll still be Very Very Polite................*


You people are funny. You don’t know people like me exist. Why wouldn’t you want to see my statement?


----------



## nononono (Apr 28, 2019)

messy said:


> What does “the amounts change” mean ?* **
> 
> Does it mean you are not aware that the monthly mortgage payment amount remains the same?
> At 3.5% for 30 years, the monthly mortgage payment is always $8900 or so. I lay much less than that, but I’m only fixed for 7 years. Are you being serious? And why are you asking so many irrelevant questions?


* “ Messy “ a financial genius your not.....


----------



## nononono (Apr 28, 2019)

messy said:


> You people are funny. You don’t know people like me exist. Why wouldn’t you want to see my statement?


*Don’t post the IOU’s you tape to the backdoor of the warehouse you sleep behind.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 28, 2019)

messy said:


> What does “the amounts change” mean? Does it mean you are not aware that the monthly mortgage payment amount remains the same?
> At 3.5% for 30 years, the monthly mortgage payment is always $8900 or so. I lay much less than that, but I’m only fixed for 7 years. Are you being serious? And why are you asking so many irrelevant questions?


More tap dancing


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 28, 2019)

messy said:


> You people are funny. You don’t know people like me exist. Why wouldn’t you want to see my statement?


Go ahead and post your statement.  I told you from the beginning that when you said “assume” in your first scenario that we would end up with you spinning like a top.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 28, 2019)

messy said:


> You people are funny. You don’t know people like me exist. Why wouldn’t you want to see my statement?


They aren't aware of much, especially things not allowed within the bubble. History befuddleds them and the entire ethos of the American way and that of modern society must be explained to them constantly.


----------



## messy (Apr 28, 2019)

nononono said:


> Here let's start with the basics :
> 
> Purchase price of said house is $ 3,000,000.00
> You plopped down $ 1,000,000.00 ....
> ...





nononono said:


> Here let's start with the basics :
> 
> Purchase price of said house is $ 3,000,000.00
> You plopped down $ 1,000,000.00 ....
> ...


I just want to confirm something here, Nono. Are you really suggesting that on a 30-year, fixed mortgage, your monthly payment after 15 years would be different than your monthly payment at year 30? That is exactly what you state above.
You don't know that a 30-year fixed mortgage is 360 monthly payments of THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY EACH MONTH? Have you ever bought a house? What a dim bulb you are...
I see why you got a thumbs up from Iz. 
You boys need to get out more.


----------



## messy (Apr 28, 2019)

nononono said:


> Here let's start with the basics :
> 
> Purchase price of said house is $ 3,000,000.00
> You plopped down $ 1,000,000.00 ....
> ...


Wanna bet? I know I've offered that to you fools before, but no takers. 
I will PM you and Iz my mortgage statement and if it  says what I say it does, what will you give me? And if it doesn't, what can I give you?


----------



## messy (Apr 28, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Go ahead and post your statement.  I told you from the beginning that when you said “assume” in your first scenario that we would end up with you spinning like a top.


Iz, you never answered my simple question? 
Should I have bought the house or not? Was thee a better method with which to buy it? That's all I'm asking.
$3m, I elected to put down $1m and finance the other $2m with a traditional mortgage (albeit my super-low rate is only good for 7 years).
What else should I have done?


----------



## nononono (Apr 28, 2019)

QUOTE="messy, post: 261936, member: 3299"
I just want to confirm something here, Nono. Are you really suggesting that on a 30-year, fixed mortgage, your monthly payment after 15 years would be different than your monthly payment at year 30? That is exactly what you state above.
*Nope, you are having serious issues with reading comprehension.*

You don't know that a 30-year fixed mortgage is 360 monthly payments of THE SAME AMOUNT OF MONEY EACH MONTH? Have you ever bought a house?
*Multiple.*
*I can see you've never signed a loan doc ever....*
*You really should have stayed in school.....*




What a dim bulb you are...
I see why you got a thumbs up from Iz.
You boys need to get out more.

/QUOTE

*You really are an idiot.....*
*Where did I state " fixed "*
*Where did I state 30 is different than 15......*
*Where did I state any of the " Lunacy " you've typed....*

QUOTE="messy, post: 261938, member: 3299"
Wanna bet? I know I've offered that to you fools before, but no takers.
I will PM you and Iz my mortgage statement and if it  says what I say it does, what will you give me? And if it doesn't, what can I give you?
/QUOTE

*I will give you further harassment for lying as I have ....*
*I want nothing from you....*
*There is no equity in Cardboard Boxes or run down Motor homes you move daily*
*to avoid Code Enforcement.....*


----------



## nononono (Apr 28, 2019)

messy said:


> Wanna bet? I know I've offered that to you fools before, but no takers.
> I will PM you and Iz my mortgage statement and if it  says what I say it does, what will you give me? And if it doesn't, what can I give you?


*Make sure when you " PM " BI & I you include your Bank Statement Routing Numbers*
*and your Loan Doc's complete....*
*While ur at it......your Social Security Number, a copy of your California DL, a copy of your *
*Birth Certificate and any other pertinent financial data....*

*Urine Idiot.*


----------



## messy (Apr 29, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Make sure when you " PM " BI & I you include your Bank Statement Routing Numbers*
> *and your Loan Doc's complete....*
> *While ur at it......your Social Security Number, a copy of your California DL, a copy of your *
> *Birth Certificate and any other pertinent financial data....*
> ...


I guess you mean “Messy, I am afraid to bet, because I know you’re correct.” 
Thank you.


----------



## nononono (Apr 29, 2019)

messy said:


> I guess you mean “Messy, I am afraid to bet, because I know you’re correct.”
> Thank you.


*No facts....
No Data....
Just childish taunts.....
That’s what a “ Messy “ individual provides......

Urine Idiot.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 29, 2019)

messy said:


> Iz, you never answered my simple question?
> Should I have bought the house or not? Was thee a better method with which to buy it? That's all I'm asking.
> $3m, I elected to put down $1m and finance the other $2m with a traditional mortgage (albeit my super-low rate is only good for 7 years).
> What else should I have done?


Lol!  What year did you get the loan in your simulation.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 29, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> They aren't aware of much, especially things not allowed within the bubble. History befuddleds them and the entire ethos of the American way and that of modern society must be explained to them constantly.


Never has eloquence been so empty


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 29, 2019)

messy said:


> Wanna bet? I know I've offered that to you fools before, but no takers.
> I will PM you and Iz my mortgage statement and if it  says what I say it does, what will you give me? And if it doesn't, what can I give you?


Still waiting for your statement.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Apr 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Still waiting for your statement.


I think multi is still waiting at the coffee shop too.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I think multi is still waiting at the coffee shop too.


messy changed the coffee shop too.  He owns a coffee shop too.


----------



## messy (Apr 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> messy changed the coffee shop too.  He owns a coffee shop too.


nope I don’t own a coffee shop. But besides my 3 houses I do have an interest in a large house being built in Pasadena. I have to wait until it sells to see if I get my money back though and it’s been 2 years already...gulp. I’m expecting 10% per year yield though.
You’ll have my statement end of week or early next.


----------



## messy (Apr 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  What year did you get the loan in your simulation.


About a year and a half ago. What’s the funny part? That you can’t answer my question? Or you don’t believe me? You have a lot of trouble believing me. Why?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> About a year and a half ago. What’s the funny part? That you can’t answer my question? Or you don’t believe me? You have a lot of trouble believing me. Why?


People see themselves in others. Crooks see crooks, ego maniacs see ego maniacs, liars see liars.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> About a year and a half ago. What’s the funny part? That you can’t answer my question? Or you don’t believe me? You have a lot of trouble believing me. Why?


I don’t answer questions without key information.  One of the ways I would have financed your simulations is through a High Dividend Paying Whole Life Policy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> People see themselves in others. Crooks see crooks, ego maniacs see ego maniacs, liars see liars.


The ramblings of a father through his son


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> About a year and a half ago. What’s the funny part? That you can’t answer my question? Or you don’t b You have a lot of trouble believing me. Why?


Because you’re sloppy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> About a year and a half ago. What’s the funny part? That you can’t answer my question? Or you don’t b You have a lot of trouble believing me. Why?


Because you’re sloppy.


----------



## messy (Apr 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Because you’re sloppy.


It’s funny because I’m sloppy? And you still can’t piece enough of what I’m saying, loan amount, equity value, price of house, to advise what I did wrong, if anything?
I’ve tried to explain to you to see the forest, not just the trees. So accept the essentials of hat I’ve told you and please instruct how I could have done a better deal.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> It’s funny because I’m sloppy? And you still can’t piece enough of what I’m saying, loan amount, equity value, price of house, to advise what I did wrong, if anything?
> I’ve tried to explain to you to see the forest, not just the trees. So accept the essentials of hat I’ve told you and please instruct how I could have done a better deal.


Tell me more about the traditional 7 year loan.  And tell us how you got a traditional loan for 2.11% when traditional banks are lending to each other for more than that.  Oh I pieced it together alright.  You didn’t do anything wrong.  You didn’t do anything you said you did from the start.  The better deal is cheaper money that also cash flows.


----------



## nononono (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> nope I don’t own a coffee shop. But besides my 3 houses I do have an interest in a large house being built in Pasadena. I have to wait until it sells to see if I get my money back though and it’s been 2 years already...gulp. I’m expecting 10% per year yield though.
> You’ll have my statement end of week or early next.


*You represent the worst of the liberal liars who frequent this forum........*


----------



## nononono (Apr 30, 2019)

messy said:


> It’s funny because I’m sloppy? And you still can’t piece enough of what I’m saying, loan amount, equity value, price of house, to advise what I did wrong, if anything?
> I’ve tried to explain to you to see the forest, not just the trees. So accept the essentials of hat I’ve told you and please instruct how I could have done a better deal.


*If what you post is honest/truthful then supporting the HONEST TRUTH should
have been easy.......but you struggle each and every time with more lies that spew
from your pie hole.....you’re a failing forum flea infested fool.".*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Tell me more about the traditional 7 year loan.  And tell us how you got a traditional loan for 2.11% when traditional banks are lending to each other for more than that.  Oh I pieced it together alright.  You didn’t do anything wrong.  You didn’t do anything you said you did from the start.  The better deal is cheaper money that also cash flows.


You are a great example of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".


----------



## Booter (May 1, 2019)

*Trump's washing machine tariffs are costing Americans almost $100 more per appliance*
American manufacturers have also jacked up the cost of their appliances, in order to match the higher price of their competitors.

The researchers found that the price of clothes dryers rose in tandem with washing machine price increases, even though dryers weren’t impacted by the tariffs. The study also found that domestically manufacturers raised prices on their washing machines, as well. All the big brands studied raised their prices by a range of 5 percent to as much as 17 percent.

“Firms are operating in competitive markets and they’re going to try to charge what they can,” Dollar said. When that competition is stifled, companies don’t have to worry as much about being priced out of a market if their products are more expensive. “Free trade is a great anti-monopoly policy,” he said.

Despite the president’s contention that the import tariffs on washing machines would create more American jobs, the new study found that the number of jobs created was very small, only around 1,800, but at a cost of $815,000 per job. And although Trump has said that the revenues are collected by the U.S. government from import tariffs, the researchers also found that this is not the case. The tariffs on imported washing machines and machine parts brought in a mere $82 million over the course of a year.

Tariffs can give a boost to the profits of domestic producers, but Dollar said ordinary workers rarely see those gains. “In most companies, it’s primarily benefiting the shareholders. The actual employment generation is usually very small. Firms expect these to be temporary, so they raise prices but they don’t employ more people,” he said. “It’s not an efficient way to create employment.”

https://www.nbcnews.com/business/consumer/trump-s-washing-machine-tariffs-are-costing-americans-almost-100-n999461

This is why Bruddah Iz loves Trump, but it's clear that Izzy doesn't understand how tariffs work and how they interfere with Markets.


----------



## nononono (May 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump's washing machine tariffs are costing Americans almost $100 more per appliance*
> American manufacturers have also jacked up the cost of their appliances, in order to match the higher price of their competitors.
> 
> Despite the president’s contention that the import tariffs on washing machines would create more American jobs, the new study found that the number of jobs created was very small, only around 1,800, but at a cost of $815,000 per job. And although Trump has said that the revenues are collected by the U.S. government from import tariffs, the researchers also found that this is not the case. The tariffs on imported washing machines and machine parts brought in a mere $82 million over the course of a year.
> ...



*Obviously you're in the market for a washing machine, complaining on a soccer forum*
*won't find you a deal....*

*Just shop around like a big boy.*


----------



## Booter (May 1, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Obviously you're in the market for a washing machine, complaining on a soccer forum*
> *won't find you a deal....*
> 
> *Just shop around like a big boy.*


Whether or not I am in the market for a washing machine is irrelevant!  These tariffs have got to go! 

And for your information I am not in the market for a washing machine - a friend of mine is.  So please let me know if you hear of any sales.


----------



## messy (May 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are a great example of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".





Bruddah IZ said:


> Tell me more about the traditional 7 year loan.  And tell us how you got a traditional loan for 2.11% when traditional banks are lending to each other for more than that.  Oh I pieced it together alright.  You didn’t do anything wrong.  You didn’t do anything you said you did from the start.  The better deal is cheaper money that also cash flows.


30-yr mortgage, first 7 fixed is quite normal. Do you not know anything?
I will send you my statement. It's a really nice house. I don't cash flow it.


----------



## messy (May 1, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You represent the worst of the liberal liars who frequent this forum........*


You like to think I'm lying, don't you?
I scare you, obviously.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump's washing machine tariffs are costing Americans almost $100 more per appliance*
> American manufacturers have also jacked up the cost of their appliances, in order to match the higher price of their competitors.
> 
> The researchers found that the price of clothes dryers rose in tandem with washing machine price increases, even though dryers weren’t impacted by the tariffs. The study also found that domestically manufacturers raised prices on their washing machines, as well. All the big brands studied raised their prices by a range of 5 percent to as much as 17 percent.
> ...


Fake News.


----------



## Booter (May 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Fake News.


I know you are too fucking stupid to understand any of this but I'll post it anyway.

A recent study by economists from the New York Federal Reserve Bank and Columbia and Princeton Universities, entitled “The Impact of the 2018 Trade War on U.S. Prices and Welfare,” found that *the principal victims of Trump’s tariff war were American consumers.*

*“[We] find that the full incidence of the tariff falls on domestic consumers, with a reduction in U.S. real income of $1.4 billion per month by the end of 2018,” it said.

This is an unintended, but certainly not an unanticipated, effect. Trade sanctions always victimize consumers.
*
And farmers.

When other countries react to what they consider unfair trade practices by the United States, they almost always hit back where it hurts – in farm country. Since China imposed a retaliatory tariff of 25% on American soybeans, farmers who had been exporting most of their beans to China are now storing them in grain bins, where they’re in danger of spoiling. China has made up for the loss by buying more soybeans from Brazil.


----------



## nononono (May 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> Whether or not I am in the market for a washing machine is irrelevant!  These tariffs have got to go!
> 
> And for your information I am not in the market for a washing machine - a friend of mine is.  So please let me know if you hear of any sales.



*Awwww.....someone else is washing your poopy diapers.*
*How nice of them.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 1, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are a great example of "a little knowledge is a dangerous thing".


I can some bubble wrap on.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump's washing machine tariffs are costing Americans almost $100 more per appliance*
> American manufacturers have also jacked up the cost of their appliances, in order to match the higher price of their competitors.
> 
> The researchers found that the price of clothes dryers rose in tandem with washing machine price increases, even though dryers weren’t impacted by the tariffs. The study also found that domestically manufacturers raised prices on their washing machines, as well. All the big brands studied raised their prices by a range of 5 percent to as much as 17 percent.
> ...


Did someone say QE?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 1, 2019)

messy said:


> 30-yr mortgage, first 7 fixed is quite normal. Do you not know anything?
> I will send you my statement. It's a really nice house. I don't cash flow it.


Yes I know.  It’s your collateralized debt Bozo.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 1, 2019)

Booter said:


> I know you are too fucking stupid to understand any of this but I'll post it anyway.
> 
> A recent study by economists from the New York Federal Reserve Bank and Columbia and Princeton Universities, entitled “The Impact of the 2018 Trade War on U.S. Prices and Welfare,” found that *the principal victims of Trump’s tariff war were American consumers.*
> 
> ...


Chump change compared to  6 straight years of QE.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Chump change compared to  6 straight years of QE.


. . . and? Where is the damage?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> I know you are too fucking stupid to understand any of this but I'll post it anyway.
> 
> A recent study by economists from the New York Federal Reserve Bank and Columbia and Princeton Universities, entitled “The Impact of the 2018 Trade War on U.S. Prices and Welfare,” found that *the principal victims of Trump’s tariff war were American consumers.*
> 
> ...


Really Fake News.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes I know.  It’s your collateralized debt Bozo.


Sure is. 
I could be really stupid like you and, what was it you said again? Pay more equity into the house so I’d have more equity to borrow against? 
You did say that.
All-timer!


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Chump change compared to  6 straight years of QE.


Tell me more about that fake money? Counterfeit, was it? And what happened when people spent it?
You and Ricky form a task force yet to find out where it went?


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Did someone say QE?


What did QE do? Inflation is incredibly low.
Wages aren’t increasing (except at my business where the combination of QE and my collateralized debt allow me to give healthy raises and bonuses to my team every year).


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> What did QE do? Inflation is incredibly low.
> Wages aren’t increasing (except at my business where the combination of QE and my collateralized debt allow me to give healthy raises and bonuses to my team every year).


Sloppy


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Sure is.
> I could be really stupid like you and, what was it you said again? Pay more equity into the house so I’d have more equity to borrow against?
> You did say that.
> All-timer!


Donʻt forget the amortized debt reduction.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> What did QE do? Inflation is incredibly low.
> Wages aren’t increasing (except at my business where the combination of QE and my collateralized debt allow me to give healthy raises and bonuses to my team every year).


Inflation(Increase) of money supply precedes price increases.  Always.  QE increased national debt.  QE increased money supply without equally increasing resources in the economy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Inflation(Increase) of money supply precedes price increases.  Always.  QE increased national debt.  QE increased money supply without equally increasing resources in the economy.


So if saving our country from years of depression by increasing the debt is the only side effect to QE, I'll take it. Anything else?
I know you would rather the ultra wealthy profit from the US going deeper in debt like with t's tax bill, but I'd rather all America see the results like with what Bush and Obama did.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Inflation(Increase) of money supply precedes price increases.  Always.  QE increased national debt.  QE increased money supply without equally increasing resources in the economy.


So when do prices increase? They haven’t... there’s no inflation.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Oh, and with your usual, "you're too stupid to know" rebuttal coming, could you please include some substance based on facts in that upcoming post?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> So when do prices increase? They haven’t... there’s no inflation.


He cut & pasted that response with no thought about it.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Donʻt forget the amortized debt reduction.


What reduction? Your only accurate statement ever (although you’re incapable of explaining it properly because of your convoluted thinking) is that the debt is reducing tragically slightly during those early years of front-loaded interest.

Fortunately, I’m gaining 100% of the appreciation in value on the property anyways while my money is busy working elsewhere.

That way, I continue to build equity in my house without paying in more principal and I make more money by utilizing my available capital elsewhere.

I don’t expect you to understand.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh, and with your usual, "you're too stupid to know" rebuttal coming, could you please include some substance based on facts in that upcoming post?


You are to Stoopid to understand his response too.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> So when do prices increase? They haven’t... there’s no inflation.


That's bullshit, have you been to the market lately?
$5.99 for a pound of butter.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Tell me more about that fake money? Counterfeit, was it? And what happened when people spent it?
> You and Ricky form a task force yet to find out where it went?


Ricky, Iz, c’mon now. You’re scaring me with that talk about counterfeit money. I mean, what happens? I spent some for sure. Am I in trouble? Ricky, you mentioned it vanishes “into thin air?” I’ve been checking my bank balances and it’s still there.
Please guys, you seem to really know this stuff. Help me out here.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> That's bullshit, have you been to the market lately?
> $5.99 for a pound of butter.


Are you broke too?


----------



## espola (May 2, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> That's bullshit, have you been to the market lately?
> $5.99 for a pound of butter.


Where are you shopping?

https://www.instacart.com/shopping/products/2297233-first-street-unsalted-butter-grade-aa-1-lb?rid=379&utm_source=instacart_google&utm_medium=sem_shopping&utm_campaign=ad_demand_prospecting_shopping&device_id=CjwKCAjwqqrmBRAAEiwAdpDXtOGr-MYXUUeI_qF1B1rJyCAQvUHmjbxyf4Mka115AHWWgevyRsFjHxoC-b8QAvD_BwE&utm_source=instacart_google&utm_medium=paid_search_nonbrand&utm_campaign=ad_demand_shopping_food_ca_sandiego_newengen?ko_click_id=ko_6f3c5ccb12f044c83&utm_medium=paid_search&utm_source=instacart_google&utm_campaign=ad_demand_prospecting&utm_term=&gclid=CjwKCAjwqqrmBRAAEiwAdpDXtOGr-MYXUUeI_qF1B1rJyCAQvUHmjbxyf4Mka115AHWWgevyRsFjHxoC-b8QAvD_BwE


----------



## espola (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Tell me more about that fake money? Counterfeit, was it? And what happened when people spent it?
> You and Ricky form a task force yet to find out where it went?


I haven't heard any of the sellers of assets purchased with QE money complaining about how they couldn't spend that money.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

espola said:


> Where are you shopping?
> 
> https://www.instacart.com/shopping/products/2297233-first-street-unsalted-butter-grade-aa-1-lb?rid=379&utm_source=instacart_google&utm_medium=sem_shopping&utm_campaign=ad_demand_prospecting_shopping&device_id=CjwKCAjwqqrmBRAAEiwAdpDXtOGr-MYXUUeI_qF1B1rJyCAQvUHmjbxyf4Mka115AHWWgevyRsFjHxoC-b8QAvD_BwE&utm_source=instacart_google&utm_medium=paid_search_nonbrand&utm_campaign=ad_demand_shopping_food_ca_sandiego_newengen?ko_click_id=ko_6f3c5ccb12f044c83&utm_medium=paid_search&utm_source=instacart_google&utm_campaign=ad_demand_prospecting&utm_term=&gclid=CjwKCAjwqqrmBRAAEiwAdpDXtOGr-MYXUUeI_qF1B1rJyCAQvUHmjbxyf4Mka115AHWWgevyRsFjHxoC-b8QAvD_BwE


Yeah Joe. Stop buying that elitist grass-fed, organic, locally sourced butter and get real.
Inflation is at like 2%.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So if saving our country from years of depression by increasing the debt is the only side effect to QE, I'll take it. Anything else?
> I know you would rather the ultra wealthy profit from the US going deeper in debt like with t's tax bill, but I'd rather all America see the results like with what Bush and Obama did.


QE has made the rich richer and sent the country in to nearly twice as much debt under Obama and Bush.  They didnʻt save the country, they just made it more fragile and more susceptible to financial crisis.  You people arenʻt smart enough to see whatʻs been happening since before the great depression.  Always an increase in money supply before each financial crisis the U.S. has ever been through.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> So when do prices increase? They haven’t... there’s no inflation.


What about your beloved equity via your collateralized debt?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Sure


Hüsker Dü said:


> Oh, and with your usual, "you're too stupid to know" rebuttal coming, could you please include some substance based on facts in that upcoming post?


Itʻs called the Federal Reserves balance sheets.  Youʻre not smart enough to find much less read one.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QE has made the rich richer and sent the country in to nearly twice as much debt under Obama and Bush.  They didnʻt save the country, they just made it more fragile and more susceptible to financial crisis.  You people arenʻt smart enough to see whatʻs been happening since before the great depression.  Always an increase in money supply before each financial crisis the U.S. has ever been through.


So you are banking on a recession or depression to validate your thesis to then lay blame on Bush and Obama (while ignoring teflon donny's hand in it)?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sure
> 
> Itʻs called the Federal Reserves balance sheets.  Youʻre not smart enough to find much less read one.


Once again you cast yourself as the expert yet lack any justification thereof.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What about your beloved equity via your collateralized debt?


So Cal real estate goes by different rules, always. It’s nuts.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you are banking on a recession or depression to validate your thesis to then lay blame on Bush and Obama (while ignoring teflon donny's hand in it)?


He’s waiting for the third year of Trump’s term, to blame Obama for it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> What reduction? Your only accurate statement ever (although you’re incapable of explaining it properly because of your convoluted thinking) is that the debt is reducing tragically slightly during those early years of front-loaded interest.
> .


Proper explanations require proper understanding.  If you canʻt tell me what CLTV is, and sloppily preface your scenarios with words like “assume” and “traditional”, I know youʻre a poser.  Like Husker and Espola you three amigos waffle around in a sea of confusion.  Fries U! What a deal


----------



## espola (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Proper explanations require proper understanding.  If you canʻt tell me what CLTV is, and sloppily preface your scenarios with words like “assume” and “traditional”, I know youʻre a poser.  Like Husker and Espola you three amigos waffle around in a sea of confusion.  Fries U! What a deal


You're doing great.  No one is laughing at you.  Please continue.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> So Cal real estate goes by different rules, always. It’s nuts.


Iʻm all eyes, please tell me about the different rules regarding cali RE and “traditional” loans .  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> He’s waiting for the third year of Trump’s term, to blame Obama for it.


Let me know when they turn on the 6 year QE spigot.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So you are banking on a recession or depression to validate your thesis to then lay blame on Bush and Obama (while ignoring teflon donny's hand in it)?


