The Inevitable New The Inevitable Trump Mocking Thread

Friesland said:
Uh... no. It's not. Quantative easing is not directed the way tarrifs and import duties (and the retaliation) are, genious. Quantitative easing is, in the long run, a "tax", but it is a very different type of tax with a very different effects.

But what is most important to this discussion, QE (or the omnibus bill that "signaled" QE is over - even though it's been clear it's over for at least a year now) is not what moved the market on the day you and racist Joe claimed it did. Yet, you persist in that stupidity because... I have no idea.
Click to expand...

What Idea's do you have.......
 
Friesland said:
Hey, did North Korea denuke yet?

He's no libtard, but you all might want to check out Noah Rothman on the whole NK dance... Or just read this: Trump calls Kim Jong Un's letter to him a "very interesting letter." Then, after a few minutes, says he hasn't opened it yet, and that he could be in for a "big surprise."
Click to expand...
You think they would send this guy here to piss on Trump?
 
Looking for a common theme in t's recent pardons and commutations -- perjury, criminal acts while in elected office, campaign finance crimes, and treason.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
Funny that a government worker like yourself that self-admittedly couldn't make a dime investing during the O admin is fixated on my situation. Worry about yourself, you are the one who has cried about personal finance woes, not me, I'm fine.
Click to expand...
lol! Another ten years and you’ll be up 2 bucks.
 
Sheriff Joe said:
You think they would send this guy here to piss on Trump?
Click to expand...

Again, I offer the bet, no one takes me up on it.

NK has been trying for YEARS to get a 1 v 1 meeting with a US Pres. EVERY US Pres. has said "no" because NK never lives up to its promies.

Trump is GIVING them the meeting. He is getting... what? What has NK agreed to?

Seriously - "meeting with a nuclear-armed, rogue-state, murderous dictator to own the libs" is not necessarily the best policy.

But, sure, they're going to give up their nukes and open an In-and-Out burger.
 
Friesland said:
Again, I offer the bet, no one takes me up on it.

NK has been trying for YEARS to get a 1 v 1 meeting with a US Pres. EVERY US Pres. has said "no" because NK never lives up to its promies.

Trump is GIVING them the meeting. He is getting... what? What has NK agreed to?

Seriously - "meeting with a nuclear-armed, rogue-state, murderous dictator to own the libs" is not necessarily the best policy.

But, sure, they're going to give up their nukes and open an In-and-Out burger.
Click to expand...

And the difference between when Obama met with Iran is....?
 
Friesland said:
Again, I offer the bet, no one takes me up on it.

NK has been trying for YEARS to get a 1 v 1 meeting with a US Pres. EVERY US Pres. has said "no" because NK never lives up to its promies.

Trump is GIVING them the meeting. He is getting... what? What has NK agreed to?

Seriously - "meeting with a nuclear-armed, rogue-state, murderous dictator to own the libs" is not necessarily the best policy.

But, sure, they're going to give up their nukes and open an In-and-Out burger.
Click to expand...
Trump gives away bargaining chips with his every attempt at a "deal"*.

* In quotations because I'm not sure The Donald has a clue what is and what isn't a chance to strike a deal.
 
*GOBEARGO* said:
And the difference between when Obama met with Iran is....?
Click to expand...

What about!!!!

If you think this is a good idea, good for you.

If you don't know the difference between what our relationship with Iran has been versus our relationship with NK, I can't help you.

And again. Who wants to bet that NK does not give up their nukes? I'm still waiting.

And what are we getting? Seriously? What is the national benefit of the current diplomacy?

And do you think Melane is transitioning?
 
Friesland said:
What about!!!!

If you think this is a good idea, good for you.

If you don't know the difference between what our relationship with Iran has been versus our relationship with NK, I can't help you.

And again. Who wants to bet that NK does not give up their nukes? I'm still waiting.

And what are we getting? Seriously? What is the national benefit of the current diplomacy?

And do you think Melane is transitioning?
Click to expand...

But hamburgers.
 
Friesland said:
Of course, I said none of those things. "You people" actually like to make up things other people said so you can scold. You're a petty pedant who invents positions to rail against. If you think import duties and quotas affect the economy in exactly the same way as quantitative easing, well, you run with that. "They both distort the market by manipulation prices and thus supply and demand" is first week econ 101a. It's like saying HIV and HPV are the "the same, they're viruses that cause the bodies immune system to react." Ok, Dr. Genious. That will save a lot of lives... You're point is too broad to be interesting or informative. ALL national economic policy "distorts the market" - whether it's subsidies, differing tax rates, rebates, immigration/work visa restrictions, tax exclusions, or even simply the contracting policy (for big enough countries and big enough departments) of government departments. This fantasy of some "pure" market, outside of some souk in Raqqa or your local swap meet, maybe, is academic. Now, in the real world, tarrifs don't act "just like" QE anything. That's wrong and you will make stupid economic decision in the short to medium term if you believe it.
Click to expand...
Are you really doubting that tariffs and QE effects prices and supply and demand in exactly the same way? Especially, since you consider it "first week econ 101a". You seem conflicted. I don't remember any epidemiological analogies in that first week of economics either. I somewhat agree that my point might be too broad for most. But F.A. Hayek said it best in describing economics. "The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to man how little he knows about what he imagines he can design". Both QE and tariffs have repeatedly shown us how our government becomes the "con" in economics. I assume that you'll default to the, "but we need government to protect us from the ill effects of the market". That's fine, I'm for private property rights, easy taxes, and the rule of law. Both QE and tariffs obscure the law and rob the citizen of their hard earned savings and property. There is a broad explanation for what I just posted. It goes beyond first week econ but I started this thread with money and interest rates. You should start there and I'll be happy to provide further explanations if you require them. Laced and I had a very good conversation concerning money and how it really works.

There is not a single national economic policy that even comes close to distorting the markets like QE does. A broader conversation is needed but since you find it "too broad to be interesting or informative" you remain uninformed while some of the basics are discussed and solidified in the initial post of this thread.

Pure markets become fantasy whenever QE or tariffs are employed. The history of the negative effects of QE type monetary policy and tariffs are well documented for those who don't find economics "too broad to be interesting or informative".......in the real world that is.
 
Friesland said:
What about!!!!

If you think this is a good idea, good for you.

If you don't know the difference between what our relationship with Iran has been versus our relationship with NK, I can't help you.

And again. Who wants to bet that NK does not give up their nukes? I'm still waiting.

And what are we getting? Seriously? What is the national benefit of the current diplomacy?

And do you think Melane is transitioning?
Click to expand...

Do you...on anything you typed? Perhaps you should wait and see what happens before you consult your crystal ball aka CNN.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
Despite the incomplete nature of the recovery, influential voices are already calling for the Federal Reserve to guard against inflation by raising interest rates to slow the economy. The stakes in this debate are high. Macroeconomic policy (including monetary policy) that prioritized very low rates of inflation over low rates of unemployment is a key reason why real wages have stagnated for the vast majority of American workers in recent decades (as we have shown through our Raising America’s Pay initiative). Widespread wage growth will not occur over the coming years if the Federal Reserve prematurely slows the recovery in the name of fighting prospective inflation.

https://www.epi.org/nominal-wage-tracker/
Click to expand...
Another way in which QE distorts the labor market.
 
Hüsker Dü said:
Funny that a government worker like yourself that self-admittedly couldn't make a dime investing during the O admin is fixated on my situation. Worry about yourself, you are the one who has cried about personal finance woes, not me, I'm fine.
Click to expand...
Worry about yourself, not your PR campaign.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top