American Politics

[Tiny 12]

Tooms and Marquis, The shit has hit the fan at work so I won't have time to post much for a while.

Marquis, I'm giving you a gift before I leave.

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/imo/...ey_-_biden.pdf

Before I read it, I figured Joe Biden didn't have a lot to do with getting the Ukrainian prosecutor general, Viktor Shokin, fired, and he personally didn't receive payoffs from Burisma. Now I'm not so sure. The link is a an excerpt from an FBI FD-1023 report, describing interviews with a confidential informant, "CHS. " CHS appears to be a bush-league investment banker who specializes in oil and gas exploration & production. Zlochevsky is the owner of Burisma. Ostapenko was Burisma's chief financial officer. Shokin, again, was the prosecutor general of Ukraine, who allegedly was investigating Burisma.

While the whole FBI report is worth reading, here's an excerpt to whet your appetite,

"Zlocehvsky asked CHS and/or Ostapenko if they read the recent news reports about the investigations into the Bidens and Burisma, and Zlochevsky jokingly asked CHS if CHS was an "oracle" (due to CHS's prior advice that Zlochevsky should not pay the Bidens and instead hire an attorney to ligitgate the allegations concerning Shokin's investigation.) CHS mentioned Zlochevsky might have difficulty explaining suspicious wire transfers that may evidence any (illicit) payments to the Bidens. Zlochevsky responded he did not send funds directly to the "Big Guy" (which CHS understood was a reference to Joe Biden). CHS asked Zlochevsky how many companies/bank accounts Zlochevsky controls; Zlochevsky responded it would take them (investigators) 10 years to find the records (i.e. illicit payments to Joe Biden)."

Another highlight is when Zlochevsky says his dog is smarter than Hunter Biden, even though Zlochevsky was counting on Hunter to influence the U.S. government for various purposes.

Tooms, I don't have a gift for you right now, but am sure I'll come across something before long and will check back in to give it to you.

[Tiny 12]

Bull shit

Nobody pulled anyone out of poverty.

Wall St just transferred the wealth from the US to mainland CCP land.

And imported their poverty here.

They lowered our standard of living and raised CCP lands.

https://www.oecd.org/forum/asia-challenges.htm

The region remains home to two-thirds of the world's poor, with more than 800 million Asians still living on less than $1. 25 a day and 1. 7 billion surviving on less than $2 a day. Poverty reduction remains a daunting task!!

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/20...rior-illegals/

Hunger Games 2023 Dirty Joes NYC edition.

Free trade has made both the USA and the developing world more prosperous. We may have a smaller % of the pie, but the pie has gotten larger.

You earlier criticized me for wanting to see Asians make a living wage, because you incorrectly believe that comes at the expense of the American worker. Now you're saying 1. 7 billion Asians survive on less than $2 a day. Do you want them to stay poor? Do you think American consumers should have to pay 3 X what they're paying now for televisions and clothes?

Assembling electronic components, making clothes and a lot of other low end factory work is painstaking and tedious. Americans would rather do something else, although many Asians appreciate the opportunity to make enough money to feed themselves and their families. I believe the same applies to much of the work done by foreigners in the USA, although I don't believe they should be here illegally. A guest worker program makes more sense. The unemployment rate is 3. 6%, for goodness sake.

I guess you and Tooms are fans of big government spending on industrial policy like that authorized by Biden's Inflation Reduction Act and Chips and Science Act. And of high tariffs, like the ones imposed by Trump and continued by Biden. Well, they don't make sense. The best results come from spending money instead on basic research and development, and from opening foreign markets to American goods. And basic common sense policies, like the corporate tax system imposed by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (e.g. a competitive corporate tax rate and the GILTI tax, which encourages investment in the USA). You guys might borrow a bit of the time you spend watching MSNBC and reading Breitbart and look at this.

https://www.piie.com/sites/default/f.../piieb21-5.pdf

[Tiny 12]

As is shown everywhere in the data and historical results, the USA economy was already recovering and rebounding from the Reagan / Bush1 Repub Recessions doldrums, magnificently expanding, creating and strengthening businesses and adding jobs well before Nude Grinbitch and his fellow Do Nothing Repubs took control of Congress and had the power to put a damper on the potential even better positive results with their counterproductive government shutdowns meant to destroy the historic Clinton / Dem economy triggered by brilliant Dem Demand-Side, anti-Reaganomics, anti-Repub Supply-Side policies and legislation passed in 1993 without a single Repub vote.