Let me know when they turn on the QE spigot for Donny T.  Thesis?  Not smart enough to follow the History of financial crisis?  Too bad your dad didnʻt share the book he referred to by Charles Calomiris titled Fragile by Design.  You might not look so stupid right now.


----------



## espola (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Let me know when they turn on the QE spigot for Donny T.  Thesis?  Not smart enough to follow the History of financial crisis?  Too bad your dad didnʻt share the book he referred to by Charles Calomiris titled Fragile by Design.  You might not look so stupid right now.


You keep stumbling into areas where people who are actually competent can see you are either ignorant or lying.  Which is it in this case?


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Let me know when they turn on the QE spigot for Donny T.  Thesis?  Not smart enough to follow the History of financial crisis?  Too bad your dad didnʻt share the book he referred to by Charles Calomiris titled Fragile by Design.  You might not look so stupid right now.


Man you read all that fancy stuff and you still won’t tell me what’s going to happen to the counterfeit money I spent? No fair!

Are those books telling you to take money and pay down your mortgage so you can take it back as debt? That one was your best ever.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

espola said:


> You keep stumbling into areas where people who are actually competent can see you are either ignorant or lying.  Which is it in this case?


See my post above for his investment strategy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

espola said:


> You keep stumbling into areas where people who are actually competent can see you are either ignorant or lying.  Which is it in this case?


A lot of both. I love how he continues to ask questions attempting to spin once again away from his own lack of being able to competently answer one without claiming the one asking couldn't understand the answer. Once again those that know what they are talking about can make it simple, diz just keeps coming off looking simple, and needy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Man you read all that fancy stuff and you still won’t tell me what’s going to happen to the counterfeit money I spent? No fair!
> 
> Are those books telling you to take money and pay down your mortgage so you can take it back as debt? That one was your best ever.


No, the amortization schedule tells me that simple interest is cheaper than amortized interest regardless of the HELOC interest rate.  So I eliminate the more expensive amortized debt and take on cheaper simple interest debt that increases the principal portion of each payment if I choose to.  Additionally, Iʻm only on the hook for interest in any given month.  My HELOC is also a 2 way account where I can take money out of it if I donʻt use all the equity on one investment.  Your amortized loan has no such feature.  I get to build equity that cash flows to regenerate the equity before I sell and certainly before the 7 year or 30 year amortized loans that youʻve institutionalized yourself with.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Man you read all that fancy stuff and you still won’t tell me what’s going to happen to the counterfeit money I spent? No fair!
> 
> Are those books telling you to take money and pay down your mortgage so you can take it back as debt? That one was your best ever.


Oh and it’s not fancy stuff if you know what youʻre talking about. Lol! Fries U is frying you right now.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

espola said:


> You keep stumbling into areas where people who are actually competent can see you are either ignorant or lying.  Which is it in this case?


No such proof here Skippy.  Need a band-aid?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> See my post above for his investment strategy.


Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

HTF do you people shop for the best credit card but not the best home loan?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> A lot of both. I love how he continues to ask questions attempting to spin once again away from his own lack of being able to competently answer one without claiming the one asking couldn't understand the answer. Once again those that know what they are talking about can make it simple, diz just keeps coming off looking simple, and needy.


Like father, Like son.  Lotsa words, no cattle.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Like father, Like son.  Lotsa words, no cattle.


Again, the good ones make it look easy. Why is it so difficult for you?


----------



## nononono (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Sure is.
> I could be really stupid like you and, what was it you said again? Pay more equity into the house so I’d have more equity to borrow against?
> You did say that.
> All-timer!


*You enjoying your over encumbered life style " Messy "......*

*If you save up enough " Cans " and " Plastic Bottles " you might be able to purchase *
*another card board box from Lowes.....*

*If you get five you can pretend you cornered the low rent district in Monopoly ....*

*




*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Again, the good ones make it look easy. Why is it so difficult for you?


Dumbing things down for the institutionalized has always been difficult work.


----------



## Booter (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Let me know when they turn on the 6 year QE spigot.


OK - Izzy here you go. 

*Trump calls on Fed to cut rates by 1% and urges more quantitative easing*
*

Donald J. Trump
✔@realDonaldTrump
China is adding great stimulus to its economy while at the same time keeping interest rates low. Our Federal Reserve has incessantly lifted interest rates, even though inflation is very low, and instituted a very big dose of quantitative tightening. We have the potential to go...
53.6K
10:56 AM - Apr 30, 2019
Twitter Ads info and privacy
18.1K people are talking about this


Donald J. Trump

✔@realDonaldTrump
....up like a rocket if we did some lowering of rates, like one point, and some quantitative easing. Yes, we are doing very well at 3.2% GDP, but with our wonderfully low inflation, we could be setting major records &, at the same time, make our National Debt start to look small!
60K
11:05 AM - Apr 30, 2019*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> OK - Izzy here you go.
> 
> *Trump calls on Fed to cut rates by 1% and urges more quantitative easing
> 
> ...


Dumb ass!  Not you bootsie!


----------



## Booter (May 2, 2019)

My position is QE worked - now let us not ever ever use it again.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Booter said:


> My position is QE worked - now let us not ever ever use it again.


Did it work the last 16 times?  Did it work pre- and post depression?  Why is Dodd-Frank written to allow the fed to steal savers and bond investors money by converting those assets to equities(stock) in a defunct TBTF bank?!!! Devil is always in the details.  But you people detest details then cry about whomever is in office when the economy suffers another bust.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Dumbing things down for the institutionalized has always been difficult work.


You need word salad to hide your deficiency, plain and simple.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You need word salad to hide your deficiency, plain and simple.


lol!  Howʻs that ignore button?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> lol!  Howʻs that ignore button?


The concept confuses you I see.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The concept confuses you I see.


Not really.  I was not surprised by your cowardice.  HRC stood up her post election supporters as well.  How immature are you people?


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You enjoying your over encumbered life style " Messy "......*
> 
> *If you save up enough " Cans " and " Plastic Bottles " you might be able to purchase *
> *another card board box from Lowes.....*
> ...


Far from overencumbered but just got my mortgage statement and I was off. My rate is 3.05% and I pay $8900/month on the weekend place.
I wonder how Iz would have purchased that house.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Far from overencumbered but just got my mortgage statement and I was off. My rate is 3.05% and I pay $8900/month on the weekend place.
> I wonder how Iz would have purchased that house.


With a simple interest loan as opposed to an amortized loan.


----------



## messy (May 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> With a simple interest loan as opposed to an amortized loan.


You mean borrow $2m, ie 66.6% of the purchase price, at 3.05% or thereabouts and just not have it amortized?
I will pay you $10K to bring me that deal. 
So is your answer more hallucination than a realistic answer?


----------



## nononono (May 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You need word salad to hide your deficiency, plain and simple.


*My goodness are you lacking in depth*.


----------



## nononono (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> You mean borrow $2m, ie 66.6% of the purchase price, at 3.05% or thereabouts and just not have it amortized?
> I will pay you $10K to bring me that deal.
> So is your answer more hallucination than a realistic answer?


*Put $ 10,000.00 ( all in tens ) in a plain brown bag and drop it behind
the wall where Obama Blvd and Rev King St intersect......
Then head across town and buy yourself an ice cream...*.


----------



## nononono (May 2, 2019)

I’ll let you know in the coming months what I spent it on......Capish.


----------



## nononono (May 2, 2019)

messy said:


> Far from overencumbered but just got my mortgage statement and I was off. My rate is 3.05% and I pay $8900/month on the weekend place.
> I wonder how Iz would have purchased that house.


*Your full of donkey dung......and to stupid to realize it.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 3, 2019)

WaPo: Trump tax cut capped SALT deductions, and you won’t believe what happened next

ED MORRISSEY  Posted at 8:41 pm on May 02, 2019

Remember when Republicans capped the deductions for state and local taxes (SALT) as part of their overall tax reform package in December 2017? Critics predicted the Apocalypse, and advocates waited excitedly for tax revolts in blue states. Governors in high-tax states accused Donald Trump and the GOP of economic warfare, especially New York’s Andrew Cuomo, and many Republicans didn’t … actually mind that description at all.








Now that the first post-SALT tax season has finally concluded, the Washington Post can now confidently state the scope of the devastation. It’s as big a letdown as the Mueller report:

New York’s governor called it an “economic arrow” aimed at his state. A New Jersey congressman warned the law would cause a population exodus out of the Northeast and possibly a second recession. A Manhattan congresswoman warned it would force dramatic cuts in local budgets for police officers and firefighters.

These were some of the dire warnings Democratic lawmakers issued about the 2017 Republican tax law signed by President Trump, which liberals said would hurt primarily Democratic-voting states by limiting what taxpayers could deduct in state and local taxes (SALT) from their federal tax returns.

But more than a year after Trump’s tax cut was implemented, the harm inflicted by the tax law on Democratic states appears — at least thus far — less significant than Democrats had warned, according to interviews with a half-dozen economists from across the political spectrum.

What about the massive outward migration from high-tax states? That’s not happening either, which might actually be a bit of a relief for the other states:





Still, at least so far, rich people have not en masse fled high tax blue states due to the tax law’s new restrictions, with nonpartisan analysts at Moody’s earlier this month finding “migration from high-tax states is lower than a decade ago,” noting there’s little evidence the tax law is forcing residents to leave states such as New York and California.

That’s not to say that there have been _no_consequences. Relieved of their responsibility to subsidize state and local taxes elsewhere, the Post acknowledges that taxpayers in red states can now keep a little more of their own money, even if “the difference is not huge.” Upper-end income earners in blue states paid out a little more absent those subsidies, and blue-state budgets took a bit of a revenue hit, too. However, that wouldn’t be from the SALT cap, which had no direct impact on state and local revenues, and might not even be indirectly related to the SALT cap at all.





However, in the longer term, it might. Tax hikes in these states might get a little dicier with voters who suddenly realized how they had been passing off those costs to other states. To some extent these states already know that, which is why New York budget director Robert Mujica is already complaining about the impact on the budget for next year:






“The cap on SALT deductibility will increase taxes by more than $600 billion, overwhelmingly impacting New York and similarly situated states that’s made only more egregious by the fact that New York is already the number one ‘donor state’ in the nation — contributing $36 billion more to the federal government than we get back every year. The SALT cap makes this imbalance worse, raising taxes on New Yorkers by $15 billion annually — all so that large corporations and other states can reap the rewards.”

Other states can reap the _rewards_? Of what — their own money? The cap limits the amount New York and other states can pass on their taxes to people in other states who never voted on the state and local taxes they subsidized. It created a form of taxation without representation that should offend anyone who understands the history of the US and the nature of the republic. The SALT deduction should have been repealed altogether, not just capped.







Even in its limited fashion, though, the SALT cap is returning accountability to where it belongs — to the elected officials of the states with high tax rates. If New York is worried about an “imbalance” on where their federal tax dollars go, might we suggest telling New Yorkers in federal offices to curtail the reach of the federal government and return more control to the states?


----------



## nononono (May 3, 2019)

The above described dilemma that has been brought on by the very greed of
these two states ( New York & California ) politicians is a sleeping giant that
is looming in the dark. California for example has a massive, and I mean 
massive problem with their pension programs.....
Then there is the infrastructure in just these two states that is in need of 
major repairs, and it only gets worse by the day.
Jerry Brown played a shell game with California’s budget to stave off the inevitable
explosion of the very under funded pension plans.....
Gov Gavin Gruesome is going to have to institute some drastic measures that
state pensioners will not appreciate at all, measures that should have been done 
years ago at the least......


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 3, 2019)

nononono said:


> The above described dilemma that has been brought on by the very greed of
> these two states ( New York & California ) politicians is a sleeping giant that
> is looming in the dark. California for example has a massive, and I mean
> massive problem with their pension programs.....
> ...


Both are TBTF States.  Bad news for the nation.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> lol!  Howʻs that ignore button?


I think she sits on it.
Enjoy da ride.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 3, 2019)

nononono said:


> The above described dilemma that has been brought on by the very greed of
> these two states ( New York & California ) politicians is a sleeping giant that
> is looming in the dark. California for example has a massive, and I mean
> massive problem with their pension programs.....
> ...


But, but Ca is the 6th largest economy in the world.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 3, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> But, but Ca is the 6th largest economy in the world.


Assets = Liabilities + Owners equity


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 3, 2019)

messy said:


> You mean borrow $2m, ie 66.6% of the purchase price, at 3.05% or thereabouts and just not have it amortized?
> I will pay you $10K to bring me that deal.
> So is your answer more hallucination than a realistic answer?


How did you come up with my fee?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 4, 2019)

California population growth tanks; LA Times tries to explain without mentioning high taxes
MAY 3, 2019
Laughable.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/05/california_population_growth_tanks_la_times_tries_to_explain_without_mentioning_high_taxes_.html


----------



## nononono (May 4, 2019)

*Venezuela is a “ Model “ for Socialism at the present....that “ Model “ is 
held together by nothing more than fear and thugs. And the thugs are
losing ground to reality.....that reality is failure. Failure brought on by
lies, corruption, thuggery, theft......all the nice things in Socialism.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 9, 2019)

'Sanctuary City' Oakland Near-Broke...
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/09/sanctuary-city-oakland-near-broke-will-use-gas-tax-money-to-keep-lights-on/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 9, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> 'Sanctuary City' Oakland Near-Broke...
> https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/05/09/sanctuary-city-oakland-near-broke-will-use-gas-tax-money-to-keep-lights-on/


They didn’t get the solar memo?  WTH!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 10, 2019)

*Bank Employee Charged with Fraud; Accused of Laundering Money for Fentanyl Traffickers*
*Assistant U. S. Attorney Blanca Quintero (619) 546-7118 *

*NEWS RELEASE SUMMARY – May 9, 2019*

SAN DIEGO – Leopoldo Aguilera, a former Wells Fargo personal banker, appeared in federal court today in connection with charges that he used his position to launder millions of dollars for Mexico-based drug traffickers.

Aguilera was arrested by FBI agents on May 2, 2019, on charges of bank fraud for his participation in an international money laundering organization based in Tijuana, Mexico, and which operated primarily in San Diego.

At today’s hearing, U.S. Magistrate Judge Jill L. Burkhardt allowed the defendant to be released on a $40,000 bond secured by two financially responsible adults. The judge also ordered that the defendant be subject to home detention and GPS monitoring.

According to the complaint, Aguilera abused his position of trust as a personal banker with Wells Fargo Bank and aided the money laundering organization by wire transferring millions of dollars to Mexico.  The FBI’s investigation linked these funds to the sale of narcotics, specifically the sale of multi-kilogram amounts of fentanyl in the Midwest. 

According to the complaint, with the knowledge of the money laundering organization’s structure, scheme, and objectives, Aguilera performed a litany of financial transactions for the criminal organization. For instance, he opened 26 bank accounts at Wells Fargo Bank and executed 229 international wire transfers totaling $7.4 million. 

Of the 26 bank accounts that Aguilera opened for the organization, 11 of them were created by Aguilera with fictitious identities. Specifically, Aguilera used his position as a personal banker with Wells Fargo Bank to knowingly enter false names, passport numbers, and dates of birth on the 11 fictitious bank accounts.  These fictitious bank accounts alone were used by the criminal organization to wire transfer a total of $3.1 million to Mexico, the vast majority of those wire transfers conducted by Aguilera himself. 

As part of the investigation, the FBI identified and seized 17 bank accounts that belonged to the organization and which contained at least $160,000 at the time of the seizure of the funds.

The investigation found that Aguilera had received approximately $4,000 in cash payments from the criminal organization in exchange for his participation in the scheme. 

The case was investigated by the FBI San Diego Cross Border Violence Task Force and the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of California. The investigation was assisted by the participation of Wells Fargo Bank’s internal investigators in Arizona and California. This case is being prosecuted by Assistant U.S. Attorney Blanca Quintero.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 10, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Bank Employee Charged with Fraud; Accused of Laundering Money for Fentanyl Traffickers*
> *Assistant U. S. Attorney Blanca Quintero (619) 546-7118 *
> 
> *NEWS RELEASE SUMMARY – May 9, 2019*
> ...


40k?
I think he might be considered a flight risk.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 10, 2019)

Funny watching the liberal MSM discuss the alleged “crippling” effects of tariffs with liberal politicians who love taxes but know that tariffs will weaken their battle cry, “vote for us, we’ll raise your taxes” if Trumps already raised taxes.  Lol!  Fries U!  What a freakin’ deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 10, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> 40k?
> I think he might be considered a flight risk.


The cartel will bail him out and kill him to take their 40 million worth of secrets to the grave.  Any other bank employees wanna moonlight for the cartels?  Ozark with Jason Bateman was awesome.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 12, 2019)

Want to shock a college student? Tell him how much tuition cost in the '60s
MAY 12, 2019
It was a lot cheaper before the government took over student loans.
https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/05/want_to_shock_a_college_student_tell_him_how_much_college_cost_in_the_60s.html


----------



## messy (May 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Funny watching the liberal MSM discuss the alleged “crippling” effects of tariffs with liberal politicians who love taxes but know that tariffs will weaken their battle cry, “vote for us, we’ll raise your taxes” if Trumps already raised taxes.  Lol!  Fries U!  What a freakin’ deal!


You're so good about economics.
Last I checked, (a) you said you would take $250K of available cash and sink it into a house you already own, so you would "have more equity to borrow against and (b) QE, such as Obama and co. did in 2009-10, causes inflation...when there has been no inflation.

If it weren't true, nobody with a brain could believe that the above-described idiot pops off on a blog about economics!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 13, 2019)

messy said:


> You're so good about economics.
> Last I checked, (a) you said you would take $250K of available cash and sink it into a house you already own, so you would "have more equity to borrow against and (b) QE, such as Obama and co. did in 2009-10, causes inflation...when there has been no inflation.
> 
> If it weren't true, nobody with a brain could believe that the above-described idiot pops off on a blog about economics!


Sorry.  You flunked a long time ago.  This is not Fries U.  Run along now.  Maybe whiskers can help you with his vast econ knowledge.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Wanna bet? I know I've offered that to you fools before, but no takers.
> I will PM you and Iz my mortgage statement and if it  says what I say it does, what will you give me? And if it doesn't, what can I give you?


Still waiting.  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

]Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

*Six Things to Consider About Inflation*

As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”

The general public, however, usually takes it to mean “rising prices” which is not surprising since one of the common effects of an increase in the money supply is higher prices. However, supporters of government policy often say, “If quantitative easing (QE) and its terrible twin, fractional reserve banking, are so awful, why have we got no inflation?”

To address this conundrum, there are _six related factors_ that are noteworthy:

https://mises.org/blog/six-things-consider-about-inflation


----------



## messy (May 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Still waiting.  Lol!


Waiting for what? You didn’t answer my questions. Answer and you shall receive.


----------



## messy (May 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Six Things to Consider About Inflation*
> 
> As an economic term, “inflation” is shorthand for “inflation of the money supply.”
> 
> ...


What the F are you talking about? Blowhard.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

*Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.

*Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.

*Blowing Bubbles*
*Number Three:* newly created fiat money must go _somewhere_ — and so it goes into the grasp of its first receivers, the banks, the financial institutions, government institutions, and urban moneyed classes who least need it — widening the gap between rich and poor — and thereby building asset bubbles in property, luxury cars, yachts and the myriad baubles that only the very rich can afford to acquire. *So never say that “there is no price inflation” — it’s just that those asset prices don’t figure in the official CPI stats.*

*Number Four: *The European Central Bank (ECB) is no slouch when it comes to money creation out of thin air, and banks within the euro zone have therefore come to rely on it for survival. The solvency of Southern EU countries is dependent on the promise of limitless — thanks to Mario “Whatever it takes” Draghi — fiat money bailouts from the ECB. But, until the next bailout arrives, governments of Europe will do their coercive best to prop up their insolvent banks by any means, fair or foul. In Italy, for example, the government has now “invited” the country’s pension funds to invest 500 million euros in a bank fund called “Atlante,” which has been formally set up as a buyer of last resort to help Italian lenders (whose bad debts equate to a fifth of GDP) reduce their toxic burden. Having run out of other people’s money the Italian government is now trying to raid the nation’s pension funds.

*Number Five:* In the same vein, *you have no doubt heard reference to “helicopter money.”* This is a variant of QE favored by certain politicians who talk blithely about the need for “QE for the people.” The idea is to by-pass the treasury mandarins by dropping newly printed money directly to the people via government spending, so that they (rather than the already-rich classes) can benefit from the bonanza and aid the economy by spending their new-found wealth. Again, this notion commits the fundamental error of equating “money” and “wealth.” If everyone suddenly finds that free handouts have swelled their bank accounts, how long will it be before prices follow? (And since even helicopter money originates at the central bank, you can be sure that the financial sector will somehow get its hands on it first anyway!)

*Number Six:* the final point concerns the corrosive effect of the deliberate and utterly misguided *suppression of interest rates which, if they were allowed to find their own market level, would represent the time-value of money, *or what the private sector is prepared to pay for liquidity — either for spending now or saving for future spending.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Waiting for what? You didn’t answer my questions. Answer and you shall receive.


Poser


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

messy said:


> What the F are you talking about? Blowhard.


Reading.


----------



## messy (May 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Reading.


You need to read a little less and think a little more. You might start coming to your own conclusions that make more sense than the confusing and wrong claptrap you always spout. 
Unless you’re a sophomore in college.


----------



## messy (May 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *Number One: *we need to be clear about the terms we are using. Instead of talking about “inflation” in the loose sense, as above, it is more accurate to speak of *currency debasement*, which is the real impact of fiat money creation by any means. We experience currency debasement as declining purchasing power. Two sides of the same coin: one reflects the other.
> 
> *Number Two:* the above question overlooks the fact that the measures used in this process are inherently unreliable. The decline in purchasing power is most evident when _objectively_ measured by reference to an essential commodity such as oil — rather than against the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI purports to reflect the prices of ingredients selected by government statisticians in what they consider to be a typical, but notional, basket of “consumer goods and services.” This basket, whose contents are varied periodically, results in an index that cannot be trusted as an objective barometer. It supports the wizardry of non-independent Treasury statisticians, and relates to goods that scarcely feature in your shopping basket or mine.
> 
> ...


My God you’re a superficial blowhard.  And why do you cut-and-paste this stuff? Jr College homework?


----------



## messy (May 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Poser


Still no answer? Scared?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

messy said:


> You need to read a little less and think a little more. You might start coming to your own conclusions that make more sense than the confusing and wrong claptrap you always spout.
> Unless you’re a sophomore in college.


You make me laugh!  Poser.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

messy said:


> My God you’re a superficial blowhard.  And why do you cut-and-paste this stuff? Jr College homework?


You’re really gettin’ spooled.  Lol!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 16, 2019)

messy said:


> Still no answer? Scared?


Yeah! Terrified! Lol!  Fries U What a deal!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 17, 2019)

http://www.usdebtclock.org


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 17, 2019)

There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate.  This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because laws make them so.  Thus in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary  for the law to decree and sanction it.--Frederic Bastiat writing on government-sanctioned counterfeiting: 1. government paper money and fractional reserve banking.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 17, 2019)




----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> There is in all of us a strong disposition to believe that anything lawful is also legitimate.  This belief is so widespread that many persons have erroneously held that things are "just" because laws make them so.  Thus in order to make plunder appear just and sacred to many consciences, it is only necessary  for the law to decree and sanction it.--Frederic Bastiat writing on government-sanctioned counterfeiting: 1. government paper money and fractional reserve banking.


You should cite the sources you cut & paste so we can laugh even harder at you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You should cite the sources you cut & paste so we can laugh even harder at you.


You should read so you can find the citation.  No wonder, even Fries U admissions rejected you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

The Board of Governors in Washington, D.C., is an agency of the federal government. The Board--appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate--provides general guidance for the Federal Reserve System and oversees the 12 Reserve Banks. Board reports to and is directly accountable to the Congress but, unlike many other public agencies, it is not funded by congressional appropriations. In addition, though the Congress sets the goals for monetary policy, decisions of the Board--and the Fed's monetary policy-setting body, the Federal Open Market Committe--about how to reach those goals *do not require approval by the President or anyone else in the executive or legislative branches of government.*
*
Source?  Pick one!!*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You should read so you can find the citation.  No wonder, even Fries U admissions rejected you.


Looks like the post I cited might be wiki?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You should read so you can find the citation.  No wonder, even Fries U admissions rejected you.


I went to the U of work your ass off. We all know the path you took, seems like neither of us had any grand opportunities to choose from so maybe come down off your high horse and be real if that's possible.


----------



## nononono (May 18, 2019)

messy said:


> Waiting for what? You didn’t answer my questions. Answer and you shall receive.



*" Messy " " Messy " Financial ......*
*Over encumbering your properties is not a sign of *
*success....it's a sign of desperation.*


----------



## nononono (May 18, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I went to the U of work your ass off. We all know the path you took, seems like neither of us had any grand opportunities to choose from so maybe come down off your high horse and be real if that's possible.


*Four - six years is not a lot to give for a life long value of*
*a higher education. You still could have been a " Rod Buster "...*
*Of course that would've been a step backwards, but you're*
*entitled to that decision also. Just as you were to NO higher learning.*

*Matter of fact...you could still accomplish that goal.*


----------



## messy (May 18, 2019)

nononono said:


> *" Messy " " Messy " Financial ......*
> *Over encumbering your properties is not a sign of *
> *success....it's a sign of desperation.*


Not overencumbered at all. You and Iz just need to learn how to manage your cash. It’s clear he gave up and took an easy government job so he doesn’t have to struggle and the taxpayers will pay his pension. I get it.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 18, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Four - six years is not a lot to give for a life long value of*
> *a higher education. You still could have been a " Rod Buster "...*
> *Of course that would've been a step backwards, but you're*
> *entitled to that decision also. Just as you were to NO higher learning.*
> ...


Tell the drop out and the sailor.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I went to the U of work your ass off. We all know the path you took, seems like neither of us had any grand opportunities to choose from so maybe come down off your high horse and be real if that's possible.


Another long excuse for the legacy of non reading passed down to you by your father espola.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

messy said:


> Not overencumbered at all. You and Iz just need to learn how to manage your cash. It’s clear he gave up and took an easy government job so he doesn’t have to struggle and the taxpayers will pay his pension. I get it.


Lol! You wish you got it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Tell the drop out and the sailor.


How’s the reading coming along?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> How’s the reading coming along?


Polly wanna cracker?


----------



## messy (May 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol! You wish you got it.


Sure I do. But I’m not sure if it’s lack of skill or just lack of work ethic.
I’m not sure the narcissism alone would hold you back so far.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Polly wanna cracker?


Glooten free please.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 18, 2019)

messy said:


> Sure I do. But I’m not sure if it’s lack of skill or just lack of work ethic.
> I’m not sure the narcissism alone would hold you back so far.


Lol! Narcissism not required for Fries U grads!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 19, 2019)

The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent. Another way of saying this is that, in the free market society, people are morally and legally viewed as sovereign individuals possessing rights to their life, liberty, and honestly acquired property, who may not be coerced into any transaction that they do not consider to be to their personal betterment and advantage.

The rules of the free market are really very simple: you don’t kill, you don’t steal, and you don’t cheat through fraud or misrepresentation. You can only improve your own position by improving the circumstances of others. Your talents, abilities, and efforts must all be focused on one thing: what will others take in trade from you for the revenues you want to earn as the source of your own income and profits?

*Consent, Not Coercion, Is a Hallmark of the Market

https://fee.org/articles/free-markets-refine-good-manners/*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 19, 2019)

"Is it really true that political interest is nobler somehow then economic self interest?"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 20, 2019)




----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


>







Mrs Grey looks like the lady questioning  Sowell.


----------



## nononono (May 20, 2019)

QUOTE="messy, post: 265135, member: 3299"

Not overencumbered at all. 
You and Iz just need to learn how to manage your cash. 
It’s clear he gave up and took an easy government job so 
he doesn’t have to struggle and the taxpayers will pay his pension. 
I get it.
*You are jealous & envious it seems....*

/QUOTE

*" Not over encumbered at all. "....Really ?*

*What do you call sucking out the balance of your equity/equities....*

*You have some new age " Math " style of terminology that*
*makes you feel good with 100 % Debt ...?*

*I call it.... Very " Messy " Financials !*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 20, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> View attachment 4716
> Mrs Grey looks like the lady questioning  Sowell.


Both dumb asses


----------



## nononono (May 20, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Tell the drop out and the sailor.


*Your response is classic deflection....*
*75% of the High School kids now days have used that line....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 20, 2019)

nononono said:


> QUOTE="messy, post: 265135, member: 3299"
> 
> Not overencumbered at all.
> You and Iz just need to learn how to manage your cash.
> ...


He’s a poser


----------



## nononono (May 20, 2019)

*Very " Messy " with his Financials....*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (May 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> He’s a poser


Everyone's good at sumpin.


----------



## nononono (May 20, 2019)

*The most useful tool the Democrats/Liberals could use...!*

*




*


----------



## messy (May 20, 2019)

nononono said:


> QUOTE="messy, post: 265135, member: 3299"
> 
> Not overencumbered at all.
> You and Iz just need to learn how to manage your cash.
> ...


Hey weird 4ns, you and Iz combined don't have half of the equity, or cash,  on my balance sheet. Wanna bet? No, you don't. I don't blame you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 20, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey weird 4ns, you and Iz combined don't have half of the equity, or cash,  on my balance sheet. Wanna bet? No, you don't. I don't blame you.


Lmao!


----------



## messy (May 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lmao!


Somebody's jeaaalllous! 
Believe me, I understand.
And that's why you won't bet me! Coward.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 20, 2019)

messy said:


> Somebody's jeaaalllous!
> Believe me, I understand.
> And that's why you won't bet me! Coward.


Lmao!


----------



## nononono (May 20, 2019)

messy said:


> Hey weird 4ns, you and Iz combined don't have half of the equity, or cash,  on my balance sheet. Wanna bet? No, you don't. I don't blame you.



*First you have to have Money " Messy ".....*

*




*


----------



## nononono (May 20, 2019)

messy said:


> Somebody's jeaaalllous!
> Believe me, I understand.
> And that's why you won't bet me! Coward.



*Only a Fool does what you're doing on this forum.*


----------



## messy (May 20, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Only a Fool does what you're doing on this forum.*


Thanks for letting me know. 
Speaking of fools, tell me about the child molesting DC Democrat pizza parlor again? That was you who talked about it as fact, right?


----------



## Booter (May 21, 2019)

*https://fee.org/articles/free-markets-refine-good-manners/*[/QUOTE]
What is the hallmark of a monopoly or a cartel?


Bruddah IZ said:


> The hallmark of a truly free market is that all associations and relationships are based on voluntary agreement and mutual consent. Another way of saying this is that, in the free market society, people are morally and legally viewed as sovereign individuals possessing rights to their life, liberty, and honestly acquired property, who may not be coerced into any transaction that they do not consider to be to their personal betterment and advantage.
> 
> The rules of the free market are really very simple: you don’t kill, you don’t steal, and you don’t cheat through fraud or misrepresentation. You can only improve your own position by improving the circumstances of others. Your talents, abilities, and efforts must all be focused on one thing: what will others take in trade from you for the revenues you want to earn as the source of your own income and profits?
> 
> ...


Thank you Mr. Econ 99.  How is your hero Trump doing with all of this?  Trump is a fucking moron when it comes to Free Trade and you are here every day defending the jackass.  You are one confused tool.  
From the article:
"The difference between the lower price the consumer would pay under free trade, and the higher price they would pay under a tariff, is the stolen sum out of the consumer's pocket."
Trump knows this but he keeps lying about it to his base of idiots becuase he knows how ignorant his they are.  Case in point - the nutters on this board.
Please carry on with your confusion Izzy - its very entertaining.


----------



## espola (May 21, 2019)

Booter said:


> *https://fee.org/articles/free-markets-refine-good-manners/*


What is the hallmark of a monopoly or a cartel?


Thank you Mr. Econ 99.  How is your hero Trump doing with all of this?  Trump is a fucking moron when it comes to Free Trade and you are here every day defending the jackass.  You are one confused tool. 
From the article:
"The difference between the lower price the consumer would pay under free trade, and the higher price they would pay under a tariff, is the stolen sum out of the consumer's pocket."
Trump knows this but he keeps lying about it to his base of idiots becuase he knows how ignorant his they are.  Case in point - the nutters on this board.
Please carry on with your confusion Izzy - its very entertaining.[/QUOTE]

Tariffs are a tax on a country's citizens to raise revenue for operating the government (including the part of the government that decides how much tariff to apply) or to influence their buying decisions.  Tariffs only affect other countries when the tariffs are high enough to discourage imports, or perhaps when tariffs are applied selectively to one country's exports compared to those from another.

In the early days of our Republic, the chief sources of income for the government were land sales and tariffs.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 21, 2019)

Booter said:


> What is the hallmark of a monopoly or a cartel?
> 
> 
> Thank you Mr. Econ 99.  How is your hero Trump doing with all of this?  Trump is a fucking moron when it comes to Free Trade and you are here every day defending the jackass.  You are one confused tool.
> ...


Who said I support the higher taxes that tariffs are, which is the Democrats battle cry for 2020?  You people are easily confused and detest the details of the difference between QE and Tariffs.  Funny how you people support one while detesting the other.  Though they both generate future cost, one is in the billions while the other is senselessly in the trillions. ....your hater is on overload.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 21, 2019)

espola said:


> Tariffs are a tax on a country's citizens to raise revenue for operating the government (including the part of the government that decides how much tariff to apply) or to influence their buying decisions.  Tariffs only affect other countries when the tariffs are high enough to discourage imports, or perhaps when tariffs are applied selectively to one country's exports compared to those from another.
> 
> In the early days of our Republic, the chief sources of income for the government were land sales and tariffs.


QE is a tax on the country’s citizens, creating fiat money to raise revenue for operating the government.


----------



## espola (May 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QE is a tax on the country’s citizens, creating fiat money to raise revenue for operating the government.


Nonsense.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 21, 2019)

espola said:


> Nonsense.


Your powers of non-deduction in action.


----------



## Multi Sport (May 21, 2019)

"The Los Angeles Times released an extensive profile of new ESPN President Jimmy Pitaro over the weekend, cataloging Pitaro's rise to the top of the sports-focused network and his plans to make big changes to ESPN's coverage.

Buried deep in the profile — caught by National Review Online's Jim Geraghty — is some welcome news for fans of ESPN who have turned off or turned down the network over its sudden and dramatic plunge into politics. Pitaro says he recognizes that ESPN viewers want sports coverage, not political commentary.
This isn't really news for fans of the network, or of Pitaro. 

It was clear as early as December of 2017 that ESPN's bottom line was being affected by its newfound love of social justice. Forbes reported at the time that ESPN's online consumer sentiment tanked from 62% to 41% with the network's coverage of that year's events in Charlottesville, Virginia, and subsequent commentary from some of its major anchors, including Jemele Hill."


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 21, 2019)

nononono said:


> *First you have to have Money " Messy ".....*
> 
> *
> 
> ...


Wrong!  You have to be able to do third grade math first.  Said he had to go to his weekend home to get his CLTV.  That was one of his best yet.


----------



## nononono (May 21, 2019)

messy said:


> Thanks for letting me know.
> Speaking of fools, tell me about the child molesting DC Democrat pizza parlor again? That was you who talked about it as fact, right?



*Yes it was.....!*

*You check the News lately....!*

*NXIVM ring a Bell....!*

*Oh and by the way....thanks for outing who you really are..*

*Along with being a Pussy...you are the outhouse Queen.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 29, 2019)

Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez and Bernie Sanders are proposing that interest rates on credit cards be capped, as a way of helping the poor. Would such a policy have that effect? I'm joined by Todd Zywicki, a professor of law at Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, and who's an expert on consumer credit, to work through the answer. We also discuss the cronyism that keeps alternative institutions from issuing credit cards. - Tom Woods


----------



## Hüsker Dü (May 29, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QE is a tax on the country’s citizens, creating fiat money to raise revenue for operating the government.


Deflection, of course.


----------



## Multi Sport (May 29, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Deflection, of course.


It's better then hiding in a corner like you...


----------



## Bruddah IZ (May 29, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Deflection, of course.


Actually, rare agreement with your father although I’m sure your father did not intend to agree on taxes Imposed on citizens.  No wonder Fries U rejected your application.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 1, 2019)

*Why the UK Suddenly Is Suffering from a Physician Shortage*
If only someone had warned them.
*Saturday, June 1, 2019

UK tax policy intended to soak the rich has caused highly specialized physicians and surgeons to retire early, depriving more than a million citizens of their services. A new report details the extent to which progressive taxation has harmed British patients.

The NHS is in a long wait times, and rationing. The UK lost 441 general practitioners last year and had 11,576 unfilled vacancies for doctors as of last June.

https://fee.org/articles/why-the-uk-suddenly-is-suffering-from-a-physician-shortage/
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 1, 2019)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 1, 2019)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 1, 2019)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 7, 2019)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 7, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.


Plagiarize much? I bet you Khan.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 7, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


>


Somethings never get old.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 7, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Plagiarize much? I bet you Khan.


Keep reading


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 7, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Plagiarize much? I bet you Khan.


It’s a definition.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 7, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Somethings never get old.


But it’s all new for some in here.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 7, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> But it’s all new for some in here.


You must mean the keynesians.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 7, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> You must mean the keynesians.


Aye I do.  Although, Maynard would be embarassed.


----------



## nononono (Jun 7, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Plagiarize much? I bet you Khan.


*Regurgitate much.....Union Khan.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 7, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Aye I do.  Although, Maynard would be embarassed.


I have a pretty tough question for you brah, are they worse at reading or Econ?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 7, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I have a pretty tough question for you brah, are they worse at reading or Econ?


Yes.  But they comprehend all the levers even worse.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 8, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Keep reading


I did and see why your non- answers are so garbled.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 8, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I did and see why your non- answers are so garbled.


That’s your lack of comprehension.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 8, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That’s your lack of comprehension.


Keep dreaming oh desperate one, keep the dream alive.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 8, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Keep dreaming oh desperate one, keep the dream alive.


Lmao! It’s in your genes huspola.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 13, 2019)

The big increase in deficits is coming after President Donald Trump's pushed a $1.5 trillion tax cut through Congress in 2017. Congress then approved sharp increases in spending for the military and domestic programs beginning in 2018.

Spending so far this year totals $3.01 trillion, up 9.3 percent from the same period in 2018, while government receipts total $2.27 trillion, an increase of 2.3 percent.

Interest on the $22 trillion national debt is one of the fastest growing parts of the budget with net interest payments totaling $268.3 billion, up 15.6 percent from a year ago. That reflects the fact that interest rates have risen and there is now more debt to finance.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The big increase in deficits is coming after President Donald Trump's pushed a $1.5 trillion tax cut through Congress in 2017. Congress then approved sharp increases in spending for the military and domestic programs beginning in 2018.
> 
> Spending so far this year totals $3.01 trillion, up 9.3 percent from the same period in 2018, while government receipts total $2.27 trillion, an increase of 2.3 percent.
> 
> Interest on the $22 trillion national debt is one of the fastest growing parts of the budget with net interest payments totaling $268.3 billion, up 15.6 percent from a year ago. That reflects the fact that interest rates have risen and there is now more debt to finance.


Wait for it...............nothing like 6 straight Years of QE under Obama to bail out his 1 percenter friends, nearly doubling the debt.  He and Bush cluelessly introducing Trillion dollar deficits.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Wait for it...............nothing like 6 straight Years of QE under Obama to bail out his 1 percenter friends, nearly doubling the debt.  He and Bush cluelessly introducing Trillion dollar deficits.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 13, 2019)

*Balance the federal budget 'fairly quickly'*



"It can be done. ... It will take place and it will go relatively quickly.  ... If you have the right people, like, in the agencies and the various people that do the balancing ... you can cut the numbers by two pennies and three pennies and balance a budget quickly and have a stronger and better country."

The two biggest drivers of the projected increase in the 2019 deficit were the Republican tax bill and the bipartisan agreement on federal spending, both of which Trump signed.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/trumpometer/promise/1430/balance-federal-budget-fairly-quickly/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


>


The power of 6 years of counterfeit money under Obama.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> *Balance the federal budget 'fairly quickly'*
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nothing like 6 straight years of QE under Obama to continue the trillion dollar deficits that Bush and Obama started.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

*Conflating “Rights” with Goods*
Sanders’s arguments, however, completely bastardize the very concept of “rights” and ignorantly conflate rights with scarce goods and services.

*Goods and services like medical care, education, and housing don’t just exist in a state of nature. They are produced using human labor combined with capital goods. What Sanders, et al. are really saying when declaring “economic rights” is that some people have the right to the labor of others.*

More practically, however, what Sanders and others envision is a government-funded system of hospitals, medical providers, educators, and daycare workers providing these services. Instead of declaring a right of some to the labor of the service providers themselves, this system declares a right to a portion of the fruits of the labor of all (or most) productive workers in the form of taxation to pay for such services.

Bradley Thomas


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Fewer than 18 months stand between us and the next presidential election, and politicians are tripping over each other to offer voters more “free” things, including everything from health care and college to a guaranteed basic income. But voters should be fostering a healthy sense of skepticism. If there is one eternal and immutable fact in economics, it is that nothing is free. Nothing. And no quantity of political promises, wishful thinking, or government policy can change that.

—Davis and Harrigan


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Fewer than 18 months stand between us and the next presidential election, and politicians are tripping over each other to offer voters more “free” things, including everything from health care and college to a guaranteed basic income. But voters should be fostering a healthy sense of skepticism. If there is one eternal and immutable fact in economics, it is that nothing is free. Nothing. And no quantity of political promises, wishful thinking, or government policy can change that.
> 
> —Davis and Harrigan


What is Biden promising to hand out?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What is Biden promising to hand out?


Who said he was?


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What is Biden promising to hand out?


It is still early just wait.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


Nothing like Obama presiding over 6 consecutive years of QE to make Donald and his friends richer.  Just sayinʻ.  You people crack me up!!


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nothing like Obama presiding over 6 consecutive years of QE to make Donald and his friends richer.  Just sayinʻ.  You people crack me up!!


I wonder what Trump promised Putin?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Nothing like Obama presiding over 6 consecutive years of QE to make Donald and his friends richer.  Just sayinʻ.  You people crack me up!!


It didn't help t or you (you admitted as much).


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> I wonder what Trump promised Putin?


Are you so dumb as to not see what has been laid out in front of you? The first thing t did was try to get rid of all sanctions and wondered out loud about doing the same with NATO, etc. etc.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Are you so dumb as to not see what has been laid out in front of you? The first thing t did was try to get rid of all sanctions and wondered out loud about doing the same with NATO, etc. etc.


Who did you vote for again?


----------



## nononono (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What is Biden promising to hand out?


*What hasn't he......*

*For eight years he was the " Cabin Butt Boy " to some of the largest hand outs ever.....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Who did you vote for again?


What relevance would that have in regards to t's corrupt actions and strange kowtowing behavior for and around putin?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

nononono said:


> *What hasn't he......*
> 
> *For eight years he was the " Cabin Butt Boy " to some of the largest hand outs ever.....*


What hand outs?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> It didn't help t or you (you admitted as much).


And you just told us it did help T. Lol!  



Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


you and your brother messpola like contradicting yourselves.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And you just told us it did help T. Lol!
> 
> you and your brother messpola like contradicting yourselves.


Where?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Where?


Below



Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . *but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.*


Huspolaism


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Below
> 
> Huspolaism


Hilarious, you are pulling an LE, is it a complete misrepresentation of what I posted or a complete lack of comprehension on your part? What do t's larcenous actions have to do with the Obama economy, that is still booming?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Below
> 
> Huspolaism


"When someone tells you who they are believe them" . . . and you tell us daily how intellectually disingenuous you are . . . or are you really that dumb.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.





Bruddah IZ said:


> And you just told us it did help T. Lol!
> 
> you and your brother messpola like contradicting yourselves.





Hüsker Dü said:


> Where?





Hüsker Dü said:


> It didn't help t or you (you admitted as much).





Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.



Lol!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> "When someone tells you who they are believe them" . . . and you tell us daily how intellectually disingenuous you are . . . or are you really that dumb.


See your genuine self above


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.





Bruddah IZ said:


> Nothing like Obama presiding over 6 consecutive years of QE to make Donald and his friends richer.  Just sayinʻ.  You people crack me up!!





Hüsker Dü said:


> It didn't help t or you (you admitted as much).





Bruddah IZ said:


> And you just told us it did help T. Lol!
> 
> you and your brother messpola like contradicting yourselves.





Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!!


Disingenuous to the bone, hilarious! You really are an idiot! Keep spinning dizzy! . . .


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> See your genuine self above


Keep trying, one day you will be a real little boy.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Where?





Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


If you thought Trump was helping his friends since being elected, wait until he pulls an Obama next month.  Then you people will really blow a gasket because god knows QE only helped the rich.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 24, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If you thought Trump was helping his friends since being elected, wait until he pulls an Obama next month.  Then you people will really blow a gasket because god knows QE only helped the rich.


God should be capitalized, unless you are a pagan.


----------



## nononono (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What hand outs?



*Where should we start :*

*The " Phones "...*
*The " Solar "*
*The " Healthcare "*
*The " Bailouts "*
*The " Iran " handout*
*Etc, Etc, Etc........*

*I could smother you with data, but you are not worth it....*
*Ignorance is bliss....you should have studied instead of*
*beating rods....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> God should be capitalized, unless you are a pagan.


Here little fishy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Where should we start :*
> 
> *The " Phones "...*
> *The " Solar "*
> ...


You are confusing different programs across state, federal, local and private lines in an attempt to have a point, nice try though. Of course you will once again gain the approval of the other desperate to be legit idiots such as yourself.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> If you thought Trump was helping his friends since being elected, wait until he pulls an Obama next month.  Then you people will really blow a gasket because god knows QE only helped the rich.


More intellectual disingenuous b.s. Your lack of comprehension bit you in the ass yet again, hilarious!
Keep trying though, its funny to watch.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> More intellectual disingenuous b.s. Your lack of comprehension bit you in the ass yet again, hilarious!
> Keep trying though, its funny to watch.





Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


Keep trying to distance yourself from your ignorance, Huspola.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are confusing different programs across state, federal, local and private lines in an attempt to have a point, nice try though. Of course you will once again gain the approval of the other desperate to be legit idiots such as yourself.


Your huspolaism is showing again.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Your huspolaism is showing again.


You should worry about your lack of comprehension, disingenuous nature and lack of judgement.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You should worry about your lack of comprehension, disingenuous nature and lack of judgement.


And again.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What is Biden promising to hand out?


Hugs.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 25, 2019)

Donʻt forget shampoo


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jun 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> And again.


He leaves no room for doubt...once again removing it completely.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> He leaves no room for doubt...once again removing it completely.


I call you fools on your shit constantly as that's all you do, b.s. Certainly I can see how disconcerting that might be to be shot down so frequently like that . . . but keep trying, its funny to watch you smash your head on the wall then act like it didn't happen, hilarious actually!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I call you fools on your shit constantly as that's all you do, b.s. Certainly I can see how disconcerting that might be to be shot down so frequently like that . . . but keep trying, its funny to watch you smash your head on the wall then act like it didn't happen, hilarious actually!





Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


Keep arguing with yourself .


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Keep arguing with yourself .


How's that Polly?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> How's that Polly?






Hüsker Dü said:


> We all now know what t promised to hand out and the things he had earmarked for the majority of his base never came to fruition . . . but he has helped himself and, in doing so, other much wealthier people.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

That hit a bone with you I see, eh Polly?
I always hit what I swing at, you'll be alright. Rub some dirt on it and get back up off the ground.


----------



## nononono (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You are confusing different programs across state, federal, local and private lines in an attempt to have a point, nice try though. Of course you will once again gain the approval of the other desperate to be legit idiots such as yourself.


*No I'm not....and what's sad is YOU now that.*

*I've told you time and time again....*

*DO SOME RESEARCH !*

*No reason to argue with a Rodent that doesn't even*
*bring ammo......*


----------



## nononono (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I call you fools on your shit constantly as that's all you do, b.s. Certainly I can see how disconcerting that might be to be shot down so frequently like that . . . but keep trying, its funny to watch you smash your head on the wall then act like it didn't happen, hilarious actually!



*Rodent....you've NEVER provided PROOF or FACTS to*
*dispute data....you regurgitate then flatulate for your*
*own pleasure...*

*Do some research and prove your point like a MAN instead*
*of squeaking like a mouse ya puss.......*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 25, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Rodent....you've NEVER provided PROOF or FACTS to*
> *dispute data....you regurgitate then flatulate for your*
> *own pleasure...*
> 
> ...


On the contrary, but don't let that stop your nutter rage . . . go tell it on the mountain top! Lol!


----------



## nononono (Jun 25, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> On the contrary, but don't let that stop your nutter rage . . . go tell it on the mountain top! Lol!


*Squeak....Squeak.....the " Rodent " is at his peak.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That hit a bone with you I see, eh Polly?
> I always hit what I swing at, you'll be alright. Rub some dirt on it and get back up off the ground.


Lol!  What were you swinging at?  Youʻre still on defense.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jun 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I call you fools on your shit constantly as that's all you do, b.s. Certainly I can see how disconcerting that might be to be shot down so frequently like that . . . but keep trying, its funny to watch you smash your head on the wall then act like it didn't happen, hilarious actually!


Muahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....
Please list examples of these frequently shot down posts...
Once again, take your time ratboy 
You've yet to list any examples when asked to produce examples.
You're the Joe Biden of the kitchen ya plagiarizing ass wipe. 
The nut rage around here belongs to you and the delusional fodder you put forth...
You really should shut-up.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jun 26, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> Muahahahahhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....
> Please list examples of these frequently shot down posts...
> Once again, take your time ratboy
> You've yet to list any examples when asked to produce examples.
> ...


What's that you say black knight?


----------



## nononono (Jun 26, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> What's that you say black knight?
> *NoNoNo Rodent.....*
> *You've got it all backwards.*
> *You're the " Black Knight " and you utter :*


*" It's just a minor flesh wound ......No worries, I'm a Democrat..! "*

*




*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 11, 2019)

*No, Americans Are Not Worse Off Today Than They Were in the 1970s*
Populism feeds on myths about living standards that simply don't stand up to scrutiny.
*Tuesday, July 9, 2019*





Back in May, a young American called Akki caused a minor twitterstorm by seemingly showing what many pundits in the U.S. media frequently assert—that ordinary Americans are worse off today than they were in the late 1970s. A number of better-educated twitterati soon pointed out that Akki, a self-declared member of #TheResistance, engaged in what former U.S. President George W. Bush once referred to as “fuzzy math.”