Unless sniffing around Clinton's dick and balls to find out where they'd been contributed something of value to the USA economy not yet fully examined.

Some highlights are mine:

Growth Surprises in 1994.
Jan. 1, 1995

https://www.aei.org/research-product...rises-in-1994/

In short, the Great Clinton / Dem Economy was already well on its way, clearly establishing a nearly undefeatable upward and positive trajectory, although Grinbitch and his Do Nothing Repubs sure as hell tried, LONG before the 1994 Midterm elections.

Since then as now we have see you and other pro-Repub revisionist historians supporting that traditional Repub stunt of them rushing in after Dems have shouldered all the heavy lifting and assumed all the political risk to produce terrific economic results and outcomes to claim utterly and thoroughly undeserved credit for it. LOL. Seen them do it many, many, many times. They get a lot of help pulling off that deceitful and dishonest Repub stunt from typically pro-Repub Mainstream Media too. As we all know.

And here is another look back at Reagan's Great Repub Recession during Bush2's Great Repub Recession:

Reagans Recession.
Dec. 14, 2010

https://www.pewresearch.org/2010/12/...ans-recession/

I doubt boom times in 1994 had much to do with Bill Clinton. And I know the "Reagan Recession" was mostly the result of tight monetary policy by Paul Volcker et al. High real interest rates were what was required to cure high inflation.

You only look at the party of the president in explaining GDP growth and employment, and that doesn't have a lot to do with either. One exception, yes, a president and Congress can dump a lot of stimulus into the economy and boost GDP growth in the short term. And if we're in a recession, that makes sense. But our perennially growing deficits and stimulus when we don't need it, like Biden's American Rescue Plan, is growing our national debt to unsustainable levels.

I look at the longer term, and that's why I praise Reagan, Clinton after 1994, and Congress during the periods they served.

Clinton, Gingrich, et al balanced the budget, reformed welfare, passed NAFTA, and lowered the capital gains tax rate to 20%. Unfortunately future administrations undid a lot of what they accomplished.

Reagan, O'Neill (Democratic House Speaker) et al set the stage for a balanced budget by helping to end the cold war. The USSR couldn't keep up with us on defense expenditures and because of that and other reasons threw in the towel. Democracy came to much of eastern Europe. Defense expenditures could come way down as a % of GDP during the Clinton administration, paving the way for lower deficits and even budget surpluses. I also give Reagan, O'Neil and others credit for lowering the maximum tax rate from the ridiculous level of 70%, and making Social Security and Medicare solvent again. I say the later, even though I much prefer a true retirement and health savings system like what Singapore has to our system.

Since Clinton, the only significant positive legislative change related to the economy was lowering the total (federal + state) corporate tax rate from the highest in the developed world to the middle of the pack.

Your refrain as usual will be we need higher taxes. That doesn't appeal to me because the most prosperous decent-sized developed countries, that don't have the advantage of massive oil and gas production, all have small governments (in terms of government revenues or expenditures as a % of GDP), and high taxes are associated with larger governments. Also philosophically I view exorbitant taxation as akin to theft, and believe our federal government is inefficient when it spends our money.

[EihTooms]

Written as a gift for you ET.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...st-poll-means/

https://nypost.com/2023/09/24/trump-...gn=android_nyp

How long before Dirty Joe is indicted.

Or he drops out to spend more time with his "family" LMAO "the junkie in Florence Co".

Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar.

https://nypost.com/2023/09/24/trump-...gn=android_nyp

Thanks for the gift.

While it is interesting to see that passionate Repubs are rushing to their phones and online to tell the world how much they love their lord and master at Trump's time of greatest need for Repub hillbilly defense fund donations from their entitlement checks, there have actually been other "polls" being taken for the last several months that might be a bit more telling about Biden and his Dem Party's prospects going forward.

Maybe Newsmax and Breitbart haven't been mentioning them much lately:

Democrats have been winning big in special elections.
That could bode well for them in the 2024 election.

https://abcnews.go.com/538/democrats...y?id=103315703

Democrats keep winning special elections in battleground states.

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign...ground-states/

Democrats are on a special election winning streak.

https://www.axios.com/2023/09/21/dem...winning-streak

Democrats Are on a Winning Streak That Could Transform Our Politics.
Recent victories in Pennsylvania and New Hampshire special elections suggest Democrats can score huge wins in the fight to control state legislatures. That changes everything.

https://www.thenation.com/article/po...ure-victories/

Looks like those passionate Repubs are not showing up nearly as much as passionate Dems have been for these special elections that typically engender more Repub turnout.

Yes, it has been well documented that when gas prices increase, Biden's approval numbers decrease. As is the case right now. It is pretty much as simple as that.

But that doesn't necessarily mean the electorate blames Biden or the Dems for gas price inflation. Or for any inflation, really. After all, they didn't punish Biden and the Dems for higher and scarier inflation during the 2022 midterms, right? No, if anything, the electorate appeared to have blamed Trump's Party for inflation and a slew of other problems when they entered the voting booths last year.

And they are still blaming them this year. In the voting booth "polls", I mean.

Besides, maybe a miracle will happen and USA oil reserves will flood the market and help to lower gas prices sometime soon and cause Biden's approval numbers to greatly improve. Or early next year. Or around August, September, October and Novrmber of next year.

Miracles do happen, you know.

[MarquisdeSade1]

"I have nothing to do with and have never communicated with Mitt Romney, the NYT, MSNBC, or National Review. I did have a short conversation with Jeff Flake. It was an honor to speak with the great man. And I trolled the WAPO message boards for a while, until my teaser subscription rate expired.

Globalism and free markets have lifted billions out of poverty. As to "slavery" in China, apparently you haven't visited the country or you'd know better. Per capita GDP increased from $197 in 1981 before Deng Xiaoping become Chairman to $12,720.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...gdp-per-capita#text=Data%20 are%20 in%20 current%20 USA, a%202.61%25%20 increase%20 from%202019.

Adjusted for purchasing power, China's GDP per capita is around $22,000.

China doesn't have cheap labor any longer. If you want that you go to Vietnam, South Asia, Central America, etc.

I've worked in Asia off and on for 25 years, and few Asians would agree with your characterization of their labor forces. "

Nobody pulled anyone out of poverty.

Wall St just transferred the wealth from the US to mainland CCP land.

And imported their poverty here.

They lowered our standard of living and raised CCP lands.

https://www.oecd.org/forum/asia-challenges.htm

The region remains home to two-thirds of the world's poor, with more than 800 million Asians still living on less than $1. 25 a day and 1. 7 billion surviving on less than $2 a day. Poverty reduction remains a daunting task!!

https://www.breitbart.com/economy/20...rior-illegals/

Hunger Games 2023 Dirty Joes NYC edition.

[EihTooms]

Well goodness, I struck quite the chord. My impression from following the forum is that you two legendary mongers met and bonded. And things subsequently unraveled because of your political differences. And now I'm bringing you back together again! I'm happy for you.

The only way you're going to substantially increase GDP and prosperity in the USA is through increases in productivity. In economic terms, productivity is defined as units of output per hour worked. You don't increase productivity the Biden Way, which is also called the French Way, by keeping people in jobs that have become redundant. Or the Trump Way, also called the Biden Way since Biden carried on with his policies, by imposing massive tariffs on toys and textiles and the like in a futile attempt to bring low end manufacturing jobs back to America. You do it the Romney Way, also called the American Way and the Singapore Way, by improving the efficiency and competitiveness of businesses. Yes, this will result overall in people moving from jobs that add less value to jobs that add more value. Fewer people will be employed in low skilled occupations. .

I would also say your impression about anything "unraveling" between Marquis and I is mistaken.