In the meantime, Akki’s misleading claim scored over 197,000 likes on Twitter. It seems that in addition to the U.S. dollar, Americans have come to crave a new kind of currency: victimhood. Many Americans of all political persuasions relish the feeling of aggrievement and the accompanying sense of moral superiority, and if that means that they have to pretend that their lives are worse than those of their ancestors, so be it.

https://fee.org/articles/no-americans-are-not-worse-off-today-than-they-were-in-the-1970s/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

*The End of the Free Internet Is Near*
*The idea that the internet should enjoy minimal government oversight precisely because it was a technology that enabled open and free speech for everyone has been turned on it's head.*
DECLAN MCCULLAGH | FROM THE AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2019 ISSUE

https://reason.com/2019/07/12/the-end-of-the-free-internet-is-near/

*The United States of Deplatforming*
So far, at least, the U.S. government has yet to appoint a chief censor. But Silicon Valley's coastal elites have been eager to volunteer their services gratis.

The last year has marked a dispiriting new low in the "deplatforming," or banning from various online channels, of dissident voices. The ax fell on Infowars' Alex Jones, actor James Woods, the editorial director of AntiWar.com, the director of the Ron Paul Institute, and radio talk show host Jesse Kelly. (Some of these accounts have since been reinstated.)

Lawmakers have encouraged these social media bans. Congressional hearings have been called to interrogate tech execs on how their products are being used. *Last August, Sen. Chris Murphy (D–Conn.) urged an even broader crackdown, proclaiming on Twitter that "the survival of our democracy depends on it."*


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *The End of the Free Internet Is Near*
> *The idea that the internet should enjoy minimal government oversight precisely because it was a technology that enabled open and free speech for everyone has been turned on it's head.*
> DECLAN MCCULLAGH | FROM THE AUGUST/SEPTEMBER 2019 ISSUE
> 
> ...


When the internet was invented, everyone who had access to it knew who everyone else was and trusted them to be honest and respectful.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I call you fools on your shit constantly as that's all you do, b.s. Certainly I can see how disconcerting that might be to be shot down so frequently like that . . . but keep trying, its funny to watch you smash your head on the wall then act like it didn't happen, hilarious actually!


Polly want cracker ?
What are you 6 years old?
You take and post whats been posted at you and all but copy and paste it as your own...
You've become a pathetic whining little rodent.
You really shut just shut the fuck up, you've erased all doubt ratboy.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> When the internet was invented, everyone who had access to it knew who everyone else was and trusted them to be honest and respectful.


Are you the guy who believes adding more tax to the price of gasoline doesn't make the price go up?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> When the internet was invented, everyone who had access to it knew who everyone else was and trusted them to be honest and respectful.


The government version of the internet for commerce was, shall we say, less than ideal.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Are you the guy who believes adding more tax to the price of gasoline doesn't make the price go up?


Are you the guy who posted that a retail tax doesn't apply to current inventory?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The government version of the internet for commerce was, shall we say, less than ideal.


I have no idea what that means.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Are you the guy who posted that a retail tax doesn't apply to current inventory?


Think about it.
If you were a gasoline retailer, how would you handle it?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Think about it.
> If you were a gasoline retailer, how would you handle it?


I would follow the law.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Think about it.
> If you were a gasoline retailer, how would you handle it?


Sales tax is sales tax. You make a sale you charge the tax . . . so simple even a caveman (should) be able to understand. Did the retailer pay the tax?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> I would follow the law.


Is it a sales tax?
If you top off your tank and pay the tax on that inventory before the tax is applied. Is that against the law?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Sales tax is sales tax. You make a sale you charge the tax . . . so simple even a caveman (should) be able to understand. Did the retailer pay the tax?


Lets pretend you own a retail outlet and you buy a certain amount of inventory.
Is it against the law to pay the sales tax on that inventory before you sell it?

Assuming it is legal, and you are a gas station owner, what would you do?
Assuming you do the smart thing and pay the tax ahead of time, would you be able to charge the added tax on top of the inventory already taxed and paid?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

My advice to rat and espola is to consult a real tax professional before owning or operating a gas station.
My conjecture is neither professional or worthy of much more than a passing thought.

One thing I can say for certain, is that adding a tax or increasing a tax, will always lead to higher cost for the consumer.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> I have no idea what that means.


Not as secure as it needed to be for commerce.  Hence the billions lost in I.D. Theft.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> My advice to rat and espola is to consult a real tax professional before owning or operating a gas station.
> My conjecture is neither professional or worthy of much more than a passing thought.
> 
> One thing I can say for certain, is that adding a tax or increasing a tax, will always lead to higher cost for the consumer.


Why are we paying tax on an industry that is already taxpayer subsidized?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Is it a sales tax?
> If you top off your tank and pay the tax on that inventory before the tax is applied. Is that against the law?


I posted a link to the text of the law.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> My advice to rat and espola is to consult a real tax professional before owning or operating a gas station.
> My conjecture is neither professional or worthy of much more than a passing thought.
> 
> One thing I can say for certain, is that adding a tax or increasing a tax, will always lead to higher cost for the consumer.


The price posted today at the Arco on the corner I pass most days is still $3.499, just like it was on June 30th.  

Do you suppose they have big tanks?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> The price posted today at the Arco on the corner I pass most days is still $3.499, just like it was on June 30th.
> 
> Do you suppose they have big tanks?


Last week the Carmel Mountain Costco ran out of regular. I filled my tank with premium for the price of regular.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> The price posted today at the Arco on the corner I pass most days is still $3.499, just like it was on June 30th.
> 
> Do you suppose they have big tanks?


I don’t know.
Do you suppose raising taxes doesn’t make the price go up?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I don’t know.
> Do you suppose raising taxes doesn’t make the price go up?


I'm only posting what I'm seeing.  My $3.269/gallon purchase yesterday was not the lowest I have paid this year, but it was close to what I was paying in March, before the big price jumps nationwide in April.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I don’t know.
> Do you suppose raising taxes doesn’t make the price go up?


Think, is it a consumer tax or a retailer tax.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Think, is it a consumer tax or a retailer tax.


Why?
Does one tax not make the price go up, while the other one does?
Think.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Sales tax is sales tax. You make a sale you charge the tax . . . so simple even a caveman (should) be able to understand. Did the retailer pay the tax?


Because they have a choice?  Come on cave man.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> I'm only posting what I'm seeing.  My $3.269/gallon purchase yesterday was not the lowest I have paid this year, but it was close to what I was paying in March, before the big price jumps nationwide in April.


If the price is the same now as it was before the tax took affect, there are other market forces keeping it that way.
Without the tax increase, prices would be about five cents less.

This isnt rocket science.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> If the price is the same now as it was before the tax took affect, there are other market forces keeping it that way.
> Without the tax increase, prices would be about five cents less.


I don't disagree with that, but reality often intrudes upon opinion.

Are you agreeing now that it is a retail tax?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> I don't disagree with that, but reality often intrudes upon opinion.
> 
> Are you agreeing now that it is a retail tax?


I never said it wasn't a retail tax.
Its irrelevant either way.

The reality is that tax increases force prices up.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Last week the Carmel Mountain Costco ran out of regular. I filled my tank with premium for the price of regular.


Did they offer that as an alternative?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I never said it wasn't a retail tax.
> Its irrelevant either way.


If it's a retail tax, then your idea of "it's not applied to what's in the tanks" is irrelevant.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If it's a retail tax, then your idea of "it's not applied to what's in the tanks" is irrelevant.


I detailed some of the possibilities.
No need to repeat myself.
You can consult your own tax professional when you and rat open your own gas station.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I detailed some of the possibilities.
> No need to repeat myself.
> You can consult your own tax professional when you and rat open your own gas station.


Or you could just admit you are wrong and move on.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Why?
> Does one tax not make the price go up, while the other one does?
> Think.


That could be considered racist.  The think part I mean.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> I don't disagree with that, but reality often intrudes upon opinion.
> 
> Are you agreeing now that it is a retail tax?


Thatʻs quite the legacy youʻre passing on to the twins.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Or you could just admit you are wrong and move on.


Are you getting more or less gallons when the gas tax is .52 cents per gallon insead of .41 cents per gallon.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Or you could just admit you are wrong and move on.


 Something you know ZERO about.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If it's a retail tax, then your idea of "it's not applied to what's in the tanks" is irrelevant.


WOW! I'm surprised the plumber runs a business (or does he?). This is a very easy concept to grasp.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Did they offer that as an alternative?


Premium at regular price was your range of choices.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> WOW! I'm surprised the plumber runs a business (or does he?). This is a very easy concept to grasp.


I could be wrong, but I have always believed that the price of parts charged to a customer is always subject to retail sales tax.  Is that not true for plumber-installed parts?

Maybe a craftsman can just charge for his services and roll the parts in for free.  I honestly don't know.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> Something you know ZERO about.


Now it's obvious that you are just trolling.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Premium at regular price was your range of choices.


Did the customers that needed premium (as in my wife's last three cars insisted, and they would warn you on the speedometer info display when you tried to cheat) get the regular price also?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Did the customers that needed premium (as in my wife's last three cars insisted, and they would warn you on the speedometer info display when you tried to cheat) get the regular price also?


If they had half a brain yes, it was posted on the pump.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> I could be wrong, but I have always believed that the price of parts charged to a customer is always subject to retail sales tax.  Is that not true for plumber-installed parts?
> 
> Maybe a craftsman can just charge for his services and roll the parts in for free.  I honestly don't know.


Plumbers don't do anything for free.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Plumbers don't do anything for free.


If he paid retail (and thus the sales tax) for the parts he is using, the State has already gotten their bite.   There used to be a way for those holding a valid business license to avoid the sales tax on things purchased for eventual resale to a retail customer - is that still the case?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If he paid retail (and thus the sales tax) for the parts he is using, the State has already gotten their bite.   There used to be a way for those holding a valid business license to avoid the sales tax on things purchased for eventual resale to a retail customer - is that still the case?


If a plumber resells a part for more than he buys it for, then he needs to pay the sales tax over and above any tax he may or may not have paid at the wholesale level.
If this hypothetical plumber wants to calculate the tax on the inventory he hasnt sold yet and send it in ahead of time, that would be perfectly legal as well.
The government never complains about taxes paid early.

If the hypothetical gas station did the same thing, I dont see a problem.
I am not a tax professional.
I have professionals advise me on what is legal.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If he paid retail (and thus the sales tax) for the parts he is using, the State has already gotten their bite.   There used to be a way for those holding a valid business license to avoid the sales tax on things purchased for eventual resale to a retail customer - is that still the case?


Wrong.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> If he paid retail (and thus the sales tax) for the parts he is using, the State has already gotten their bite.   There used to be a way for those holding a valid business license to avoid the sales tax on things purchased for eventual resale to a retail customer - is that still the case?


I know ole Joe the plumber didn't have one of those, a valid business license . . .


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> I know ole Joe the plumber didn't have one of those, a valid business license . . .


You two have something in common.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> If a plumber resells a part for more than he buys it for, then he needs to pay the sales tax over and above any tax he may or may not have paid at the wholesale level.
> If this hypothetical plumber wants to calculate the tax on the inventory he hasnt sold yet and send it in ahead of time, that would be perfectly legal as well.
> The government never complains about taxes paid early.
> 
> ...


So who is paying the new gas tax, the seller (gas station operator) or the buyer (consumer)?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So who is paying the new gas tax, the seller (gas station operator) or the buyer (consumer).


Is this a trick question?
You are every time you fill up, Einstein.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Simple question.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Is this a trick question?
> You are every time you fill up, Einstein.


So then why did you say the tax would not have started on July 1st?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Is this a trick question?
> You are every time you fill up, Einstein.


But -- "They can't tax the gas already in their tanks, gumshoe."


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> So then why did you say the tax would not have started on July 1st?


Sorry pal.
Im not going round the daisy with you any longer.


----------



## Multi Sport (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Simple question.


Kinda like mine to your Dadd-E.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> But -- "They can't tax the gas already in their tanks, gumshoe."


Correct, as long as they have already paid the tax on it.
If they charged tax twice on the same gas, that would be illegal.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> But -- "They can't tax the gas already in their tanks, gumshoe."


Did that come from your tax professional?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Did that come from your tax professional?


Its sage advice.
Only the government is allowed to tax things repeatedly.
I wish you and rat good luck on your gas station.
You guys have a name for it yet?


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Correct, as long as they have already paid the tax on it.
> If they charged tax twice on the same gas, that would be illegal.


Retail outlets collect sales tax at the time of sale, based on the sale price, and forward the money they collect to the state on a regular basis.  Not doing so gets them in serious trouble.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Its sage advice.
> I wish you and rat good luck on your gas station.
> You guys have a name for it yet?


Why are you trying such an obvious diversion?  You can either provide some backup to your "no tax on what's in the tanks already theory", or admit that you were wrong.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Retail outlets collect sales tax at the time of sale, based on the sale price, and forward the money they collect to the state on a regular basis.  Not doing so gets them in serious trouble.


Like I said before, if they send the tax in before they sell the product, as long as the price and tax collected match up, no penalty for early payment.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Why are you trying such an obvious diversion?  You can either provide some backup to your "no tax on what's in the tanks already theory", or admit that you were wrong.


Circle.
I've been very detailed in my theory.

I have some gas station names if you guys need help.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Why are you trying such an obvious diversion?  You can either provide some backup to your "no tax on what's in the tanks already theory", or admit that you were wrong.





Ricky Fandango said:


> Like I said before, if they send the tax in before they sell the product, as long as the price and tax collected match up, no penalty for early payment.


Seems the plumber wants to have it both ways. He has the retailer paying the tax on deliver and the consumer paying the tax at the pump . . . that is if he is aware of what he has said in the last 15 minutes.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Seems the plumber wants to have it both ways. He has the retailer paying the tax on deliver and the consumer paying the tax at the pump . . . that is if he is aware of what he has said in the last 15 minutes.


Its always the consumer who pays.
The retailer only moves the money between you and the tax man.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Circle.
> I've been very detailed in my theory.
> 
> I have some gas station names if you guys need help.


Don't get grumpy and go all lying eyes on us (although that is a hoot as well). You have been as clear as mud.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Its always the consumer who pays.
> The retailer only moves the money between you and the tax man.


Did they (the retailer) pay the tax on the fuel delivered before July 1st?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Don't get grumpy and go all lying eyes on us (although that is a hoot as well). You have been as clear as mud.


I did the best I could, you're welcome.
Just be sure to have a real tax professional on the payroll when you guys are up and running, and let me know if you want some free ideas on naming your gas station.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Seems diz and aff are in the same financial boat paddling upstream.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Did they (the retailer) pay the tax on the fuel delivered before July 1st?


Only if they wanted to.
I don't know any gas station owners besides you and espola.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I did the best I could, you're welcome.
> Just be sure to have a real tax professional on the payroll when you guys are up and running, and let me know if you want some free ideas on naming your gas station.


Just can't face yourself it appears. You are a dropout after all.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Just can't face yourself it appears. You are a dropout after all.


Have a nice day, rat.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Only if they wanted to.
> I don't know any gas station owners besides you and espola.


You are still left with, "no tax on what's in the tanks already".


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Like I said before, if they send the tax in before they sell the product, as long as the price and tax collected match up, no penalty for early payment.


How do they know how much sales tax to send in before the sale has taken place?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> How do they know how much sales tax to send in before the sale has taken place?


That part is easy. Everything is calibrated on the pumps, tanks and deliveries.

The important thing, (and this is where the tax pro comes in) is to know if the state is going to pin the sales tax to existing inventory before the new tax is implemented.
If they don't, then a gas station with four 10,000 gallon tanks could stand to save up to 2,000 dollars by filling up, and paying the tax before the deadline.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> That part is easy. Everything is calibrated on the pumps, tanks and deliveries.
> 
> The important thing, (and this is where the tax pro comes in) is to know if the state is going to pin the sales tax to existing inventory before the new tax is implemented.
> If they don't, then a gas station with four 10,000 gallon tanks could stand to save up to 2,000 dollars by filling up, and paying the tax before the deadline.


Nice theory.  Is anyone actually doing that?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

You and rat may want to consult a tax pro and bring it up before you open your new station.

My names are free if you'd like to hear them.
A tax pro you will have to pay.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Plumbers don't do anything for free.


I have donated my services many times.
Its something i choose to do when the opportunity presents itself.
Can't help it, Ima giver.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

This is as thorough an explanation as I have found about California's gas taxes.  Anyone who understands it all can explain it to me.

https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/ups-and-downs-californias-gas-tax


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I have donated my services many times.
> Its something i choose to do when the opportunity presents itself.
> Can't help it, Ima giver.


When it comes to Daffy and Magoo see: Dunning–Kruger effect


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> When it comes to Daffy and Magoo see: Dunning–Kruger effect


One of the facets of the effect discovered by Dunning and Kruger is that those who are intellectually most competent tended to underestimate their ability relative to others in their group.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> This is as thorough an explanation as I have found about California's gas taxes.  Anyone who understands it all can explain it to me.
> 
> https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxvox/ups-and-downs-californias-gas-tax


The plumber is simply spinning like they all do when cornered by their own words.
t 101, first semester tu.


----------



## espola (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> The plumber is simply spinning like they all do when cornered by their own words.
> t 101, first semester tu.


Trying to condense what I read in that article - gasoline is taxed in at least three ways - Federal excise tax per gallon, Cal state excise tax per gallon, and sales tax as a percentage of sale price.  I didn't realize until I read it that the state sales tax rate for gasoline is different than that for general retail purchases (I think that's what it says) and that there is some sort of annual adjustment of state excise tax and gasoline sales tax rates for some purpose that is not clear to me.  I'll have to read it again.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

espola said:


> Trying to condense what I read in that article - gasoline is taxed in at least three ways - Federal excise tax per gallon, Cal state excise tax per gallon, and sales tax as a percentage of sale price.  I didn't realize until I read it that the state sales tax rate for gasoline is different than that for general retail purchases (I think that's what it says) and that there is some sort of annual adjustment of state excise tax and gasoline sales tax rates for some purpose that is not clear to me.  I'll have to read it again.


I think, (if I may) it may be prudent to do as I suggested earlier and hire a tax professional before opening your new "Huspola Gas'N-Go"


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I think, (if I may) it may be prudent to do as I suggested earlier and hire a tax professional before opening your new "Huspola Gas'N-Go"


The twins can run the whole operation.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The twins can run the whole operation.


I'm looking forward to seeing the opening day product.
I have all kinds of ideas.
It would be smart for them to pick my brain.
I see myself as a kind of self styled marketing maven.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Jul 12, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I'm looking forward to seeing the opening day product.
> I have all kinds of ideas.
> It would be smart for them to pick my brain.
> I see myself as a kind of self styled marketing maven.


Yeah, you and t, brilliant business minds . . . I mean really, who goes belly up running a casino? Most res gaming started in tents and grew to destination resorts, but not t, he's too stupid to do well so he lies about it, like you.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 12, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yeah, you and t, brilliant business minds . . . I mean really, who goes belly up running a casino? Most res gaming started in tents and grew to destination resorts, but not t, he's too stupid to do well so he lies about it, like you.


What, I lie about being a plumber?
Who lies about being a plumber?
I'm ...
I don't know,..

You got me.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Yeah, you and t, brilliant business minds . . . I mean really, who goes belly up running a casino? Most res gaming started in tents and grew to destination resorts, but not t, he's too stupid to do well so he lies about it, like you.


t can’t do res gaming.  He’s only 1/1032nd cherokee.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 13, 2019)

https://fee.org/articles/hawaii-governor-vetoes-bill-aimed-to-end-confiscation-of-property-without-a-conviction/

*Hawaii Governor Vetoes Bill Aimed to End Confiscation of Property Without a Conviction*
Hawaii will continue to deny its citizens due process and make a profit in the process.
*Friday, July 12, 2019*





Image Credit: Staff Sgt. Jackie Sanders [public domain]


*Carey Wedler*


The legislature finds that civil asset forfeiture frequently leaves innocent citizens deprived of personal property without having ever been charged or convicted of any crime. This amounts to government-sponsored theft.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 13, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Plumbers don't do anything for free.


Unlike your wife.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 13, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> https://fee.org/articles/hawaii-governor-vetoes-bill-aimed-to-end-confiscation-of-property-without-a-conviction/
> 
> *Hawaii Governor Vetoes Bill Aimed to End Confiscation of Property Without a Conviction*
> Hawaii will continue to deny its citizens due process and make a profit in the process.
> ...


Dakine


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 27, 2019)

*Kim Jong Un's Mercedes Limousine Holds an Economic Lesson*
People are asking how a Mercedes limousine ended up in Pyongyang. There’s no mystery here. With market goods, there’s no accounting for their final destination.
*Friday, July 26, 2019
*
https://fee.org/articles/kim-jong-uns-mercedes-limousine-holds-an-economic-lesson/?utm_source=ribbon

A few weeks ago world champion Toronto Raptors forward Kawhi Leonard signed a free agent contract with the Los Angeles Clippers. This can’t have pleased his former team once removed in the San Antonio Spurs. When the Spurs traded Leonard after the 2018 season to the Raptors, they did so in order to keep him out of the Western Conference. No doubt the Spurs succeeded, for a time, but they couldn’t control what Leonard would ultimately do with his talents. He’s back in the NBA’s Western Conference.


....................

*Snuck Past Luxury Goods Ban*
Leonard’s migration to Los Angeles came to mind while pondering a more recent question: “How Did That Mercedes End Up in Pyongyang?” The latter was a front page headline/question in the _New York Times_ last week. The _Wall Street Journal_ similarly featured this seeming news of the weird, noting that Kim Jong Un’s possession of a Mercedes limousine had “stumped outsiders” in consideration of existing UN bans of luxury goods in North Korea.

*No one should be stumped. There’s no mystery here. With market goods, there’s no accounting for their final destination.* Try as politicians might to cut off individuals and countries from the world’s plenty, the power of politicians to control what we do is thankfully limited. Applied to Korea’s "beloved" leader, attempts to isolate him with sanctions are more than toothless. Though Mercedes can’t sell directly into the Hermit Kingdom, though U.S. companies are barred from trading with “North Korea,” neither Mercedes nor American companies are barred from selling what they produce. That they’re not ultimately means the producers of useful market goods are essentially trading with everyone, including with people from “enemy” countries.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 29, 2019)

*And to whom does the unhappy citizen turn when there is only one healthcare provider, one landlord, and one education system? The state monopolies under socialism offer a kind of subjugation and submission far greater than that in competitive markets. The faceless corporate decision makers that trouble professor Robin are far less sinister than government bureaucrats who can block all exit options.* Imagine how poorly the Post Office would function without competition from Federal Express and UPS.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 31, 2019)

The Federal Reserve is cutting interest rates for the first time in over a decade — a preemptive move aimed at extending the already record-long economic expansion.

The Fed on Wednesday lowered its target for the key federal funds rate by a quarter percentage point. The move should decrease the cost of borrowing, including for credit cards, auto loans and mortgages.

The rate cut — the first since the Great Recession — had been widely expected, but it marks a turnaround for the Fed. As of late last year, the central bank was expecting to continue raising rates in 2019.

Major stock indexes fell after the Fed's announcement, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average down more than 350 points, or 1.3% percent.

The U.S. economy is still growing at a modest pace. And, at 3.7%, unemployment is near a 50-year low. But the central bank is concerned that trade tensions with China and slowing growth in other countries could put the brakes on the economy, just as many Americans are beginning to enjoy the benefits of a slow-moving recovery.


https://www.npr.org/2019/07/31/734060292/fed-cuts-interest-rates-for-1st-time-since-2008


----------



## Booter (Jul 31, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> And, at 3.7%, unemployment is near a 50-year low. But the central bank is concerned that trade tensions with China and slowing growth in other countries could put the brakes on the economy, just as many Americans are beginning to enjoy the benefits of a slow-moving recovery.
> 
> 
> https://www.npr.org/2019/07/31/734060292/fed-cuts-interest-rates-for-1st-time-since-2008


The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction. If you look for a job for six months and then you give up, they consider you give up. You just give up. You go home. You say, ‘Darling, I can’t get a job.’ They consider you statistically employed.  When people look and look and look, and then they give up looking for a job, they’re taken off the rolls, so the number isn’t reflective. I’ve seen numbers of 24 percent, I actually saw a number of 42 percent unemployment—42 percent. And it could be.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 31, 2019)

Booter said:


> The unemployment number, as you know, is totally fiction. If you look for a job for six months and then you give up, they consider you give up. You just give up. You go home. You say, ‘Darling, I can’t get a job.’ They consider you statistically employed.  When people look and look and look, and then they give up looking for a job, they’re taken off the rolls, so the number isn’t reflective. I’ve seen numbers of 24 percent, I actually saw a number of 42 percent unemployment—42 percent. And it could be.


The official U.S. jobless rate slid to an 18-year low of 3.8% in May, but even better the so-called real unemployment rate has fallen more rapidly.

That’s good news for millions of Americans who were on the outside of the labor market looking in. They now have a foot in the door.

The official jobless rate, known as U3, only includes people who don’t have a job but have looked for one in the past month. The result is that millions of Americans who want to work are actually left out of the official figure, potentially making the labor market look healthier than it really is.

By contrast, the “real” unemployment rate also includes part-time employees who want to work full time as well as people who haven’t looked recently but are willing to work. It’s typically a lot higher.






In tough times or the early stages of an economic recovery, the real unemployment rate gets a lot of attention from critics who argue the official rate understates the problem. Technically called the U6, the real unemployment rate tends to run about 4 points higher than the official rate. The gap ballooned to 7 points in late 2009 before beginning to decline.