Oh, but now I see in your post that a typo between my thumb and smartphone keyboard led me to way over praise MittWitt's jobs results re Staples. Not only did his Bain Capital not create 750,000 jobs at that company, as I erroneously misstated based on my own typo in a reply, he didn't even create the 75,000 that you said were employed there.

Therefore, instead of MittWitt's Repub Party's favorite economic policies and stewardship wiping out a mere 26 times that many USA jobs just in April 2020 under Trump and at least that many in each of more than one month in GW Bush's Great Repub Recession, they actually wiped out 267 Times and 10 Times that many USA jobs, respectively. My bad based on my own typo.

And that was thanks to classic Repub Party economic policy and stewardship that MittWitt not only would and did applaud and vote for, but most certainly would have promoted, passed and stewarded to that national economy result himself if given the same circumstances, conditions and political leverage to produce such a classic Repub result that Trump and GW Bush had.

As would Reagan. As would GHW Bush. As would Nixon. As would Ford. As would Ike. As would Hoover. As would Coolidge. As would all Repubs of at least the past 100 years if only given the same set of opportunities to produce such Repub crap economic results.

That's just how Repubs roll at the national level, what they do for a living, the only thing they do for a living, the only thing they know how to do, the only thing they want to know how to do and the only thing they want to do economically.

[MarquisdeSade1]

It's difficult to find a more current assessment.

But the pattern in any Google Search I have made on the topic puts Fux News clearly in the lead among Fake News Liars, MSNBC far behind in 2nd Place and CNN the least Fake News Liar of those three:

https://www.politifact.com/article/2...-meter-scorec/

That being the case, it is then worth seeing what the Best Truth-Teller of the 3 has to say about Fux News quite recently:

Analysis: Fox News has been exposed as a dishonest organization terrified of its own audience.

February 17,2023.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/17/busin...ies/index.html

They never give up.

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/do...23/id/1135629/

[MarquisdeSade1]

"As is shown everywhere in the data and historical results, the USA economy was already recovering and rebounding from the Reagan / Bush1 Repub Recessions doldrums, magnificently expanding, creating and strengthening businesses and adding jobs well before Nude Grinbitch and his fellow Do Nothing Repubs took control of Congress and had the power to put a damper on the potential even better positive results with their counterproductive government shutdowns meant to destroy the historic Clinton / Dem economy triggered by brilliant Dem Demand-Side, anti-Reaganomics, anti-Repub Supply-Side policies and legislation passed in 1993 without a single Repub vote.

Unless sniffing around Clinton's dick and balls to find out where they'd been contributed something of value to the USA economy not yet fully examined.

Some highlights are mine:

Growth Surprises in 1994.

Jan. 1, 1995.

https://www.aei.org/research-product...rises-in-1994/

In short, the Great Clinton / Dem Economy was already well on its way, clearly establishing a nearly undefeatable upward and positive trajectory, although Grinbitch and his Do Nothing Repubs sure as hell tried, LONG before the 1994 Midterm elections.

Since then as now we have see you and other pro-Repub revisionist historians supporting that traditional Repub stunt of them rushing in after Dems have shouldered all the heavy lifting and assumed all the political risk to produce terrific economic results and outcomes to claim utterly and thoroughly undeserved credit for it. LOL. Seen them do it many, many, many times. They get a lot of help pulling off that deceitful and dishonest Repub stunt from typically pro-Repub Mainstream Media too. As we all know.

And here is another look back at Reagan's Great Repub Recession during Bush2's Great Repub Recession:

Reagans Recession.

Dec. 14,2010.

https://www.pewresearch.org/2010/12/...ans-recession/

Written as a gift for you ET.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corne...st-poll-means/

[MarquisdeSade1]

https://nypost.com/2023/09/24/trump-...gn=android_nyp

How long before Dirty Joe is indicted.

Or he drops out to spend more time with his "family" LMAO "the junkie in Florence Co".

Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar Allahu Akbar.

https://nypost.com/2023/09/24/trump-...gn=android_nyp

[Beijing4987]

President Dick Cheney: "Reagan proved that deficits don't matter".

[MarquisdeSade1]

"I have nothing to do with and have never communicated with Mitt Romney, the NYT, MSNBC, or National Review. I did have a short conversation with Jeff Flake. It was an honor to speak with the great man. And I trolled the WAPO message boards for a while, until my teaser subscription rate expired.

Globalism and free markets have lifted billions out of poverty. As to "slavery" in China, apparently you haven't visited the country or you'd know better. Per capita GDP increased from $197 in 1981 before Deng Xiaoping become Chairman to $12,720.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...gdp-per-capita#text=Data%20 are%20 in%20 current%20 USA, a%202.61%25%20 increase%20 from%202019.

Adjusted for purchasing power, China's GDP per capita is around $22,000.

China doesn't have cheap labor any longer. If you want that you go to Vietnam, South Asia, Central America, etc.

I've worked in Asia off and on for 25 years, and few Asians would agree with your characterization of their labor forces. ".

You sound like you're sugar coating it a bit LOL.

You didn't mention the Foxcon suicides or their brilliant solution either the nets, if that isn't slavery what is?

There might be a tad of hyperbole in my characterizations but not much.

I've seen my share of Asia and as a generalization think its a huge toilet.

The Philippines Cambodia Thailand Indonesia (Japan isn't a toilet per se).

I'm pretty sure that ppp number you used is misleading.

I think they have some money concentrated on the cities bordering the coast of the West Philippines Sea.

The rest of the 1. 4 billion living inland are mostly much poorer.

If you take a shit load of money and average it out by 1. 4 billion people its misleading.

There you go, hanging around ET too much using stats to distort the truth of the matter.

USA ppp is $65000 do you know how many people in the country don't make anything near 65000, way too many.

They also have huge income disparities which your figures don't show.

You mention it has pulled billions out of poverty? Billions? Doubtful, now it sounds like you're stealing NYT talking points.

But nonetheless are you suggesting you gave a shit more about the well being of the 3rd world than your fellow Americans? If so, you ought to be very ashamed of yourself.

Here is the "Parasites dilemma" slavery was outlawed with the 13th amend in 1865.

So how do they get more slaves?

Import more here.

https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/bi...22/id/1135535/ (Andy Biggs the Good Mormon, Biggs for President 2028).

Or export all the jobs to 3rd world shitholes ie CCPland India SEA et al.

Asia aka the Globes source for slave labor.

But not to worry Dirty Joe is trying to even the score.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/23/u...ild-labor.html

[EihTooms]

Where did I say anything about Republicans? We haven't had a government that comports with my ideal during our lifetimes. The closest we came was during Bill Clinton's second term, when Republicans controlled Congress. Reagan and Tip O'Neill didn't do a bad job either.

As is shown everywhere in the data and historical results, the USA economy was already recovering and rebounding from the Reagan / Bush1 Repub Recessions doldrums, magnificently expanding, creating and strengthening businesses and adding jobs well before Nude Grinbitch and his fellow Do Nothing Repubs took control of Congress and had the power to put a damper on the potential even better positive results with their counterproductive government shutdowns meant to destroy the historic Clinton / Dem economy triggered by brilliant Dem Demand-Side, anti-Reaganomics, anti-Repub Supply-Side policies and legislation passed in 1993 without a single Repub vote.

Unless sniffing around Clinton's dick and balls to find out where they'd been contributed something of value to the USA economy not yet fully examined.

Some highlights are mine:

Growth Surprises in 1994.
Jan. 1, 1995

https://www.aei.org/research-product...rises-in-1994/

The U.S. economy has had a magnificent year, with growth nearly a third higher and inflation just a bit lower than had been expected last January. Meanwhile, U.S. and global financial markets have had a terrible year, with interest rates rising so fast that bond prices have fallen by nearly 20 percent while stock prices have slipped by about 5 percent.

Obviously, the gap has widened in favor of the real economy, where goods are produced, against the financial markets, where claims on future production are priced. Groans in New York, where financial markets are located, contrast sharply with jubilation in the Midwest, where real goods are produced.
...
U.S. Economic Date: The Big Surprises of 1994

In January 1994, the consensus of growth forecasts for the United States for the coming year was a 3 percent increase in the gross domestic product. Two-thirds of the forecasts for growth ranged from 2.7 to 3.3 percent. Just eleven months later, by December 1994, the forecast for 1994 growth had been increased to 4.0 percent, a 33 percent increase in the projected growth rate, representing an extra $60 billion worth of goods and services. Just the error in the growth of U.S. GDP for 1994 was equal to more than half the gross domestic product of Denmark.