In May, the real unemployment fell to 7.6% from 7.8%. It’s lower now than it was right before the start of the 2007-2009 recession and it’s at the lowest point since May 2001.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-real-us-unemployment-rate-reached-a-17-year-low-2018-06-01


----------



## Booter (Jul 31, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> The official U.S. jobless rate slid to an 18-year low of 3.8% in May, but even better the so-called real unemployment rate has fallen more rapidly.
> 
> That’s good news for millions of Americans who were on the outside of the labor market looking in. They now have a foot in the door.
> 
> ...


These are numbers that are massaged, to make the existing economy look good, to make this administration look good, when in fact, it’s a total disaster.


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 31, 2019)

Booter said:


> These are numbers that are massaged, to make the existing economy look good, to make this administration look good, when in fact, it’s a total disaster.


Speaking of total disaster...your brain must be messaged.
If you have proof of your assertion, please show it....


----------



## Booter (Jul 31, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> Speaking of total disaster...your brain must be messaged.
> If you have proof of your assertion, please show it....


There is great anger in our Country caused in part by inaccurate, and even fraudulent, reporting of the news.  Stop the open & obvious hostility & report the news accurately & fairly.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EAa4F_iXoAASiWx?format=jpg&name=large


----------



## Lion Eyes (Jul 31, 2019)

Booter said:


> There is great anger in our Country caused in part by inaccurate, and even fraudulent, reporting of the news.  Stop the open & obvious hostility & report the news accurately & fairly.


Unless you have proof of what you claim regarding "messaged" numbers, you are the fraud here bootsie...
Simply post the facts and cite the sources, otherwise you are adding to the "great anger" you speak about.
The source used is a legitimate source...prove the numbers are wrong...prove the numbers are questionable...
Stop the open & obvious hostility & report the news accurately & fairly.

PS We did land on the moon, Oswald acted alone,  & no votes were changed in the last Presidential election.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

Spigot boy went back to work today.


----------



## Booter (Jul 31, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> Unless you have proof of what you claim regarding "messaged" numbers, you are the fraud here bootsie...
> Simply post the facts and cite the sources, otherwise you are adding to the "great anger" you speak about.
> The source used is a legitimate source...prove the numbers are wrong...prove the numbers are questionable...
> Stop the open & obvious hostility & report the news accurately & fairly.
> ...


I was just yanking your chain.  My recent  posts on this topic were all quotes from your hero Don The Con.  I guess you only swallow that tripe when Trumpy is dishing it out.  SUCKER!!!


----------



## espola (Jul 31, 2019)

Lion Eyes said:


> The Federal Reserve is cutting interest rates for the first time in over a decade — a preemptive move aimed at extending the already record-long economic expansion.
> 
> The Fed on Wednesday lowered its target for the key federal funds rate by a quarter percentage point. The move should decrease the cost of borrowing, including for credit cards, auto loans and mortgages.
> 
> ...


Hmmm - big-business types have been asking for a rate cut for months.  When they get it, the market falls. 

I don't get it.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 31, 2019)

Booter said:


> I was just yanking your chain.  My recent  posts on this topic were all quotes from your hero Don The Con.  I guess you only swallow that tripe when Trumpy is dishing it out.  SUCKER!!!


QE coat tails?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 31, 2019)

Booter said:


> I was just yanking your chain.  My recent  posts on this topic were all quotes from your hero Don The Con.  I guess you only swallow that tripe when Trumpy is dishing it out.  SUCKER!!!


Don Trump numbers speak for themselves.
No need for parlor tricks, booty.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> QE coat tails?


What do you think lowering the interest rate is? It’s a “parlor trick” to incentivize more  borrowing to bring more money into the economy...and more debt.
With a year and a half before election and the economy plateauing...what a surprise.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

espola said:


> Hmmm - big-business types have been asking for a rate cut for months.  When they get it, the market falls.
> 
> I don't get it.


Right


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> What do you think lowering the interest rate is? It’s a “parlor trick” to incentivize more  borrowing to bring more money into the economy...and more debt.
> With a year and a half before election and the economy plateauing...what a surprise.


The President has no control over what the fed does with interest rates.
DT wanted a bigger cut, and so did the market.

The market was at 18,000 when DT was elected.
Perspective.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> The President has no control over what the fed does with interest rates.
> DT wanted a bigger cut, and so did the market.
> 
> The market was at 18,000 when DT was elected.
> Perspective.


My statement was correct and the market rose much more, percentage wise, under Obama. 
Learn.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> What do you think lowering the interest rate is? It’s a “parlor trick” to incentivize more  borrowing to bring more money into the economy...and more debt.
> With a year and a half before election and the economy plateauing...what a surprise.


Actually, itʻs the other way around.  More money in the system, drives down interest rates , incentivizes borrowing, and drives up cost when more dollars are competing for the same amount of goods and services pre-rate cut.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> My statement was correct and the market rose much more, percentage wise, under Obama.
> Learn.


6 straight years of QE.  Learn.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Actually, itʻs the other way around.  More money in the system, drives down interest rates , incentivizes borrowing, and drives up cost when more dollars are competing for the same amount of goods and services pre-rate cut.


It’s both. The more money will be flying around because it’s cheaper to borrow. Rates were lowered today not by “more money in the system,” but by fiat, so people will borrow more.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> QE coat tails?


The Fed is still holding 4 trillion in bonds from 6 straight years of QE under Obama.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> 6 straight years of QE.  Learn.


Incorrect. Higher stock market, low inflation. QE had nothing to do with anything except the first couple of years it saved our economy from crashing.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Incorrect. Higher stock market, low inflation. QE had nothing to do with anything except the first couple of years it saved our economy from crashing.


Remember when the fake news said the economy would crash when Trump was elected?
No crash and no QE.


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Incorrect. Higher stock market, low inflation. QE had nothing to do with anything except the first couple of years it saved our economy from crashing.


Who pays back the 4 trillion?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Incorrect. Higher stock market, low inflation. QE had nothing to do with anything except the first couple of years it saved our economy from crashing.


Sucker.  When you save the bond market with 6 straight years of QE, guess what that does for the stock marketʻs lenders?  Low inflation- when you bail out the banks and then pay them interest on their reserves, guess what they do?  They donʻt lend as much.  No lend, no inflation.  In fact,  the largest banks held 3 to 7 times more life insurance than real estate according to FDIC balance sheets.  Learn


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

espola said:


> Hmmm - big-business types have been asking for a rate cut for months.  When they get it, the market falls.
> 
> I don't get it.


We know.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> It’s both. The more money will be flying around because it’s cheaper to borrow. Rates were lowered today not by “more money in the system,” but by fiat, so people will borrow more.


You donʻt know what fiat is do you?  Hint: we agree.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Remember when the fake news said the economy would crash when Trump was elected?
> No crash and no QE.


What do you think today was, if not QE?
 Show me where the news said that anyway. NY Times or Washington Post or CNN or NBC.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Sucker.  When you save the bond market with 6 straight years of QE, guess what that does for the stock marketʻs lenders?  Low inflation- when you bail out the banks and then pay them interest on their reserves, guess what they do?  They donʻt lend as much.  No lend, no inflation.  In fact,  the largest banks held 3 to 7 times more life insurance than real estate according to FDIC balance sheets.  Learn


Do you have every single thing backwards about economics? Is that why you’re poor? By “poor” I mean you don’t make much money. Because you don’t understand how it works. Banks have been lending just fine, now people will borrow even more.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> What do you think today was, if not QE?
> Show me where the news said that anyway. NY Times or Washington Post or CNN or NBC.


All of them.


----------



## messy (Jul 31, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> All of them.


Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Do you have every single thing backwards about economics? Is that why you’re poor? By “poor” I mean you don’t make much money. Because you don’t understand how it works. Banks have been lending just fine, now people will borrow even more.


I donʻt expect you to understand banking when you donʻt understand simple finance terms like CLTV, ROA and ROE.  Run along poser.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


All of you smart guys, just go back and look in the trump thread. Husker did and all you people get your talking points from the same place.
Trust me.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I donʻt expect you to understand banking when you donʻt understand simple finance terms like CLTV, ROA and ROE.  Run along poser.


Posing  must be hard work.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Banks have been lending just fine, now people will borrow even more.


Yes they have.  But they make more and safer money on their reserves when they lend less to the public because the Fed incentivize$ them to do so to hold down inflation.  The Fed has been targeting inflation for at least the last 10 years.  But the uneducated look at the CPI to explain price inflation and find none because the asset classes that cause financial crisis are not a part of the basket of goods that generates CPI.  Yes, people will borrow more as a result of rate cuts and no doubt theyʻll need to, to compete with other borrowers who will drive up prices in a bid war.  But make no mistake, the Fed is still sitting on 4 trillion in bonds.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


*What Happens to the Markets if Donald Trump Wins?*

Share on Facebook
Post on Twitter
Mail
Image_





The Trump store on Fifth Avenue. Uncertainty about what a Trump victory might mean for the markets has fueled speculation.CreditDolly Faibyshev for The New York Times


By Andrew Ross Sorkin


_

_Oct. 31, 2016_
_Assume, for a moment, that Donald J. Trump wins the presidency.

Some readers of this column will shudder at the thought and might even stop reading now. Others in the business world will beam, like Peter Thiel, the Silicon Valley entrepreneur.

But what exactly happens the day after? To markets? To the economy?

The conventional wisdom is that, right off the bat, the stock market would fall precipitously. Simon Johnson, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology economist, posited that Mr. Trump’s presidency would “likely cause the stock market to crash and plunge the world into recession.” He predicted that Mr. Trump’s “anti-trade policies would cause a sharp slowdown, much like the British are experiencing” after their vote to exit the European Union.

In explaining his prediction, Professor Johnson wrote that Europe’s economy is so fragile that “Trump’s trade-led recession would tip Europe back into full-blown recession, which would likely precipitate a serious banking crisis.” After that, he continued: “If this risk were not contained — and the probability of a European banking debacle is already disconcertingly high — there would be a further negative spiral. Either way, the effects on emerging markets and all lower-income countries would be dramatic.”

Professor Johnson’s view may be a bit hyperbolic, but to one degree or another, his pessimism is shared by many economists across Wall Street, from Citigroup to Goldman Sachs. Each cites a different set of reasons the markets will fall if Mr. Trump wins.

ADVERTISEMENT 

But is the conventional wisdom right?

Naturally enough, investors and analysts hate uncertainty. Hillary Clinton largely represents the status quo. Mr. Trump is more like Forrest Gump’s “box of chocolates,” as Peter Boockvar, chief market analyst at The Lindsey Group, an economic advisory firm in Washington, put it. “You never know what you’re going to get.”

In all likelihood, a Trump victory would lead to a swift, knee-jerk sell-off. Many investors will choose to sell stocks and ask questions later.

But in the days and weeks after a Trump victory, among investors who cull their portfolios carefully, the decision about buying and selling will be company by company, industry by industry, currency by currency and so forth.

In truth, it’s impossible to predict how the markets would settle into a Trump presidency, despite the speculation on all sides. In all likelihood, it will take time for investors to truly make sense and “math out” how his policies would affect the economy. Yes, the Mexican peso would most likely fall on fears of a trade fight — Goldman Sachs says it could fall by as much as 25 percent — and shares of some insurance companies could tumble on the uncertainty of what would happen if Obamacare were repealed.

But oil companies and other sectors of the traditional energy industry would be likely to rally given Mr. Trump’s plan to repeal regulations. (Renewable energy companies would fall.) Health care and biotechnology stocks, which have been driven down over concerns that Mrs. Clinton will seek greater regulation and possibly even price controls, might also pop.

If Mr. Trump wins, two companies that seem poised for an immediate pummeling are AT&T and Time Warner, given how much Candidate Trump has objected to their recently announced merger plan. AT&T, by the way, also happens to have a huge business in Mexico.

The biggest test for the stock markets might be pegged to the future leadership of the Federal Reserve. “There is much more uncertainty regarding who Trump might nominate, though he has made it clear he would not renominate Chair Yellen,” Goldman Sachs wrote in a note to clients. “His criticisms of Fed policy are somewhat ambiguous; he has suggested rates have been left too low for too long, but also warns of negative consequences of rate hikes. We would expect that financial markets would view a Trump victory as having slightly hawkish implications, since it would make a change in what many view as a dovish-leaning Fed leadership much more likely.”

A handful of economists have suggested that despite all of the promises made by the candidates, the outcome of the election might not actually decide what direction the markets will take.

ADVERTISEMENT 






_


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/donald-trump-wall-street-effect-markets-230164


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


https://money.cnn.com/2016/10/24/investing/stocks-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


How old are you? Your memory ain’t that great.
https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/F0AE84A8-9F6A-11E6-A0BE-7FFA36735CAF


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Jul 31, 2019)

messy said:


> Where, exactly? Economy will crash? Where does it say that?


I am pretty sure you aren’t really as dumb as you act.
*And The Hits Just Kept Coming: The Greatest (False) Predictions Of 2017 *



STEPHEN MOORE and JONATHAN DECKER

12/29/2017
Since the day Donald Trump was elected president in November of 2016 the Dow Jones industrial average has risen by some 35%, making the last 14 months one of the greatest bull-market runs in history.

Some $6 trillion of wealth has been created for Americans — which is very good news for the 55 million Americans with 401k plans, the 25 million or so who have IRAs, and another 20 million with company pension plans and employee stock ownership plans.










This ad will end in 8

 The left was certain that exactly the opposite would happen with a Trump presidency.  To borrow a recent phrase from House minority leader Nancy Pelosi, Trump's policies would cause "Armageddon" for family finances, the American economy, and the stock market.


Keep all this talk of economic meltdowns and financial market doomsday in mind the next time you hear a news commentator say that "most economists" believe that Trump's policies won't work, or "mainstream economists" believe Trump doesn't know what he is doing.  When it comes to Trump, his critics so far have almost all been not just wrong, but dead wrong.

Here are some of the greatest hits, gleefully compiled from the media over the past 18  months or so.

"Donald Trump's first gift to the world will be another financial crisis." Headline in the U.K. Independent. "(He) gives every impression that he will soon be hustling America — and possibly the entire world — in the direction of another catastrophic financial crisis." Same article.

[iframe frameborder="0" src="https://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-35/html/container.html" id="google_ads_iframe_/4824/ibd/news/columnists/article_1" title="3rd party ad content" name="1-0-35;4307;
"I have no stocks. I advise people not to invest in the stock market, not now. Way too dangerous." Film maker Michael Moore, August, 2017.

"It really does now look like President Donald J. Trump, and markets are plunging. When might we expect them to recover?  A first-pass answer is never… So we are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight." Paul Krugman of the New York Times the day after the election.



No Hidden Agenda: Get News From A Pro-Free Market, Pro-Growth Perspective


"Trump's domestic policies would lead to recession." Former GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney, March 2016.

"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 (if Trump becomes president)." Eric Zitzewitz, former chief economist at the IMF, November 2016.

"Under Trump, I would expect a protracted recession to begin within 18 months. The damage would be felt far beyond the United States."  Former Clinton and Obama chief economist Larry Summers, June 2016.

"Trump would likely cause the stock market to crash and plunge the world into recession." Simon Johnson, MIT economics professor, in The New York Times, November 2016.

"Citigroup: A Trump Victory in November Could Cause a Global Recession",  Bloomberg Financial News headline, August 2016.

"I have never seen an election in which the markets have so strong of a view as to what was good and bad about the outcome. And what you saw was the markets rallying yesterday because of the FBI thing on Sunday. And the reason I mention this particularly is if the likely event happens and Trump wins you will see a market crash of historic proportions, I think…The markets are terrified of him."  Steve Rattner, MSNBC economics guru and former Obama Car Czar, October, 2016.

"Wall Street is set up for a major crash if Donald Trump shocks the world on Election Day and wins the White House. New research out on Friday suggests that financial markets strongly prefer a Hillary Clinton presidency and could react with panicked selling should Trump defy the polls and deliver a shocking upset on Nov. 8." Ben White, Politico, October 2016.

And finally, and most unambiguously:

"A President Trump Could Destroy the World Economy", headline of Washington Post editorial, October 2016.

Just for the record, the world economy is as strong today as it has been in at least a decade, as the Wall Street Journal recently reported. Now the left has to engage in logical contortions to explain how the red hot American economy is really a result of Obama policies — every which one Trump has systematically been at work dismantling.

As I've acknowledged many times, the roaring stock market and the surging rate of growth of the economy (which is now estimated at 3.5%, up from 1.6% in Obama's last year in office), could turn against Trump in the months and years to come.

It's quite possible that the market exuberance over Trump's deregulation and tax cut policieshave run too far ahead, though I'm predicting 3% to 4% growth for 2018 with the Trump tax cut kicking in.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 1, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> Remember when the fake news said the economy would crash when Trump was elected?
> No crash and no QE.


Isnʻt it enough that their candidate lost?  Now you poke him in the eye with no market crash the day after.


----------



## messy (Aug 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I donʻt expect you to understand banking when you donʻt understand simple finance terms like CLTV, ROA and ROE.  Run along poser.


You’re a college sophomore-level economist. With a federal government paycheck.
When you buy and sell houses and stocks, let me know what your returns and net profits are. These are things you don’t understand. Like I have told you, son, you play with letters when you should be dealing with numbers.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Isnʻt it enough that their candidate lost?  Now you poke him in the eye with no market crash the day after.


He’s a giver, like you.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 1, 2019)

messy said:


> You’re a college sophomore-level economist. With a federal government paycheck.
> When you buy and sell houses and stocks, let me know what your returns and net profits are. These are things you don’t understand. Like I have told you, son, you play with letters when you should be dealing with numbers.


Q.E.D.


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> How old are you? Your memory ain’t that great.
> https://www.marketwatch.com/amp/story/guid/F0AE84A8-9F6A-11E6-A0BE-7FFA36735CAF


Yea, with three screen names he has a hard time remembering what he post, almost as bad as E. But it does make for some good laughs...


----------



## espola (Aug 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> *What Happens to the Markets if Donald Trump Wins?*
> 
> Share on Facebook
> Post on Twitter
> ...


More questions there than predictions.  Is that your best effort?


----------



## espola (Aug 1, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> https://money.cnn.com/2016/10/24/investing/stocks-donald-trump-hillary-clinton/


Ditto.


----------



## messy (Aug 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Q.E.D.


I'm glad you agree. 
Do you look at your bank account and see letters? Like IOU?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 1, 2019)

messy said:


> I'm glad you agree.
> Do you look at your bank account and see letters? Like IOU?


Ahhhh Mr. Collateralized debt is an asset


----------



## messy (Aug 1, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Ahhhh Mr. Collateralized debt is an asset


I make much more in passive income every year than you do from your job. Stocks, bonds and rent.
 Tell me what else you know about money that I don't, fool.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 1, 2019)

messy said:


> I make much more in passive income every year than you do from your job. Stocks, bonds and rent.
> Tell me what else you know about money that I don't, fool.


Good.  I too, make more in passive income than from my job.  Lol!


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 2, 2019)

espola said:


> More questions there than predictions.  Is that your best effort?


More nothing from you. That is your best effort...


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I make much more in passive income every year than you do from your job. Stocks, bonds and rent.
> Tell me what else you know about money that I don't, fool.


I keep waiting for Turdacious to call you out for bragging about your income. He called me out once because he said I was boasting about something. But since you two are politically aligned that must give you a free pass... lol!


----------



## messy (Aug 2, 2019)

Multi Sport said:


> I keep waiting for Turdacious to call you out for bragging about your income. He called me out once because he said I was boasting about something. But since you two are politically aligned that must give you a free pass... lol!


I only do it to Iz, who always talks like he's the econ genius...


----------



## Multi Sport (Aug 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I only do it to Iz, who always talks like he's the econ genius...


Does that matter to Turdacious?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 2, 2019)

messy said:


> I only do it to Iz, who always talks like he's the econ genius...


Genius not required for econ.  3rd grade gets it....for some.  Oh and Btw we talk mostly finance.  At least one of us does.  Again, 3rd grade math gets it.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Seems diz and aff are in the same financial boat paddling upstream.





Hüsker Dü said:


> Seems the plumber wants to have it both ways. He has the retailer paying the tax on deliver and the consumer paying the tax at the pump . . . that is if he is aware of what he has said in the last 15 minutes.





espola said:


> Retail outlets collect sales tax at the time of sale, based on the sale price, and forward the money they collect to the state on a regular basis.  Not doing so gets them in serious trouble.


Not surprised that the father son combo got this so wrong.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 15, 2019)

*One Size Does Not Fit All*
In 1988, George McGovern opened the Stratford Inn in Connecticut. As the owner of this hotel, Mr. McGovern had to deal with the regulations, taxes, mandates, and legal costs of frivolous lawsuits that he passed or supported. In about four years, the Stratford Inn went bankrupt.

In a famous 1992 letter to the _Wall Street Journal_ entitled “A Politician's Dream Is a Businessman's Nightmare,” McGovern stated:

While I never doubted the worthiness of any of these goals, the concept that most often eludes legislators is: ‘Can we make consumers pay the higher prices for the increased operating costs that accompany public regulation and government reporting requirements with reams of red tape.’ It is a simple concern that is nonetheless often ignored by legislators.

https://fee.org/articles/what-george-mcgovern-learned-from-running-his-own-business/?utm_campaign=FEE Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=75735384&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-9FcXKk1gWijEj1LuDV_sv90ZunEWhnyUdULHJu1HYzhydXAPut2ZDuhUA92-A7F_Kmje6Ajif7QMSWjV2GQqLv9qCZXQ&_hsmi=75735384


----------



## messy (Aug 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> *One Size Does Not Fit All*
> In 1988, George McGovern opened the Stratford Inn in Connecticut. As the owner of this hotel, Mr. McGovern had to deal with the regulations, taxes, mandates, and legal costs of frivolous lawsuits that he passed or supported. In about four years, the Stratford Inn went bankrupt.
> 
> In a famous 1992 letter to the _Wall Street Journal_ entitled “A Politician's Dream Is a Businessman's Nightmare,” McGovern stated:
> ...


Can you imagine being such a bad businessman that you have a casino that goes bankrupt? I can’t.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 15, 2019)

messy said:


> Can you imagine being such a bad businessman that you have a casino that goes bankrupt? I can’t.


Imagine that.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 16, 2019)

*The Dow Gains 74 Points Because the U.S. Consumer Is Strong*


Ben Walsh

Aug. 15, 2019 12:45 pm ET
_





*A Bounce.* U.S. stocks were in better shape Thursday after investors got positive news on the U.S. consumer from strong Commerce Department spending data and better-than-expected earnings results from Walmart. But with dropping U.S. Treasury yields and the Chinese government saying it would take “necessary counter-measures” against U.S. tariffs, optimism was kept in check.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 74 points, or 0.3%. The S&P 500 gained 0.2%, and the Nasdaq Composite was nearly flat. 

*Midday Movers*

Agilent Technologies (ticker: A) rose 6.8% after the lab instrument-maker beat Wall Street’s earnings and revenue expectations and raised its guidance. 

Walmart (WMT) was up 4.9% after it topped analysts’ estimates for the second quarter and raised its full-year outlook.

ADVERTISEMENT

Tapestry (TPR) fell 19.9% after the owner of Coach missed fiscal fourth-quarter estimates and reported that weakness in its Kate Spade brand led it to forecast a fall in earnings and revenue next quarter.

General Electric (GE) dropped 12.5% after the forensic accountant who correctly identified the Bernie Madoff ponzi scheme released a report accusing the company of accounting fraud. A GE spokeswoman said the claims were “meritless” and that the company operated “at the highest level of integrity and stands behind its financial reporting.”

Cisco (CSCO) stock was down 7.3% after the company gave investors disappointing guidance for the coming first fiscal quarter.



_


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Aug 20, 2019)

AUGUST 20, 2019
*Figures Don't Lie, but Liars Can Figure*
By Daniel G. Jones
Last week, two events of smallish note occurred. On August 13 and 14, the stock market suffered its biggest losses of the year. Also, an “inverted-yield curve” formed. The yield on the 10-year bond briefly slipped below the yield on the two-year note. By day’s end, the interest rates had righted themselves.

I didn’t realize it at the time, but the combination of these events foretold the end of the Trump economy. By the next day, the news was everywhere.

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman announced “Trump Boom to Trump Gloom” and added that “…an inverted-yield curve… predicted six of the last six recessions.” The Guardian asked: “Is a recession coming to the U. S.? Here’s what to watch for.” The Capitol Spectatornoted: “The Bond Market’s All-In On Its Recession Forecast.” CNN declared: “A global recession may be coming a lot sooner than anyone thought.”

CNN also published an article titled“From Reagan to Trump: Here’s how stocks performed under each president.” They graphed the performance of the S&P during the administrations of the past five presidents.

Set against the four- and eight-year terms of his predecessors, Trump’s performance looks mediocre. And his modest 25% gain in the S&P to date puts him in the middle of the pack, ahead of only Reagan and last-place George W. Bush.

Ronald Reagan’s second-to-last position got me checking CNN’s figures (they were correct), and thinking about presidential legacies, and how the policies of one president might affect the success of another. So as Paul Harvey used to say: “Here’s the rest of the story.”






Ronald Reagan succeeded the second-worst president in my lifetime, and he inherited Jimmy Carter’s legacy of double-digit inflation and unemployment. During his first term, Reagan and Fed chief Paul Volcker bit the bullet and increased federal interest rates in order to tame inflation, which had reached 13.5% in 1980. These actions depressed the stock market for a while, but ultimately they worked and the market rebounded. By the end of Reagan’s first term, the economy had become robust and the S&P had risen 23%. Reagan won 49 states in 1984.