The 1994 U.S. growth surprise has been driven by unexpectedly strong household spending on durable goods and unexpectedly strong business spending on capital goods. In January, consumption spending was expected to rise at about 3 percent. The actual figure will probably be closer to 3.5 percent. The January forecast for growth of business investment was 8.2 percent. The actual figure will probably be closer to 14 percent.

The surge in household spending on durable goods meant that households wanted to increase their holdings of appliances and automobiles and other such real assets that provide a stream of services over time. Spending on housing, another such asset, has been above the expected level for most of 1994, despite sharply higher interest rates.

Another form of business investment that has been especially strong during 1994 has been business investment in inventories of unsold goods. Of course, much inventory investment has been driven by stronger than expected demand growth. As demand rises relative to what businesses predict, inventories are run down and the ability to provide customers with goods impaired. If businesses expect sales growth to continue and if they expect prices to be firm or to rise while inventory finance costs are steady, business will wish to increase their inventory holdings.

Strong inventory investment during the second quarter of 1994 led many analysts to expect a slowdown in the third quarter because the inventory accumulation was judged to be unwanted, because of unexpectedly slow sales growth. As it turned out, inventory investment during the third quarter was nearly as large as that of the second quarter and still insufficient to keep inventories rising as rapidly as sales were increasing.

Beyond that, inventories at the wholesale and intermediate levels provided their owners with an extra inflation bonus. At the wholesale level, prices of intermediate and crude goods rose rapidly enough to reward companies with gains on their inventory positions. Some analysts have estimated that one-third to one-half of third-quarter corporate profits was related to the rising value of inventories of raw materials and intermediate goods.

The unexpected acceleration of demand growth required firms to increase production schedules. The January forecast of a 4 percent growth rate of industrial production was sharply exceeded with year-over-year industrial production rising at 6.6 percent by November. The extra production required increased employment of labor. Growth in payroll employment has also been stronger than expected, while the unemployment rate has dropped to 5.6 percent as of November, well below the expected level for year-end of around 6 percent.

During the second half of 1994, the U.S. expansion has gained momentum instead of losing it as had been forecast earlier. Strong demand growth, an increase in hiring, and resultant more rapid growth in incomes have created a self-reinforcing expansion. Higher income growth increases demand further, which in turn requires more production and more employment of labor and once again generates more income.

In short, the Great Clinton / Dem Economy was already well on its way, clearly establishing a nearly undefeatable upward and positive trajectory, although Grinbitch and his Do Nothing Repubs sure as hell tried, LONG before the 1994 Midterm elections.

Since then as now we have see you and other pro-Repub revisionist historians supporting that traditional Repub stunt of them rushing in after Dems have shouldered all the heavy lifting and assumed all the political risk to produce terrific economic results and outcomes to claim utterly and thoroughly undeserved credit for it. LOL. Seen them do it many, many, many times. They get a lot of help pulling off that deceitful and dishonest Repub stunt from typically pro-Repub Mainstream Media too. As we all know.

And here is another look back at Reagan's Great Repub Recession during Bush2's Great Repub Recession:

Reagans Recession.
Dec. 14, 2010

https://www.pewresearch.org/2010/12/...ans-recession/

Prior to the current recession, the deepest post-World War II economic downturn occurred in the early 1980s. According to the accepted arbiter of the economys ups and downs, the National Bureau for Economic Research, a brief recession in 1980 lasting only six months and a short period of growth, were followed by a sustained recession from July 1981 to November 1982. The unemployment rate did not fall below 6%, however, until September 1987.