Near the end of his second term, Ronald Reagan signed a bill to drop marginal income tax rates from 50% to 28%. This would prove a gift to the legacies of his successors.

More in Home





Weaponizing Compassion in Dallas






Hey, Pichai! Here's My Advice for Google

Joe Biden’s long goodbye

The climate change crisis racket

The US Congress has decided to scrap the Constitution
George H.W. Bush started the first Gulf War and won it within 100 days, and he became immensely popular. But a broken promise (“Read my lips. No new taxes.”) damaged his reputation, and a brief recession during his last year in office allowed Bill Clinton to win by campaigning against “the worst economy in history.” Still, by the end of his term the S&P had gained over 50%.

Bill Clinton was the luckiest president in the 20th century. He benefitted from Reagan’s economic policies; and his mistakes, especially regarding foreign terrorism, would have their greatest impact on his successor. The Clinton years were marked by personal scandal, but little of national import. The S&P gained 210% during his term.

George W. was star-crossed, with disastrous events bookending his presidency. The 9/11 attack that struck nine months into his term was the culmination of planning and lesser foreign attacks that had occurred during the Clinton presidency. Bush was solely responsible, however, for his own ill-conceived decisions to execute wars for democracy in Afghanistan and Iraq. The great recession, which started a year before the end of his second term (the S&P peaked at 1562 on October 10, 2007), was the consequence of home-lending policies that had begun earlier but were continued by the Bush administration. The S&P ended down40% during his eight years.

Barack Obama came to power under the fortuitous, for him, effects of the great recession. On election day, 2008, the S&P closed at 1005. By the day of his inauguration, it had fallen to 805. By the time the collapse had spent itself, on March 9, 2009, the S&P stood at 667. Then the markets began to retrace.

The S&P didn’t reach its previous high of 1562 until March 26, 2013, more than a year into Obama’s second term. Thus, Obama’s policies, or lack thereof, caused the great recession to last nearly six years, our longest economic downturn since the great depression. Yet, if I had to rate Obama by the increase in the S&P during his full term, he’d come out as second-best (after Clinton!), instead of the worst in my lifetime.

Finally, Trump. Given that he inherited the sclerotic economy of the Obama years, he’s turned things around pretty well. Employment across all classes is up, manufacturing is up, and, as CNN has reported, the S&P is up 25% (even after a downturn). But there’s more to the story.

The markets began to rise immediately after Trump was elected. On election day, the S&P stood at 2139. By the day of his inauguration, it had risen to 2271. Measured from the day the real Trump boom began, the S&P has risen 35%.

But we know (even CNN must know, surely) that a president’s legacy rests upon much more than stock prices. It also rests upon peace, tranquility, love of country, and respect for law and order. These things are the very opposite of what news organizations like CNN long for in their quest for headline-grabbing news. So we can count on them,  especially during the rest of the Trump presidency, to continue to do their best to do their worst.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 8, 2019)

*The Long-Term Benefits of Corporate Tax Cuts Are Undeniable*
Every tax cut in recent decades has been denigrated as a trickle-down fraud benefiting the rich at the expense of the rest.
*Saturday, September 7, 2019

Every tax cut in recent decades has been denigrated as a trickle-down fraud (whose family tree also includes “voodoo” and even “déjà voodoo” economics) benefiting the rich at the expense of the rest. President Trump’s corporate tax rate cuts were just the most recent illustration. But with next year’s election getting ever closer, such attacks are picking up again.

Are Tax Cuts Fraudulent? 

Those attacks, however, are built on several faulty premises. They rely on a zero-sum view of the world in which gains to some are taken to mean harm to others. They assume corporation owners capture virtually all the benefits of corporate tax cuts. And they rely on highly skewed data to make their case.

The zero-sum view ignores that voluntary market arrangements benefit all participants. Consequently, increasing mutually beneficial trade, as with reduced taxation, benefits both buyers and sellers. In contrast, punishing sellers with higher taxes also induces them to do less with their resources in the service of others.

https://fee.org/articles/the-long-term-benefits-of-corporate-tax-cuts-are-undeniable/?utm_campaign=FEE Daily&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=76563533&_hsenc=p2ANqtz-8jRItdE2PeHlX7BFbWhGOfOjatd7n0rfAevLwVx2YYHmekyuqj8ZaMN_j52HP4FzzVR7xqrlLhYKJY1uQ0hG7KIXhsMg&_hsmi=76563533
*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 8, 2019)

Lower corporate taxes increase rewards for improving techniques, technology, and increasing capital investments, which increase worker productivity and earnings. They expand rewards for risk-taking and entrepreneurship in service of consumers. They reduce the substantial distortions caused by the tax. And those changes benefit others, such as workers and consumers.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 8, 2019)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 17, 2019)

Them Obama GM bailouts sure paid off didn't they?  Lol!!


----------



## messy (Sep 17, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Them Obama GM bailouts sure paid off didn't they?  Lol!!


The W bailout with the 17B saved them and now their profits are through the roof!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 17, 2019)

messy said:


> The W bailout with the 17B saved them and now their profits are through the roof!


This is why I'm not jealous.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 18, 2019)

The Federal Reserve “purchased large amounts of federal debt as part of its quantitative easing program,” thus cheapening the cost (decreasing the interest rates) of money.


----------



## Booter (Sep 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lower corporate taxes increase rewards for improving techniques, technology, and increasing capital investments, which increase worker productivity and earnings. They expand rewards for risk-taking and entrepreneurship in service of consumers. They reduce the substantial distortions caused by the tax. And those changes benefit others, such as workers and consumers.


*The federal corporate income tax rates were the highest in US history when the unemployment rates were the lowest in US history.*
 From 1951, when the top marginal corporate income tax rate rose from 42% to 50.75%, to 1969, when rates peaked at 52.8%, the unemployment rate moved from 3.3% to 3.5%. From 1986 to 2011, when the top marginal corporate income tax rate declined from 46% to 35%, the unemployment rate increased from 7% to 8.9%


----------



## nononono (Sep 18, 2019)

QUOTE="messy, post: 278824, member: 3299"

I make much more in passive income every year than you do from your job.
Stocks, bonds and rent.
Tell me what else you know about money that I don't, fool.


/QUOTE

*Hey Braggart.....*
*Tell us all about Atlantic City Casino failures.....*
*You might want to do some research before responding...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 18, 2019)

Booter said:


> *The federal corporate income tax rates were the highest in US history when the unemployment rates were the lowest in US history.*
> From 1951, when the top marginal corporate income tax rate rose from 42% to 50.75%, to 1969, when rates peaked at 52.8%, the unemployment rate moved from 3.3% to 3.5%. From 1986 to 2011, when the top marginal corporate income tax rate declined from 46% to 35%, the unemployment rate increased from 7% to 8.9%


Speaking of picking fruit, we harvested about 3 1/2 tons of Sangiovese last week and destemmed them in preparation for fermentation.  The Syrah in the steel vat is still too sweet but promising nonetheless.  The tempranillo and grenache are almost at zero.  Picked Falanghina yesterday.  I see some medals coming out of this harvest.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 19, 2019)

*New York State Drew Up a Tax to Punish Opioid Makers—But Found Some Unanticipated Side Effects*
By 
Anastassia Gliadkovskaya
September 16, 2019

https://fortune.com/2019/09/16/new-york-opioid-tax-drugmakers-side-effects/?fbclid=IwAR1K_NH5XbocAfT5mODw86TQwyR452jm1MH9oxMcDtO_7DwioG2KYh4fZdA

Earlier this summer, New York became the first state to place an excise tax on opioids sold to or within the state. Backers expect the tax to generate $100 million in revenue for the state, which Gov. Andrew Cuomo and his administration have said will be plowed into helping victims of the opioid crisis.

The idea was to punish pharmaceutical companies for their role in the opioid epidemic: Pay a tax on opioids you sell to the state, and we'll use that money to fund treatment and recovery programs. Sounds simple. But the reality has been much more complicated. The tax, which went into effect July 1, has already set off a ripple effect across the entire supply chain, as manufacturers and distributors have either stopped shipping to the state altogether or passed the tax onto each other. The law allows the cost to be passed on further, to pharmacies and even consumers.

And then there are the feared social costs. Health officials worry the tax could drive patients to seek out opioids on the black market.


New York's experiment is both a cautionary tale for other states—and a look at how difficult it is to make drugmakers pay for fueling the opioid crisis.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Speaking of picking fruit, we harvested about 3 1/2 tons of Sangiovese last week and destemmed them in preparation for fermentation.  The Syrah in the steel vat is still too sweet but promising nonetheless.  The tempranillo and grenache are almost at zero.  Picked Falanghina yesterday.  I see some medals coming out of this harvest.


Too sweet you say?  How about some Port?


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 5, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Speaking of picking fruit, we harvested about 3 1/2 tons of Sangiovese last week and destemmed them in preparation for fermentation.  The Syrah in the steel vat is still too sweet but promising nonetheless.  The tempranillo and grenache are almost at zero.  Picked Falanghina yesterday.  I see some medals coming out of this harvest.


I had no idea you were a wine mavin.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 6, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I had no idea you were a wine mavin.


I'm not.  Far from.  But learned a lot over the last two years.  You should come out to Highland Valley one weekend.  I'll give you a tour and a tasting.  Although my cart runs on fossil fuel.  Hope that's not a problem?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 6, 2019)

The leading explanation for why trucking is in a slump goes back to that central tenet of economics: supply and demand.

Larger economic trends — like increased factory, retail, or construction activity — push up the demand for truck drivers. There's just more stuff to drive around, and you need people and trucks to move them. The supply comes from how many trucks and truck drivers are available.

When demand is high, trucking companies tend to buy lots of trucks and hire new drivers in anticipation of profits to come. But then, once the supply of trucks and truckers catches up to demand, rates fall, making that investment hard to pay off.

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-trucking-industry-slowdown-trucker-job-loss-2019-7#trucking-is-highly-cyclical-and-were-coming-off-from-a-massive-uptick-in-the-market-1


----------



## Ricky Fandango (Oct 6, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I'm not.  Far from.  But learned a lot over the last two years.  You should come out to Highland Valley one weekend.  I'll give you a tour and a tasting.  Although my cart runs on fossil fuel.  Hope that's not a problem?


I think it should be ok, but maybe we should run it by my handler first.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 6, 2019)

Ricky Fandango said:


> I think it should be ok, but maybe we should run it by my handler first.
> View attachment 5457


Bring her by next Harvest.  She can sail to San Diego and you can pick her up with your electric cart.  Happy to walk the vineyard if she's okay with that.


----------



## Booter (Oct 18, 2019)

*The 2019 federal deficit is almost $1 trillion. No one seems to care.*

Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office announced that the federal deficit for this past fiscal year was $984 billion, the highest that it's been in seven years.

In years past, that announcement would have been met with outrage by Republicans -- and even some Democrats. We are mortgaging our children's future! We are on an unsustainable path! We need to start tightening our belts!

Today? Barely a peep.

That change is indicative of how radically President Donald Trump has reshaped the Republican Party in his own image since he seized it in a hostile takeover in 2016. Trump has never evinced any real interest in shrinking the deficit -- and the underlying national debt it feeds -- beyond some platitudes offered to fiscal conservatives during the campaign.

"We're not a rich country. We're a debtor nation ... We've got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt," Trump told The Washington Post. "I think I could do it fairly quickly. ... I would say over a period of eight years."
But Trump has put a series of policies in place -- most notably the tax cut law -- that have ballooned the debt to more than $22 trillion in just the last three years alone. And he has done so with no real focus on (or care for) what the ballooning debt means for our overall financial health. And without once fiscally hawkish Republicans in Congress saying much of anything.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/09/politics/budget-deficit-trump/index.html


----------



## nononono (Oct 18, 2019)

Booter said:


> *The 2019 federal deficit is almost $1 trillion. No one seems to care.*
> 
> Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office announced that the federal deficit for this past fiscal year was $984 billion, the highest that it's been in seven years.
> 
> ...










*Into the corner you go....*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 18, 2019)

Booter said:


> *The 2019 federal deficit is almost $1 trillion. No one seems to care.*
> 
> Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office announced that the federal deficit for this past fiscal year was $984 billion, the highest that it's been in seven years.
> 
> ...


After 6 straight years of QE under Obama that averaged a trillion in deficits for 8 years, why would anyone care?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 21, 2019)

Wez said:


> Here's a brief overview that was the 1st hit when I Googled "problems with a gold standard":
> 
> http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2012/08/why-the-gold-standard-is-the-worlds-worst-economic-idea-in-2-charts/261552/
> 
> ...you can find plenty more academic studies if you keep going down the list.


Here's a good place for us to discuss inflation.


----------



## Booter (Oct 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> After 6 straight years of QE under Obama that averaged a trillion in deficits for 8 years, why would anyone care?


When you take into account the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars he inherited the story is quite different.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President. The Great Recession is probably the biggest of them as can be seen in the yearly deficit numbers. 

*One important difference between Trump's debt figures and Obama's is that Trump has added a massive amount of debt while the US economy has been strong, whereas Obama took over during the depths of the financial crisis.
*
Izzy, asking why anyone would care about the massive national debt might be one of the dumbest things you have ever stated here.  You might want to retake that online Economics 99 class.


----------



## nononono (Oct 21, 2019)

Booter said:


> When you take into account the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars he inherited the story is quite different.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President. The Great Recession is probably the biggest of them as can be seen in the yearly deficit numbers.
> 
> *One important difference between Trump's debt figures and Obama's is that Trump has added a massive amount of debt while the US economy has been strong, whereas Obama took over during the depths of the financial crisis.
> *
> Izzy, asking why anyone would care about the massive national debt might be one of the dumbest things you have ever stated here.  You might want to retake that online Economics 99 class.



*You have no idea what yur talking about....and it " Shows ".....!*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 21, 2019)

Booter said:


> When you take into account the Great Recession, making W. Bush’s temporary tax cuts permanent, increased Social Security and Medicare spending as more Baby Boomers retire and become 65 years old and the Afghanistan and Iraq wars he inherited the story is quite different.  President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President. The Great Recession is probably the biggest of them as can be seen in the yearly deficit numbers.
> 
> *One important difference between Trump's debt figures and Obama's is that Trump has added a massive amount of debt while the US economy has been strong, whereas Obama took over during the depths of the financial crisis.
> *
> Izzy, asking why anyone would care about the massive national debt might be one of the dumbest things you have ever stated here.  You might want to retake that online Economics 99 class.


Glad you care about debt.  Anyone else?  Except for messy that is.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Oct 21, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Here's a good place for us to discuss inflation.


WEZ?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 22, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> WEZ?


Yep


----------



## Booter (Oct 22, 2019)

nononono said:


> *You have no idea what yur talking about....and it " Shows ".....!*


----------



## nononono (Oct 22, 2019)

*You're supposed to type then hit " Post Reply "...*


----------



## Booter (Oct 30, 2019)

*Trump promised to eliminate the national debt. It has risen by $3 trillion*

Despite Mr. Trump’s campaign boasts about wiping out the debt, as president he has adopted an instant-gratification mentality. In addition to backing a $1.5 trillion tax cut without offsetting reductions in spending, Mr. Trump has pushed for increased military spending and has opposed any serious reforms to entitlements. He signed a spending bill that crashed through the limits put in place by the 2011 debt ceiling deal, which was the crowning achievement of the Tea Party.
In some senses, the Trump era is emblematic of a long-running tendency of Republicans to rail against spending during Democratic administrations only to abandon fiscal restraint when one of their own is in power. Even still, Mr. Trump’s ascendance points to a broader shift on the right. Republicans are increasingly dependent on older voters to win elections, who in turn don’t want to see changes to Social Security and Medicare.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Oct 30, 2019)

Booter said:


> *Trump promised to eliminate the national debt. It has risen by $3 trillion*
> 
> Despite Mr. Trump’s campaign boasts about wiping out the debt, as president he has adopted an instant-gratification mentality. In addition to backing a $1.5 trillion tax cut without offsetting reductions in spending, Mr. Trump has pushed for increased military spending and has opposed any serious reforms to entitlements. He signed a spending bill that crashed through the limits put in place by the 2011 debt ceiling deal, which was the crowning achievement of the Tea Party.
> In some senses, the Trump era is emblematic of a long-running tendency of Republicans to rail against spending during Democratic administrations only to abandon fiscal restraint when one of their own is in power. Even still, Mr. Trump’s ascendance points to a broader shift on the right. Republicans are increasingly dependent on older voters to win elections, who in turn don’t want to see changes to Social Security and Medicare.


Spigot Boyʻs policy delight.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 1, 2019)

We’re being robbed!
And most of us don’t even realize it.
When the stock market tanked late last year, the Federal Reserve came to the rescue. First, we had the “Powell Pause” and then we got two interest rate cuts. More recently, the Fed launched a new quantitative easing program – although the central bank isn’t calling it QE.


----------



## nononono (Nov 1, 2019)

*DEMOCRATS = CRIMINALS*

*PLAIN AND SIMPLE...............








This is where they are headed....!*


----------



## Multi Sport (Nov 1, 2019)

Hey now... looks like we are headed towards a recession... lol!!









						October job creation comes in at 128,000, easily topping estimates even with GM auto strike
					

Even with a decline of 42,000 in the motor vehicles and parts industry, the pace of new jobs well exceeded the estimate of 75,000.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## Booter (Nov 14, 2019)

*Reauthorizing the EXIM Bank must be a top priority for Congress*

There is strong bipartisan support for the EXIM Bank. We recently introduced legislation to reauthorize the Bank for 10 years. Our bill gives American businesses the long-term certainty and financial backing they need to succeed, while ensuring our foreign adversaries cannot create a lasting competitive advantage.
Members of Congress from both sides of the aisle have already joined our efforts, and we hope more will join in the coming weeks. The time to act on the EXIM Bank is now. It’s a win-win for American jobs and American national security.









						Reauthorizing the EXIM Bank must be a top priority for Congress
					

There is strong bipartisan support for the EXIM Bank. We recently introduced legislation to reauthorize the Bank for 10 years. Our bill gives American businesses the long-term certainty and financi…




					thehill.com


----------



## messy (Nov 14, 2019)

This is good. Get rid of the crowds and long lines. 

*Harrods*, the famously high-end department store in London, is putting a 1% twist on the holiday tradition of the in-store *Santa*: Only families that have spent at least *$2,500* at the retailer this year will be granted access to *Santa's*lap. To be sure, the tradition of store *Santas* is deeply entrenched in capitalism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

UBS analysis of more than 2,000 global billionaires finds that over the past 15 years, billionaire-controlled companies returned almost twice the annualized average performance of the market and generated a 50 percent higher return on equity. Moreover, while the billionaire effect is seen globally, the effect was strongest in the United States.

Well, good for them, right? But also good for the users of the products and services sold by those companies, not to mention their investors and workers. UBS describes the ability of these billionaires “to transform entire industries, to create large numbers of well-paid jobs, and to rally the world to find cures for diseases such as malaria.”

Why point this out? One reason is because some critics argue the mere existence of billionaires, at least in the US, as prima facie evidence of deep dysfunction in American public policy. Yet, as my colleague Michael Strain argues in a recent podcast chat with me, *“It is very difficult to argue that the world would be better off if we didn’t have Jeff Bezos and Bill Gates. And we should want there to be more of them, but you’re not going to have them if people can’t amass significant amounts of wealth.” (The rise of the superrich, a 2018 Credit Suisse global wealth report notes, “is often seen as a sign of a country’s economic health and its ability to generate opportunities for wealth creation.”) 


https://www.aei.org/economics/the-billionaire-effect-that-wealth-worriers-never-mention/?mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTlRVNE9XWTBOak01WmpReiIsInQiOiJQc0o1NTRtMnF3NERtXC9tXC80SU5OS1g5UXJFdnBCOUUzUjBWNnNmM1duOXpiSXlzUzBlTHBGSUh6d2R2QW12UTNCM2lMb2dnMFlEWStJb2RtSnQ3d2xZR3BTclltWUczdmlDYW5COWFrU1FzWFk3SnlwYzBQTktGWjJSeVhqWkc4In0=*


----------



## messy (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> UBS analysis of more than 2,000 global billionaires finds that over the past 15 years, billionaire-controlled companies returned almost twice the annualized average performance of the market and generated a 50 percent higher return on equity. Moreover, while the billionaire effect is seen globally, the effect was strongest in the United States.
> 
> Well, good for them, right? But also good for the users of the products and services sold by those companies, not to mention their investors and workers. UBS describes the ability of these billionaires “to transform entire industries, to create large numbers of well-paid jobs, and to rally the world to find cures for diseases such as malaria.”
> 
> ...


I wonder how a place like UBS could perform a pro-billionaire analysis. Strange.
I’m a Morgan Stanley guy. Not a billionaire, but I did find out yesterday that I have a 7-figure income tax burden to meet come April ‘20. Fries U! I know you don’t give to charity, Iz, but I will donate to you my seat on Santa’s lap.


----------



## Booter (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> UBS analysis of more than 2,000 global billionaires finds that over the past 15 years, billionaire-controlled companies returned almost twice the annualized average performance of the market and generated a 50 percent higher return on equity. Moreover, while the billionaire effect is seen globally, the effect was strongest in the United States.
> 
> Well, good for them, right? But also good for the users of the products and services sold by those companies, not to mention their investors and workers. UBS describes the ability of these billionaires “to transform entire industries, to create large numbers of well-paid jobs, and to rally the world to find cures for diseases such as malaria.”
> 
> ...


The Washington Post loses money (a deduction) and gives owner Jeff Bezos power to screw public on low taxation of Amazon.
Washington Post employees want to go on strike because Bezos isn't paying them enough.  I think a really long strike would be a great idea. Employees would get more money.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> The Washington Post loses money (a deduction) and gives owner Jeff Bezos power to screw public on low taxation of Amazon.
> Washington Post employees want to go on strike because Bezos isn't paying them enough.  I think a really long strike would be a great idea. Employees would get more money.


So Amazon writes and enforces tax laws too?  Do you take any tax deductions?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

messy said:


> I wonder how a place like UBS could perform a pro-billionaire analysis. Strange.
> I’m a Morgan Stanley guy. Not a billionaire, but I did find out yesterday that I have a 7-figure income tax burden to meet come April ‘20. Fries U! I know you don’t give to charity, Iz, but I will donate to you my seat on Santa’s lap.


Taxes are a burden?


----------



## Booter (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So Amazon writes and enforces tax laws too?  Do you take any tax deductions?


If Amazon ever had to pay fair taxes, its stock would crash and it would crumble like a paper bag. The Washington Post scam is saving it!


----------



## messy (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Taxes are a burden?


They're an "expense." Expenses are generally considered a burden....vs. revenues which are a "benefit." See if you can stay with me here.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> If Amazon ever had to pay fair taxes, its stock would crash and it would crumble like a paper bag. The Washington Post scam is saving it!


So they are providing a service that is not only legal but valued by many?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

messy said:


> They're an "expense." Expenses are generally considered a burden....vs. revenues which are a "benefit." See if you can stay with me here.


No problem. Revenues are pre-tax benefits and thus subject to expenses generally considered a burden.  Maybe you should stop earning revenues.  No benefit, no burden.


----------



## Booter (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So they are providing a service that is not only legal but valued by many?


The U.S. Post Office will lose $1.50 on average for each package it delivers for Amazon. That amounts to Billions of Dollars.
The size of the company's lobbying staff has ballooned and that does not include the Washington Post, which is used as a 'lobbyist' and should so register.  If the Post Office increased its parcel rates, Amazon's shipping costs would rise by $2.6 Billion.  This Post Office scam must stop. Amazon must pay real costs (and taxes) now.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> The U.S. Post Office will lose $1.50 on average for each package it delivers for Amazon. That amounts to Billions of Dollars.
> The size of the company's lobbying staff has ballooned and that does not include the Washington Post, which is used as a 'lobbyist' and should so register.  If the Post Office increased its parcel rates, Amazon's shipping costs would rise by $2.6 Billion.  This Post Office scam must stop. Amazon must pay real costs (and taxes) now.


Congress must have bigger fish to fry than Amazon.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> The U.S. Post Office will lose $1.50 on average for each package it delivers for Amazon. That amounts to Billions of Dollars.
> The size of the company's lobbying staff has ballooned and that does not include the Washington Post, which is used as a 'lobbyist' and should so register.  If the Post Office increased its parcel rates, Amazon's shipping costs would rise by $2.6 Billion.  This Post Office scam must stop. Amazon must pay real costs (and taxes) now.


Congress must have bigger fish to fry than Amazon.


----------



## Booter (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Congress must have bigger fish to fry than Amazon.


Why should the post office have lose $1.50 for each Amazon package it delivers?  Isn't that corporate welfare?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 15, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> No problem.  Maybe you should stop earning revenues.  No benefit, no burden.


And be like you?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

Booter said:


> Why should the post office have lose $1.50 for each Amazon package it delivers?  Isn't that corporate welfare?


Maybe.  How much More would they lose without the $1.50 loss.  But yes, my first thought was cronyism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 15, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> And be like you?


Lol!  Good one Mr. Annual raise of 2 cents.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 16, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Lol!  Good one Mr. Annual raise of 2 cents.


Is it your lack of memory, lack of math skills or a combination thereof that has you drooling false numbers?


----------



## nononono (Nov 16, 2019)

messy said:


> This is good. Get rid of the crowds and long lines.
> 
> *Harrods*, the famously high-end department store in London, is putting a 1% twist on the holiday tradition of the in-store *Santa*: Only families that have spent at least *$2,500* at the retailer this year will be granted access to *Santa's*lap. To be sure, the tradition of store *Santas* is deeply entrenched in capitalism.


*Adam Schiff is in line to beg for an eye socket reduction.........





*


----------



## Wez (Nov 18, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> some critics argue the mere existence of billionaires, at least in the US, as prima facie evidence of deep dysfunction in American public policy.


It's part of the far left's embrace of Socialism, by far the largest mistake the left can possibly make, other than perhaps nominating HRC again.  We want Social Democracy, not Democratic Socialism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 18, 2019)

Wez said:


> It's part of the far left's embrace of Socialism, by far the largest mistake the left can possibly make, other than perhaps nominating HRC again.  We want Social Democracy, not Democratic Socialism.


What is Social Democracy?


----------



## Wez (Nov 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> What is Social Democracy?







__





						Social democracy - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




It's actual compassionate Capitalism, unlike the misguided far left like to call Democratic Socialism, which is of course, Socialism....


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 19, 2019)

Wez said:


> __
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Changing the order of the words doesn’t change anything.


----------



## Wez (Nov 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Changing the order of the words doesn’t change anything.


It appears you still need pictures drawn for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism

Feel free to review those two wiki links, it explains things very clearly.

This should help as well: 



http://imgur.com/a/nlhBlMk


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 19, 2019)

Wez said:


> It appears you still need pictures drawn for you: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_socialism
> 
> Feel free to review those two wiki links, it explains things very clearly.
> 
> ...


More lipstick for the pig.  Key word: interventionism.


----------



## nononono (Nov 19, 2019)

*DEMOCRATS = CRIMINALS*


----------



## Wez (Nov 19, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> More lipstick for the pig.  Key word: interventionism.


One is Capitalism, the other is Socialism, to you it's the same, nothing changes here....


----------



## nononono (Nov 19, 2019)

Wez said:


> One is Capitalism, the other is Socialism, to you it's the same, nothing changes here....


*Being the Forum Pervert Wez, your credibility is nil....
Try another Forum........*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 19, 2019)

Wez said:


> One is Capitalism, the other is Socialism, to you it's the same, nothing changes here....


QE4 is underway.  Spigot boy is busy.


----------



## nononono (Nov 19, 2019)

*DEMOCRATS = CRIMINALS*


----------



## Wez (Nov 20, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> QE4 is underway.  Spigot boy is busy.


I'm well aware, further policy mistakes, this time at the hand of Trump.


----------



## nononono (Nov 20, 2019)

Wez said:


> I'm well aware, further policy mistakes, this time at the hand of Trump.


*Well " Aware " of what....?*

*Your issues.....*








*Remember this one ...perv. Oh yes you do.........*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2019)

Wez said:


> I'm well aware, further policy mistakes, this time at the hand of Trump.


Yep right after 6 straight years of counterfeiting.


----------



## messy (Nov 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yep right after 6 straight years of counterfeiting.


Man people bought a lot of stuff with that counterfeit money. And I even made a lot of money on the counterfeit money! My ambassador friend who was a “Bush Pioneer” fundraiser even made me whole on a Fla. real estate deal that tanked for us in ‘08. Did he use fake money? Do I have to give any of it back? You must not have gotten any...is that why you talk about it all the time?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2019)

messy said:


> Man people bought a lot of stuff with that counterfeit money. And I even made a lot of money on the counterfeit money! My ambassador friend who was a “Bush Pioneer” fundraiser even made me whole on a Fla. real estate deal that tanked for us in ‘08. Did he use fake money? Do I have to give any of it back? You must not have gotten any...is that why you talk about it all the time?


I talk about it all the time because it seems to be working just as wonderfully for Trump.  Yes?  Lol!!


----------



## Wez (Nov 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yep right after 6 straight years of counterfeiting.


You would think the Master Businessman (6 time bankruptcy king) would know to avoid such things... Turns out he just wants to juice the stock market some more.


----------



## Booter (Nov 22, 2019)

nononono said:


> *DEMOCRATS = CRIMINALS*


Except for all of the Trumpsters that are sitting in prison right now or are on their way.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2019)

Wez said:


> You would think the Master Businessman (6 time bankruptcy king) would know to avoid such things... Turns out he just wants to juice the stock market some more.


Why wouldnʻt he?  He has some Democrat in him.


----------



## Booter (Nov 22, 2019)

messy said:


> Man people bought a lot of stuff with that counterfeit money. And I even made a lot of money on the counterfeit money! My ambassador friend who was a “Bush Pioneer” fundraiser even made me whole on a Fla. real estate deal that tanked for us in ‘08. Did he use fake money? Do I have to give any of it back? You must not have gotten any...is that why you talk about it all the time?


There is a large QE asterisk on the statements from my broker.


----------



## messy (Nov 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> I talk about it all the time because it seems to be working just as wonderfully for Trump.  Yes?  Lol!!


Working for everybody but you, huh? Is that why you're mad?


----------



## nononono (Nov 22, 2019)

messy said:


> Man people bought a lot of stuff with that counterfeit money. And I even made a lot of money on the counterfeit money! My ambassador friend who was a “Bush Pioneer” fundraiser even made me whole on a Fla. real estate deal that tanked for us in ‘08. Did he use fake money? Do I have to give any of it back? You must not have gotten any...is that why you talk about it all the time?


*Once again you prove your filthy nature....Mr NH4OH.*


----------



## Wez (Nov 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Why wouldnʻt he?  He has some Democrat in him.


As usual, the Dems will have to come in behind this A'hole and clean up his mess... Not that they won't make their own messes.


----------



## nononono (Nov 22, 2019)

Wez said:


> As usual, the Dems will have to come in behind this A'hole and clean up his mess... Not that they won't make their own messes.


*Run along Forum Perv......
Take your " Messy " with you...*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2019)

messy said:


> Working for everybody but you, huh? Is that why you're mad?


Youʻre jealous.....poser.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2019)

Wez said:


> As usual, the Dems will have to come in behind this A'hole and clean up his mess... Not that they won't make their own messes.


Lol! Agree.


----------



## messy (Nov 22, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Youʻre jealous.....poser.


You ARE mad. Try some of that QE-laced counterfeit money. You can get stuff with it. Might make you less angry.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 22, 2019)

messy said:


> You ARE mad. Try some of that QE-laced counterfeit money. You can get stuff with it. Might make you less angry.


  Nah.  QE has been around since before the great depression.  But you people donʻt do economic history.


----------



## nononono (Nov 29, 2019)

messy said:


> You ARE mad. Try some of that QE-laced counterfeit money. You can get stuff with it. Might make you less angry.



*Explain your understanding of QE .......
We'll wait while you do YOUR research.......*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 30, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Explain your understanding of QE .......
> We'll wait while you do YOUR research.......*


We already know you and dizzy are confused about it so you must be seeking guidance lol! You guys are such idiots it cracks me up every time!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 30, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> We already know you and dizzy are confused about it so you must be seeking guidance lol! You guys are such idiots it cracks me up every time!


That's just your insecurity.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Nov 30, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> That's just your insecurity.


Your complete lack of accountability deems you irrelevant.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 30, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Your complete lack of accountability deems you irrelevant.


Feel free to hit the ignore button.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 1, 2019)

Better?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 1, 2019)

Decrying the ills of capitalism on a placard or in a newspaper headline is a trend with little sign of going away any time soon, but when we see such unsubstantiated claims, we should remember; the data simply doesn’t support the anti-capitalists.

https://fee.org/articles/anti-capitalism-trendy-but-wrong/

*Anti-Capitalism: Trendy but Wrong*
We should remember; the data simply doesn’t support the anti-capitalists.
*Saturday, November 30, 2019*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Decrying the ills of capitalism on a placard or in a newspaper headline is a trend with little sign of going away any time soon, but when we see such unsubstantiated claims, we should remember; the data simply doesn’t support the anti-capitalists.
> 
> https://fee.org/articles/anti-capitalism-trendy-but-wrong/
> 
> ...


You seem to be stuck on some idea you've been fed, like always, that commies are everywhere. Such a sad, sheltered life you live . . . but of course you can't afford anything else.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You seem to be stuck on some idea you've been fed, like always, that commies are everywhere. Such a sad, sheltered life you live . . . but of course you can't afford anything else.


Commies are everywhere.  Thatʻs how T got in to office.  Remember?


----------



## Wez (Dec 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You seem to be stuck on some idea you've been fed, like always, that commies are everywhere. Such a sad, sheltered life you live . . . but of course you can't afford anything else.


I actually agree with Iz on the current anti-Capitalism sentiment being expressed on the left.  I may not agree with his specific reasoning, but there is a ton of ignorance being expressed on both sides of the isle when it comes to Economics, Socialism and Capitalism.  The biggest mistake is mistakenly calling Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism and that's mostly Bernie's fault.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 2, 2019)

Wez said:


> I actually agree with Iz on the current anti-Capitalism sentiment being expressed on the left.  I may not agree with his specific reasoning, but there is a ton of ignorance being expressed on both sides of the isle when it comes to Economics, Socialism and Capitalism.  The biggest mistake is mistakenly calling Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism and that's mostly Bernie's fault.


Could you please tell me who has an actual socialist agenda and the size of the electorate that supports them and that idea wholeheartedly? . . . and how even if elected POTUS would that agenda get through congress, either the House or the Senate? There are borderline nazis in and around our government but I don't feel we will turn nazi soon . . . against t and some of his fools greatest hopes.


----------



## espola (Dec 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Could you please tell me who has an actual socialist agenda and the size of the electorate that supports them and that idea wholeheartedly? . . . and how even if elected POTUS would that agenda get through congress, either the House or the Senate? There are borderline nazis in and around our government but I don't feel we will turn nazi soon . . . against t and some of his fools greatest hopes.


We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

Mises’s point was that people don’t borrow money as much as they borrow goods. That being the case, any kind of money multiplier that, in the view of multiplier alarmists, “multiplies” money and credit, would quickly render the dollar useless. We know this because real economic goods can’t be multiplied nearly as fast as money theoretically can be. Assuming a multiplier effect, there would be copious amounts of dollars chasing exceedingly few goods.  If so, no one would borrow dollars. Why pay for the right to access a medium of exchange that banks are allegedly “multiplying” away the exchangeability of?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 2, 2019)

espola said:


> We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


Word.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 2, 2019)

espola said:


> We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


 . . . of course there is the way we pay for all those things and many more . . . then there is what faux and friends have convinced the gullible of believing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

espola said:


> We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


We can always cloak it with interventionism.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> . . . of course there is the way we pay for all those things and many more . . . then there is what faux and friends have convinced the gullible of believing.


It would be nice to "pay for all those things and many more" had we not inflated the money supply for 6 straight years under Obama.  


_Mises’s point was that people don’t borrow money as much as they borrow goods. That being the case, any kind of money multiplier that, in the view of multiplier alarmists, “multiplies” money and credit, would quickly render the dollar useless. We know this because real economic goods can’t be multiplied nearly as fast as money theoretically can be. Assuming a multiplier effect, there would be copious amounts of dollars chasing exceedingly few goods. If so, no one would borrow dollars. Why pay for the right to access a medium of exchange that banks are allegedly “multiplying” away the exchangeability of? _


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

espola said:


> We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


  Boil your water if you live in Poway.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

espola said:


> We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


I wish we had public regulation of banks that didn't include bail outs.


Mises’s point was that people don’t borrow money as much as they borrow goods. That being the case, any kind of money multiplier that, in the view of multiplier alarmists, “multiplies” money and credit, would quickly render the dollar useless. We know this because real economic goods can’t be multiplied nearly as fast as money theoretically can be. Assuming a multiplier effect, there would be copious amounts of dollars chasing exceedingly few goods. If so, no one would borrow dollars. Why pay for the right to access a medium of exchange that banks are allegedly “multiplying” away the exchangeability of?


----------



## espola (Dec 2, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Boil your water if you live in Poway.


Did you find the City's response to a cosmetic problem with the water supply to be inadequate?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

Wez said:


> I actually agree with Iz on the current anti-Capitalism sentiment being expressed on the left.  I may not agree with his specific reasoning, but there is a ton of ignorance being expressed on both sides of the isle when it comes to Economics, Socialism and Capitalism.  The biggest mistake is mistakenly calling Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism and that's mostly Bernie's fault.


We actually don't agree. Social Democracy = Democratic Socialism and it's not Bernie's fault.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 2, 2019)

espola said:


> Did you find the City's response to a cosmetic problem with the water supply to be inadequate?


Yes.  And I haven't seen any updates regarding boiling drinking water since 11 am this morn'.


----------



## Wez (Dec 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Could you please tell me who has an actual socialist agenda and the size of the electorate that supports them and that idea wholeheartedly? . . . and how even if elected POTUS would that agenda get through congress, either the House or the Senate? There are borderline nazis in and around our government but I don't feel we will turn nazi soon . . . against t and some of his fools greatest hopes.


I didn't say we would become Socialist, but the far left's embrace of Socialism is a turn off to anyone who understands history.  I repeat: "The biggest mistake is mistakenly calling Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism and that's mostly Bernie's fault. "


----------



## Wez (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> We already have a national military, the best public roads in the world, many public water supplies, some public power generation (usually associated with public flood control and irrigation), Social Security, Medicare and similar public health programs, a progressive income tax system, public regulation of banks and other financial institutions -- heaven forbid we should turn socialist.


Us choosing to pay for those services with taxes earned in a Capitalist economy, does not make them Socialist.


----------



## Wez (Dec 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> We actually don't agree. Social Democracy = Democratic Socialism and it's not Bernie's fault.


I agreed with your post, I don't think you and I agree on much at all.  As for your assertion that Social Democracy is the same as Democratic Socialism, I don't expect you to understand such sophisticated concepts.  You have a right to your opinion, not the facts.


----------



## nononono (Dec 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> We already know you and dizzy are confused about it so you must be seeking guidance lol! You guys are such idiots it cracks me up every time!


*Really....*
*Funny how YOU are the " Retired Laborer " and pontificating....
I'm the " Employer " pointing out the TRUTH yet you know better....
Go do your research....and enjoy that Union derived retirement.
By the way " Mr Soapbox " that retirement was generated from*
*PROFITS, not TAXES.....*


----------



## nononono (Dec 3, 2019)

Wez said:


> I didn't say we would become Socialist, but the far left's embrace of Socialism is a turn off to anyone who understands history.  I repeat: "The biggest mistake is mistakenly calling Social Democracy, Democratic Socialism and that's mostly Bernie's fault. "





Wez said:


> Us choosing to pay for those services with taxes earned in a Capitalist economy, does not make them Socialist.





Wez said:


> I agreed with your post, I don't think you and I agree on much at all.  As for your assertion that Social Democracy is the same as Democratic Socialism, I don't expect you to understand such sophisticated concepts.  You have a right to your opinion, not the facts.


*They say things come in " Three's "......*
*
Well....Wez The Perv just proved Idiocy comes in " Three's " also....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 3, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Really....*
> *Funny how YOU are the " Retired Laborer " and pontificating....
> I'm the " Employer " pointing out the TRUTH yet you know better....
> Go do your research....and enjoy that Union derived retirement.
> ...


There you go yet again down some worm hole of your own making just to highlight your confusion, hilarious!


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  And I haven't seen any updates regarding boiling drinking water since 11 am this morn'.


What would you have had them do in addition to what has already been done?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> What would you have had them do in addition to what has already been done?


Beside the PSA?  Nothing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

Wez said:


> Us choosing to pay for those services with taxes earned in a Capitalist economy, does not make them Socialist.


So us choosing to pay for Ukraineʻs defense is not Socialist?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

Wez said:


> I agreed with your post, I don't think you and I agree on much at all.  As for your assertion that Social Democracy is the same as Democratic Socialism, I don't expect you to understand such sophisticated concepts.  You have a right to your opinion, not the facts.


Youʻve not stated any facts to support changing the order of words.  Not very sophisticated at all.


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Beside the PSA?  Nothing.


So you find their response to be inadequate, but you wouldn't have them do anything else.  Typical Izzy circle.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> So you find their response to be inadequate, but you wouldn't have them do anything else.  Typical Izzy circle.


who said their response was "inadequate"?  Typical read-spola off in  to the woods.


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> Did you find the City's response to a cosmetic problem with the water supply to be inadequate?





Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  And I haven't seen any updates regarding boiling drinking water since 11 am this morn'.





espola said:


> So you find their response to be inadequate, but you wouldn't have them do anything else.  Typical Izzy circle.





Bruddah IZ said:


> who said their response was "inadequate"?  Typical read-spola off in  to the woods.


q.e.d.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> q.e.d.


Exactly.  Whereʻs the “inadequate” again?  Did I actually say “inadequate”.  No.  Yes I found the response.  Inadequate seemed obvious to all but you that the cities system was inadequate to prevent the boil PSA.


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Exactly.  Whereʻs the “inadequate” again?  Did I actually say “inadequate”.  No.  Yes I found the response.  Inadequate seemed obvious to all but you that the cities system was inadequate to prevent the boil PSA.


I asked if you found the city's response inadequate.  You said yes.

Like t, you are hung by your own words.


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> I asked if you found the city's response inadequate.  You said yes.
> 
> I asked what more you thought they should do.  You suggested nothing.
> 
> Like t, you are hung by your own words.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> I asked if you found the city's response inadequate.  You said yes.
> 
> Like t, you are hung by your own words.


Lol! Your reputation for taking things out of context is safe.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> Did you find the City's response to a cosmetic problem with the water supply to be inadequate?





Bruddah IZ said:


> Yes.  And I haven't seen any updates regarding boiling drinking water since 11 am this morn'.


Not seeing where you have any wiggle room out of this one dizzy one.


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Not seeing where you have any wiggle room out of this one dizzy one.


He will keep trying.

For you inevitable entertainment --


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Not seeing where you have any wiggle room out of this one dizzy one.


Always wiggle room with you Spolas.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Dec 3, 2019)

espola said:


> He will keep trying.
> 
> For you inevitable entertainment --


Still boiling your water?


----------



## nononono (Dec 3, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> There you go yet again down some worm hole of your own making just to highlight your confusion, hilarious!


*So you classify yourself as a " Worm "....yeah I can see that.*
*You do worm around the TRUTH to make the LIES you spew*
*seem relevant.......*


----------



## espola (Dec 3, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Still boiling your water?


Poway is about 1000 feet away.  We are on San Diego water.


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 4, 2019)

Wez said:


> I agreed with your post, I don't think you and I agree on much at all.  As for your assertion that Social Democracy is the same as Democratic Socialism, I don't expect you to understand such sophisticated concepts.  You have a right to your opinion, not the facts.


Because you are the smart one, dummy.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 4, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> Because you are the smart one, dummy.


Do you ever tire of being a childish, suck up, toady?


----------



## Wez (Dec 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Youʻve not stated any facts to support changing the order of words.  Not very sophisticated at all.


The facts are in the very definition of the two systems.  It's you who bears the burden of proof.  Prove them to be the same.


----------



## Wez (Dec 4, 2019)

Bruddah IZ said:


> So us choosing to pay for Ukraineʻs defense is not Socialist?


Correct.  If you mistakenly call everything we do with tax money, Socialism, I can see why you're so confused.


----------



## nononono (Dec 4, 2019)

Wez said:


> Correct.  If you mistakenly call everything we do with tax money, Socialism, I can see why you're so confused.


*Once again Urine Idiot......*







*Go back in your " Box "....*


----------



## nononono (Dec 8, 2019)

*BEST JOBS NUMBERS IN A LOOOOONG TIME !*
*BEST ECONOMY EVER......!*
*DEMOCRATS = CRIMINALS*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 9, 2019)

Long-time restaurateur Gerry Sova, owner since 1970 of Capt. Keno’s Restaurant on Coast Highway 101, says he believes the reason for the closures is the economy is not as good as we are being told. Amster and the 7-Eleven owner agree. The 7-Eleven owner says she has had to bring in family to help out. “My store is worth half of what it used to be. We couldn’t sell it if we wanted to, she said.”


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Dec 9, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Long-time restaurateur Gerry Sova, owner since 1970 of Capt. Keno’s Restaurant on Coast Highway 101, says he believes the reason for the closures is the economy is not as good as we are being told. Amster and the 7-Eleven owner agree. The 7-Eleven owner says she has had to bring in family to help out. “My store is worth half of what it used to be. We couldn’t sell it if we wanted to, she said.”


What’s the tax rate in Ca? Dummy.
How about the tax in a gallon of gas?


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 10, 2019)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What’s the tax rate in Ca? Dummy.
> How about the tax in a gallon of gas?


Just another real world example of things just aren't like t says they are. There is still a lot of work to be done on the economy and stripping away regulations and giving the uber wealthy tax breaks (trickle down) isn't the long term answer.


----------



## nononono (Dec 10, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Long-time restaurateur Gerry Sova, owner since 1970 of Capt. Keno’s Restaurant on Coast Highway 101, says he believes the reason for the closures is the economy is not as good as we are being told. Amster and the 7-Eleven owner agree. The 7-Eleven owner says she has had to bring in family to help out. “My store is worth half of what it used to be. We couldn’t sell it if we wanted to, she said.”


*California is a FAILED DEMOCRATIC EXPERIMENT IN SOCIALISM.....*
*Entrepreneurs are leaving this Cesspool in droves because of what 
the Politicians " Feel " is good for the citizens of this STATE.....

When the inmates run the asylum it's time for a DRASTIC Change....
*
*Your posting history fully identifies YOU as an Inmate....






*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 10, 2019)

nononono said:


> *California is a FAILED DEMOCRATIC EXPERIMENT IN SOCIALISM.....*
> *Entrepreneurs are leaving this Cesspool in droves because of what
> the Politicians " Feel " is good for the citizens of this STATE.....
> 
> ...


You sure are a silly little man.


----------



## nononono (Dec 10, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You sure are a silly little man.


*Oh My....





*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Dec 10, 2019)

nononono said:


> *Oh My....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That is a nice picture, you look more well kept than I would have figured.


----------



## nononono (Dec 10, 2019)

Hüsker Dü said:


> That is a nice picture, you look more well kept than I would have figured.



*That's correct, well groomed....and Mentally agile...*
*
Now why do your posts come off conveying the image *
*below....*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 27, 2020)

Where's our self proclaimed resident "financial expert" to explain how the trump admin continuing to juice an already good economy is going to help us now? Can we please leave this to the real experts from now on? Recessions are inevitable, they happen with every Republican presidency, and now we have no mechanism to right the ship.


----------



## nononono (Feb 27, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Where's our self proclaimed resident "financial expert" to explain how the trump admin continuing to juice an already good economy is going to help us now? Can we please leave this to the real experts from now on? Recessions are inevitable, they happen with every Republican presidency, and now we have no mechanism to right the ship.


*You don't know squat.....what happens if the market corrects *
*3200 points in one day......oh gee golly maybe it was knee jerk
reactions to false statements from the crooked DEMOCRATS....

Go outside and scream at the clouds......
Anyone with a brain knows why the market is being falsely
manipulated by a manufactured Virus from a Criminal regime 
that works hand in hand with the Criminal Empire in the USA*
*known as the DEMOCRATIC PARTY....

Stormy Daniels/Micheal Avenatti........Damn it that didn't work.
Russia Russia Russia .....Damn it that didn't work.
Mueller Probe......Damn it that didn't work.
Ukraine Impeachment/Adam Schiff for Brain LIES......Damn it that didn't work.
China COVID-19/nCoV 2019/Coronavirus.........Damn it that didn't work.

How about the CDC Director ( Rod Rosenstiens sister ) coming out 
on Mon/Tues and scaring the shit out of investors and trying/DID tank the Markets.......

Well we are down 3200 points because of False statements 
from a DEEP STATE operative who should be........
LOCKED UP FOR WHAT SHE DID...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The administration has had this under complete 
control, China is the MAJOR CRIMINAL HERE ALONG 
WITH ALL OF THE DEMOCRATIC DEEP STATE SCUM...!*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 27, 2020)

nononono said:


> *You don't know squat.....what happens if the market corrects *
> *3200 points in one day......oh gee golly maybe it was knee jerk
> reactions to false statements from the crooked DEMOCRATS....
> 
> ...


Like the current admin you also have nothing but bluster.


----------



## nononono (Feb 27, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Like the current admin you also have nothing but bluster.


*I have the FACTS and TRUTH....!
You have nothing but LIES and EVIL DEEDS...*


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Feb 27, 2020)

nononono said:


> *I have the FACTS and TRUTH....!
> You have nothing but LIES and EVIL DEEDS...*


You crack me up, so serious, such a loon.


----------



## nononono (Feb 27, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> You crack me up, so serious, such a loon.


*What's up loony duck...........*


----------



## Wez (Mar 12, 2020)

Congratulations Trump and GOP, you're now Socialists! Bail Out Nation, brought to you by the criminals in the White Nationalist House.









						Fed to pump in more than $1 trillion in dramatic ramping up of market intervention amid coronavirus meltdown
					

The Federal Reserve intervened in financial markets for the second day in a row.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## nononono (Mar 12, 2020)

Wez said:


> Congratulations Trump and GOP, you're now Socialists! Bail Out Nation, brought to you by the criminals in the White Nationalist House.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*What's up Porta Potty Dweller......you get run off from the tournaments again.*


----------



## Sheriff Joe (Mar 12, 2020)

Wez said:


> Congratulations Trump and GOP, you're now Socialists! Bail Out Nation, brought to you by the criminals in the White Nationalist House.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What’s wrong with being a white nationalist?
You are a white globalist, see what that’s doing for us.
Build that wall and send them all back.


----------



## nononono (Mar 12, 2020)

*Wez isn't " White ".....*

*He's muddy brown and a Porta Potty Clown...*


----------



## messy (Mar 14, 2020)

Sheriff Joe said:


> What’s wrong with being a white nationalist?
> You are a white globalist, see what that’s doing for us.
> Build that wall and send them all back.


Trump is a major globalist. Globalism has been key to all of his business strategies. Just look at the manufacturing and the locations.


----------



## nononono (Mar 15, 2020)

messy said:


> Trump is a major globalist. Globalism has been key to all of his business strategies. Just look at the manufacturing and the locations.


*Kindly show the Forum where the current President is a Globalist...*
*You stupid dumbass.....

Oh..... MAGA is a " Globalist " mantra isn't it.
*
*Pound sand Bitch.*


----------



## espola (Mar 15, 2020)

Where is Izzy's analysis of the latest round of free money for banks and a new round of QE?


----------



## nononono (Mar 15, 2020)

espola said:


> Where is Izzy's analysis of the latest round of free money for banks and a new round of QE?


*Pull your head out.....*

*What the HELL do you think the Democrats are advocating for...!!!!!!*


----------



## Wez (Mar 17, 2020)

Bruddah IZ where are you on this blatant Socialism from our current leaders??









						Fed to pump in more than $1 trillion in dramatic ramping up of market intervention amid coronavirus meltdown
					

The Federal Reserve intervened in financial markets for the second day in a row.




					www.cnbc.com


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Mar 17, 2020)

Wez said:


> Bruddah IZ where are you on this blatant Socialism from our current leaders??
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Dizzy left in disgrace.


----------



## nononono (Mar 17, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Dizzy left in disgrace.


*No he didn't.....*
*
You're the disgrace ....

You support a Criminal Enterprise known as 
the Democratic Party/Globalists/Progressives/Communists*

*I would wager he saw this China driven economic collapse on the horizon too...


Wuhan Flu*
*Chinese Flu
Spanish Flu*
*Democratic Poo*


----------



## espola (Mar 17, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Dizzy left in disgrace.


Do you suppose he has been reborn as one of the new pandemic deniers?


----------



## Wez (Mar 18, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Dizzy left in disgrace.


Seriously?


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Apr 5, 2020)

espola said:


> Where is Izzy's analysis of the latest round of free money for banks and a new round of QE?


You mean because you didn't understand the analysis of QE's 1 thru 3?  Ask spigot boy.  He may be too busy holding the spigot wide open.  You people still crack me up!!


----------



## espola (Apr 5, 2020)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mean because you didn't understand the analysis of QE's 1 thru 3?  Ask spigot boy.  He may be too busy holding the spigot wide open.  You people still crack me up!!


I notice you didn't actually post an analysis of the new round of QE, as I mentioned.


----------



## Hüsker Dü (Apr 5, 2020)

espola said:


> I notice you didn't actually post an analysis of the new round of QE, as I mentioned.


Shocking, word salad game boy can't make a reasonable front for his assertions. He can only attempt affronts.


----------



## nononono (Apr 5, 2020)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You mean because you didn't understand the analysis of QE's 1 thru 3?  Ask spigot boy.  He may be too busy holding the spigot wide open.  You people still crack me up!!


*They are " TROLLS " and deny that " Their " party is one EVIL CRIMINAL OPERATION....*

*The # 4 " Package " is being readied as I write this by the EVIL WITCH PELOSI  !*

*She's 80 years old and this IS her legacy....one HUGE CRIMINAL LEGACY...*


----------



## espola (Apr 5, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Shocking, word salad game boy can't make a reasonable front for his assertions. He can only attempt affronts.


He could just copy from someone or drop a pointer like he used to do.


----------



## nononono (Apr 6, 2020)

*It's TIME .....LOOK OUT LIBERALS !!!!!





*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 23, 2020)

espola said:


> I notice you didn't actually post an analysis of the new round of QE, as I mentioned.


You want a different analysis of QE? You smart people crack me up.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 23, 2020)

Hüsker Dü said:


> Shocking, word salad game boy can't make a reasonable front for his assertions. He can only attempt affronts.


Start at page 1 again Huspola


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 23, 2020)

espola said:


> He could just copy from someone or drop a pointer like he used to do.


It wouldn’t matter what I copied.  You spola boys are too smart for your own good.


----------



## espola (Jun 23, 2020)

Bruddah IZ said:


> You want a different analysis of QE? You smart people crack me up.


I would like to see an analysis from a Republican, pro-t, viewpoint.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 23, 2020)

espola said:


> I would like to see an analysis from a Republican, pro-t, viewpoint.


An increase in the money supply without an increase in goods and services will cause a price increase in those same goods and services.  Regardless of viewpoint, political affiliation, pro-t or not.  I told Spigot boy that Donny T would be calling him in due time.  You must have been napping


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 24, 2020)

Interest rates are prices. They impart information. They tell a business person whether or not to undertake a certain capital investment. They measure financial risk. They translate the value of future cash flows into present-day dollars. Manipulate those prices — as central banks the world over compulsively do — and you distort information, therefore perception and judgment.

Interest rates ought to be discovered in the market, not administered from on high. They can’t do their essential work if someone, say a central bank, is muscling them around. Let’s get the central banks out of the business of using interest rates — and stock prices and exchange rates, too – as instruments of national policy. Today, investors live in a hall of mirrors: They don’t know which values are real and which are distorted by monetary manipulation. Market-determined rates will help restore clarity.--http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441128/james-grant-monetary-manipulation-must-end


----------



## nononono (Jun 24, 2020)




----------



## Bruddah IZ (Jun 26, 2020)

__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=478662613036016


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 5, 2020)

Bruddah IZ said:


> __ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=478662613036016


Yup


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 5, 2020)

Good news for California Uber and Lyft drivers.  They get to remian independent contractors (1099 workers).   Both stocks up 10% yesterday


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 5, 2020)

Californian’s said NO on Prop 15; taxing properties based on current market value rather than purchase price and increasing property taxes on commercial properties for funding local government...

What government needs a capital gains tax when they can tax you on unrealized gains.  Damn crooks!

And commercial properties are getting killed during this pandemic.  California wants to kick those companies and their employees in the gut by raising their taxes too!

I am shaking my head as to why 5 million plus Californian’s voted for such tyrannical measures during a pandemic.  

Grateful though that 40k plus more Californian’s were able to figure it all out and $quash prop 15.


----------



## espola (Nov 5, 2020)

Bruddah IZ said:


> Californian’s said NO on Prop 15; taxing properties based on current market value rather than purchase price and increasing property taxes on commercial properties for funding local government...
> 
> What government needs a capital gains tax when they can tax you on unrealized gains.  Damn crooks!
> 
> ...


What did Prop 15 have to do with capital gains tax?


----------



## crush (Nov 5, 2020)

espola said:


> What did Prop 15 have to do with capital gains tax?


Coo Coo


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Nov 7, 2020)

espola said:


> What did Prop 15 have to do with capital gains tax?


Who said it did?  Read-spola.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 3, 2021)

The possibility of investment also renders relevant the increased satisfactions that the rich person’s investment today makes possible for other people to experience in the future. If Bezos’s investment is successful in the market, this investment creates more goods and services for many consumers. The additional satisfactions that these consumers enjoy from these goods and services would not exist without Bezos’s investment. Therefore, when comparing the amount of satisfaction that a poor person would experience today from spending a dollar taxed away from a rich person, the comparison must be not only to the consumption satisfaction that the rich person would eventually experience from using this dollar, but also to the consumption satisfaction that many other consumers would eventually experience from the rich person’s successful investment of this dollar.

Because rich(er) people generally invest a larger portion of their incomes than do poor(er) people, as a practical matter the ‘economic’ (or utilitarian) case for progressive income taxation and for income redistribution – a case built on comparing the “marginal utility” of income or wealth enjoyed by poor(er) people to that enjoyed by rich(er) people is not as straightforward as many professors, pundits, and politicians suppose. As is so often true in economics, being attuned to more than what is immediately obvious yields insights very different from those that arise from looking only at what is immediately obvious.-- by DON BOUDREAUX


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 16, 2021)

Don’t Envy Rihanna’s Billion Dollar Empire. Celebrate It Rihanna’s rise from a poor immigrant from Barbados to global star to billionaire entrepreneur reveals the enduring power and reality of the American Dream.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

Lockdown Harms and the Silence of Economists 

The lockdowns of Spring of 2020 were likely responsible for much more of the decline in economic activity than the consensus among economists admits.

That lockdown would, in principle, impose overwhelming costs on the population at large is not surprising. The scope of human activity touched by lockdown is overwhelming. *Lockdowns closed schools and playgrounds, shuttered businesses, and barred international travel. Lockdowns told children they could not visit their friends, put masks on toddlers, and dismissed university students from campus. They forced elderly people to die alone and prevented families from gathering to honour their elders’ passing. Lockdowns cancelled screening and even treatment for cancer patients and made sure that diabetics skipped their check-ups and regular exercise. For the world’s poor, lockdown ended the ability of many to feed their families.*

Economists, who study and write about these phenomena for a living, had a special responsibility to raise the alarm. And though some did speak, most either stayed silent or actively promoted lockdown. Economists had one job—notice costs. On COVID, the profession failed.

There are personal reasons for this docility that are easy to understand. First, when public health officials first imposed lockdowns, the intellectual zeitgeist was actively hostile to any suggestion that there might be costs to pay. The lazy formulation that lockdowns pitted lives versus dollars took hold of the public mind. This provided lockdown proponents with an easy way to dismiss economists whose inclination was to point out costs. Given the catastrophic toll in human life that epidemiological modellers projected, any mention whatsoever about pecuniary harm from lockdown was morally crass. *The moral zeal with which lockdown proponents pushed this idea undoubtedly played an important role in side-lining economists. No one wants to be cast as a heartless Scrooge, and economists have a particular aversion to the part. The charge was unfair given the costs in lives that the lockdowns have imposed, but no matter.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

Our supposition of economists’ sense of duty to the world’s poorest was well justified.* For decades economists have fiercely defended the global economic system on the grounds that it has helped lift more than a billion people out of extreme poverty and increase life expectancy everywhere.* The global economy has some significant flaws—vast inequality and climate change are often noted. But the worldwide network of trade has an essential role in facilitating economic development that brings sustained improvements to the lives of the world’s poorest, economists have argued.

*The expected rush to quantify the global collateral damage from rich countries’ lockdowns never materialized. With few exceptions, economists most decidedly did not lean into quantifying lockdown harms either in developing countries or rich countries.*


You're not alone case clowns.


----------



## espola (Aug 30, 2021)

This whole thread is Izzy posting excerpts from his 24-volume set of "Things _THEY_ Won't Let Me Say on Television" and people mocking him.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

*Precautionary Principle and Lockdown Love*

Already in March 2020, economists considered lockdowns to be worthwhile. Their reasoning was a glorified version of the precautionary principle. Several research teams quantified how large the economic damage would have to be for lockdowns to be beneficial on net. Using epidemiologists’ guesses of how many lives lockdowns might save, these analyses calculated the dollar value of the life years saved by lockdowns.

In the early days of the epidemic, there was fundamental scientific uncertainty about the nature of the virus and the risk it posed. Faced with this uncertainty, many economists (joining other scientists less well trained in thinking about decision-making under uncertainty) adopted a peculiar form of the precautionary principle. The implicit counterfactual exercise in these analyses took at face value the output from compartment models with dubious assumptions about critical parameters, such as the infection fatality rate from the model and compliance with lockdown policy. Unsurprisingly, these early analyses concluded that lockdowns would be worthwhile, even if they were to cause extensive economic disruptions.

*Applied to the COVID crisis, the precautionary principle says that when you have scientific uncertainty, it may make sense to assume the worst-case about the biological or physical phenomenon you want to prevent. This is what the early economic analyses of lockdowns did by taking at face value the early estimates produced by epidemiological models (such as the Imperial College Model) of alarming COVID deaths in the absence of lockdowns.*


*The idea was that since we do not know with certainty, for instance, about the infection fatality rate, immunity after infection, and the correlates of disease severity, it is prudent to assume the worst. Therefore, we must act as if two or three out of a hundred infected people will die; there is no immunity after infection; and everyone, no matter what age, is equally at risk of hospitalization and death after infection.

Every one of these extreme suppositions turned out wrong, *but of course, we could not have known that with certainty at the time, although there was already some evidence to the contrary. Scientific uncertainties are notoriously hard to resolve in advance of the time-consuming scientific work to resolve them, so maybe it was prudent to assume the worst. Unfortunately, fixating on the worst-case scenario then spurred long-lasting unfounded fears among the public and economists.

This all sounds very reasonable, but there was a curious asymmetry in the application of the precautionary principle in these analyses. With the benefit of hindsight, it should be clear that this application of the precautionary principle to the uncertainties of March 2020 was shockingly incomplete.* In particular, it was not reasonable to assume the best case about the harms from the interventions you want to impose while at the same time accepting the worst case about the disease.*

There are harms from the lockdown policies that any responsible economist should have considered before deciding that lockdowns were a good idea even then. A consistent application of the precautionary principle would have considered the possibility of such collateral lockdown harms, assuming the worst as the principle dictates.

In the panic of March 2020, economists assumed the best about these collateral harms. They adopted the implicit position that the lockdowns would be costless and that there was no other choice but to enforce lockdowns, at first for two weeks and then for as long as it might take to eliminate community disease spread. *Under these assumptions motivated perhaps by a curiously asymmetric application of the precautionary principle, economists stayed silent while governments adopted lockdown policies wholesale.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

espola said:


> This whole thread is Izzy posting excerpts from his 24-volume set of "Things _THEY_ Won't Let Me Say on Television" and people mocking him.


The one you paid for? Lol!  Always fun watching the smartest guy in the room tell us how smart he is without telling us how smart he is.  Your technocratic bent is showing.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

espola said:


> This whole thread is Izzy posting excerpts from his 24-volume set of "Things _THEY_ Won't Let Me Say on Television" and people mocking him.


Was it the "case clown" that set the hook?


----------



## espola (Aug 30, 2021)

Bruddah IZ said:


> The one you paid for? Lol!  Always fun watching the smartest guy in the room tell us how smart he is without telling us how smart he is.  Your technocratic bent is showing.







__





						Essential Economics for Politicians
					

Money, without government setting interest rate, is like a bird withouFree market in the purest sense cannot exist without government enforcement.How does that bird feel about negative interest rates?  Again, government does not enforce interest rates.



					www.socalsoccer.com


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

*In addition to the asymmetric treatment of scientific uncertainty about COVID epidemiology and lockdown harms, economists erred in two additional ways in applying the precautionary principle.* First, *when evidence arose contrary to the worst case, economists insisted on continuing to believe the worst case. One example of this rigidity is the negative reaction by many (including many economists) to studies that showed the infection fatality rate from COVID to be much lower than initially feared.* Motivating much of this reaction was the thought that this new evidence might lead the public and policymakers to not believe the worst about the disease’s deadliness and thereby not comply with lockdown orders.[1] A second example is economists’ support (with some exceptions) in 2020 for continued school closures in the U.S. in the face of ample evidence from Europe that showed that schools could be opened safely.

Second, while the precautionary principle is useful for aiding decision-making (particularly, it can help avoid decision paralysis in the face of uncertainty), we must still consider alternate policies. *Unfortunately, in the Spring of 2020, economists—in their rush to defend lockdowns—largely closed their eyes to any alternatives to lockdowns, such as age-targeted focused protection policies. These mistakes further solidified the economics profession’s ill-advised support for lockdowns.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

*Rational Panic?*

A second strand of analysis by economists in Spring 2020 was perhaps even more influential in turning economists in favour of lockdowns. Economists observed that most of the decline in movement and economic activity occurred before governments imposed any formal lockdown orders. The conclusion? The decline in economic activity in Spring 2020 was driven not by lockdowns but by voluntary changes in behaviour. Fear of the virus induced people to engage in social distancing and other precautionary measures to protect themselves, economists reasoned.

Having concluded that lockdowns do not significantly impede economic activity, economists have seen little need to quantify any domestic or global collateral damage from lockdowns.

To governments, this consensus among economists provided considerable relief and arrived just in time. At around the same time in the Spring of 2020, it became evident that the depth of the economic contraction was much larger than first anticipated. It was essential to politicians to blame this economic damage on the virus itself rather than the lockdowns since they were responsible for the latter but not the former. And economists obliged.

https://collateralglobal.org/article/lockdown-harms-and-the-silence-of-economists/


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

Fear, Lockdown, and Diversion: Comparing Drivers of Pandemic Economic Decline 2020 Austan Goolsbee & Chad Syverson

The collapse of economic activity in 2020 from COVID-19 has been immense. *An important question is how much of that resulted from government restrictions on activity versus people voluntarily choosing to stay home to avoid infection.* *This paper examines the drivers of the collapse using cellular phone records data on customer visits to more than 2.25 million individual businesses across 110 different industries.* Comparing consumer behavior within the same commuting zones but across boundaries with different policy regimes suggests that* legal shutdown orders account for only a modest share of the decline of economic activity (and that having county-level policy data is significantly more accurate than state-level data). While overall consumer traffic fell by 60 percentage points, legal restrictions explain only 7 of that.* *Individual choices were far more important and seem tied to fears of infection. Traffic started dropping before the legal orders were in place; was highly tied to the number of COVID deaths in the county; and showed a clear shift by consumers away from larger/busier stores toward smaller/less busy ones in the same industry. States repealing their shutdown orders saw identically modest recoveries--symmetric going down and coming back. The shutdown orders did, however, have significantly reallocate consumer activity away from “nonessential” to “essential” businesses and from restaurants and bars toward groceries and other food sellers.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

*Having concluded that lockdowns do not significantly impede economic activity, economists have seen little need to quantify any domestic or global collateral damage from lockdowns.

To governments, this consensus among economists provided considerable relief and arrived just in time. At around the same time in the Spring of 2020, it became evident that the depth of the economic contraction was much larger than first anticipated. It was essential to politicians to blame this economic damage on the virus itself rather than the lockdowns since they were responsible for the latter but not the former. And economists obliged.*


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

From "larger" link in the post above


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

*But was this conclusion about the lack of marginal lockdown harms justified? Economists were no doubt correct that movement and business activity would have changed even without any lockdowns. *Vulnerable older people were wise to take some precautionary measures, the elderly in particular. The staggeringly steep age gradient in mortality risk from infection with novel coronavirus was already known by March 2020.

Nevertheless, the argument that people would have voluntarily locked down anyway even in the absence of a formal lockdown is spurious. First, suppose we take the argument that people rationally and voluntarily restricted their behavior in response to the threat of COVID as correct. One implication would be that formal lockdowns are unnecessary since people will voluntarily curtail activities _without lockdown_. If true, then why have a formal lockdown at all? A formal lockdown imposes the same restrictions on everyone, whether or not they are able to bear the harm. *By contrast, public health advice to restrict activities voluntarily for a time would permit those—especially the poor and working-class—to avoid the worst lockdown-related harms. *That some (though not all) people did curtail their behavior in response to the disease threat is thus not a sufficient argument to support a formal lockdown.


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Aug 30, 2021)

… is from pages 492-493 of the 2011 revised and enlarged edition of Thomas Sowell’s 2009 book _Intellectuals and Society_ (footnote deleted; link added):

_






The vast disparity in knowledge and understanding between intellectuals and the population at large assumed by the intelligentsia is crucial to the vision of the anointed, whether in discussions of law, economics, race, war or innumerable other issues. But, if the knowledge that is consequential includes a range of mundane information too vast to be known to any given individual – whether among the intellectuals or the masses – then top-down decision-making processes like economic central planning, directed by an intellectual elite, are less promising than market competition, where millions of individual decisions and mutual accommodations bring into play a vastly larger range of consequential knowledge, even if this knowledge is available to each individual in unimpressively small fragments of the total knowledge in society. As Robert L. Bartley of the_ Wall Street Journal _expressed this point of view: “In general, ‘the market’ is smarter than the smartest of its individual participants.”_


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 5, 2021)

This is what the COVIDOCRACY misses.

is from pages 464 of F.A. Hayek’s profound and important 1964 article “Kinds of Order in Society” (available without charge on-line here) as it appears in Liberty Fund’s 1981 single-volume collection of _New Individualist Review_:



> _
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> _*I]f the overall character of an order is of the spontaneous kind, we cannot improve upon it by issuing to the elements of that order direct commands: because only these individuals and no central authority will know the circumstances which make them do what they do.*_


*DBx*: Undeniably true.


The kind of knowledge to which Hayek here refers is what in 1945 he called “knowledge of the particular circumstances of time and place.” It is not scientific knowledge of the sort that scholars learn in school, teach to students, and sometimes – when they advance it – earns for them Nobel Prizes. It is not knowledge of statistical data, regardless of how thoroughly the statistics or econometrics are done. (Statistics, by its nature, aggregates measurements of individual, specific instances into larger lumps of data.) It is not even wisdom acquired through experience. Instead, it is knowledge (Hayek later said “information”), almost always new and surprising, of very precise, often fleeting details found in local circumstances – the discovery that a particular iron-ore mine contains more ore than previously thought; knowledge that a machine in a catfish-processing plant in Breaux Bridge, LA, has just broken down and can best be repaired by paying Gerry Dugas to do the job; a hunch that changing ever so slightly the way some fracking machines are used will increase the daily rate of extraction by about two percent; finding out that skilled labor in some town costs more than expected and experimenting on the spot with ways to minimize the impact on production costs; knowing what specific menu items, and prepared just so, are likely to work best at a Silvio’s Italian Kitchen in Westchester County, NY; discovering that the wall of a grain silo is weakening and how best to strengthen it; noticing at a Petco in Pueblo, CO, that buyers there have an unexpectedly high demand for a particular kind of cat-litter box.

Knowledge of scientific propositions – and, even more, experience – often prime the human mind to be better able to recognize particular facts such as these and to understand their potential significance. But scientific knowledge and experience alone are not the sources of the kind of knowledge that Hayek here has in mind.

*It is not too much to say that the most under-appreciated fact about modernity is the market’s astonishing success at routinely, every moment of every day, prompting individuals in their unique circumstances to notice and act on local, detailed knowledge in ways that change prices and, in turn, cause millions of strangers each to change his or her actions as if each of these strangers were consciously informed of some detailed piece of knowledge from far away and then persuaded to react to this knowledge as if his or her goal were to serve humanity as best as possible.

No serious person argues that the results of the market process are perfect in comparison to what the human mind can imagine. But no truly informed person denies that the results are truly marvelous. The irony is that the market works so well and so consistently that we take its successes for granted and notice only its relatively rare ‘failures.’*


----------



## crush (Sep 6, 2021)

*Happy Labor Day to all of you.*  This is Crush's Labor Day predictions for the future.  Entertainment purposes only and please do your own research & predictions and add some personal dreams to it and share as well.  One can only dream in these tough times and that's what I do all day  I have visions of so much fun for all of us some day.  The fact is, all of our ancestors ((working class)) worked their asses off to build this world and only a few got super duper rich off our great & great & great Grandpa's and Grandma's sufferings and sacrifices.  If you add all the industrialized wars to make extra dollars off our kids lives, it makes one think deeply today.  Plus all the abortions they want.  Wait until you find out what these monsters do with fetus.  It's truly insane to rationalize what these monsters are up to right now as we all rest on this Labor Day. It's time us workers taste some freedom and fun, just like all the Elitist have been enjoying since forever. America was started for this very reason. I can say without a doubt that their is plenty of food, land and resources for all of us to live freely.  I mean super free.  Like wake up tomorrow and if you dont want to get on the Hamster Wheel of life, then you dont have to.  If you dont want to go to school tomorrow, you dont have to.  Crazy to think about real freedom, right?  If they ((the good guys)) take all the $$$ away from the cheaters & snakes, then we all can get $100,000 each to kick start the new life and then $2500 a month each for life.  Inflation will come down.  So if one wants to sit in his room all day playing video games, go ahead.  That's freedom or addiction, but choice has to be made. We made these stupid video games and we have a generation of addicted and obese kids that just sit in their room all day and night playing video games.  If one 18 year old really wants to travel around the world, then they can.  It's called freedom.  Others like me and my wife, we want to innovate with our ideas.  I have so many ideas to help humanity.  I want to build the first ever, "Open 24/7" Holistic Healing Urgent Care.  No pills or thrills.  No office, just Mother Nature and all she has to help us be healthy with our amazing bodies that were created to win.  This has been going on for thousands of years until big farma took over and used Petroleum to treat our pain.  If you want booster jabs forever, you can do that too.  We will have two worlds to choose from very soon.  The new world order or freedom.  If you want big brother ((and your wife)) spanking your ass every morning to get on that damn wheel and telling you want you can and can;t do ((Espola and Dad types)) then you can have that as well.  I'm going to build my own wheel with my wife.  Peace to all!!!


----------



## Bruddah IZ (Sep 2, 2022)

The ultimate proof of the fallacy of mathematical projections comes from the Communist countries. No governmental system in the world has attempted to control all the financial aspects of an economy like the Communists. Yet every government that has pursued the “controlled economy” approach has either collapsed (Soviet Union), changed to limited capitalism (China), or become destitute (Cuba). According to the mathematical models the party leaders constructed, prosperity was supposed to be guaranteed. But it didn’t happen, because mathematical projections can’t account for outside variables. (By the way, considering the above examples, does anyone really believe the United States can have a balanced budget, when that conclusion is based on projected revenues and expenses?)


----------