In the spring of 1981, shortly before the onset of the painful recession, most Americans were optimistic about their economic future. A Gallup survey at the time found that 48% of the public believed the financial position of their household would be better in the next 12 months. Another 35% believed it would stay the same, while only 15% thought it would get worse. The public also smiled on the newly elected president. In a May poll, nearly half of Americans said the Reagan administrations economic policies would make their familys financial situation much better (8%) or somewhat better (41%). Just 37% said Reagans policies would make their family finances worse.

A year later, in September 1982, with the unemployment rate at 10.1%, most Americans were far from pleased with the state of the economy. A 54%-majority said Reagans policies had made their personal financial situation worse; just 34% said the policies had made their situation better. But even as the economy reached its nadir, the public did not lose all confidence in Reagan: In an October survey, a 40%-plurality said that over the long run the presidents policies would make their economic situation better, while a third said they would make things worse and 15% volunteered they would stay the same.
....
As Andrew Kohut noted in a special to the New York Times, the rising unemployment paralleled a rise in disapproval of Reagans job performance. By the summer of 1982, only 42% of Americans approved of the president. Reagans approval would eventually hit a low of 35% early in 1983. In September 1982, when the public was asked asked by Gallup whether Reagan was correct to argue that his economic program needed more time or that Democrats were right in asserting that budget deficits and high unemployment were signs he had failed, half of Americans sided with the Democrats while 43% agreed with the president. A year and a half into his presidency, only 36% of Americans wanted Reagan to run for reelection at the end of his first term, while 51% said they would rather he sit the election out. Of course, the economy eventually did rebound, and so did Reagans poll numbers.

[MarquisdeSade1]

Unless the scum pull off cheating again.

https://www.aol.com/news/no-mistake-...131701170.html

[Tiny 12]

You can't snow me with your revisionist history contradicting the reality of typical Repub Administration Economic Disasters vs typical Dem Administration Far Superior Results.

I was born before Eisenhower's 1st Recession. I was a bit too young to be fully aware of the downturn in his 2nd Recession. But by the time of his 3rd Recession I was far enough into grade school to read, write, understand much of what was being reported on the evening news and was fully aware of how shitty economic conditions were under Ike. Compounded by the shitty economic conditions in our Ruby Red state anyway.

Which was why the adults in my extended family had to get the hell out of that place and hope for much Happier Days post-Ike. I was even aware that the improvement in all of their job opportunities was as much about Ike being replaced by JFK and his decidedly non Repub policies and stewardship as our escape from that Ruby Red state.

Every Repub Admin result vs Dem Admin result since has repeated the same Crap Repub results vs Far Superior Dem results pattern. Only more so.

So MittWitt's Bain Capital somehow created 750,000 low paying jobs at Staples, did it?

MittWitt's endorsement of and vote for Trump's classic Repub economic policies and stewardship wiped out 26 times that many USA jobs just in the month of April 2020! LOL.

He wasn't Senator yet, but I don't recall MittWitt speaking out against so-called president George W. Bush's classic Repub economic policies and stewardship that eventually wiped out 750,000 and more USA jobs in a single month when those classic Repub economic policies and stewardship came to fruition.

Yeah. Big difference between classic numbskull Repub economic policies for an entire nation and what some team of corporate henchmen can do to make CEOs and corporate board members wealthier.

Where did I say anything about Republicans? We haven't had a government that comports with my ideal during our lifetimes. The closest we came was during Bill Clinton's second term, when Republicans controlled Congress. Reagan and Tip O'Neill didn't do a bad job either.

[Tiny 12]

Free trade and free markets are euphemisms for slavery, plain and simple.

Wall St loves Asia because it has billions of dirt poor slaves.

No pesky costly environmental protections.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...cape-smog.html

No pesky costly labor laws.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...device-extract

How bad does it have to be to go to the roof and jump.

https://www.reddit.com/r/pics/commen...the/?rdt=40681

I don't remember reading about slaves in America ever killing themselves or even the slave owners.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Kanye/comme..._was_a_choice/

I'm guessing slaves in CCP land have it much much worse worse than in they did in the American south. Tiny's comment: LOL. Really loud.

Those articles represent thee raison thetre or ikigai if you will for the NYT.

Everything else is subterfuge and window dressing for the Macro agenda (see articles attach).

Some libertarians like you (Mitt and Flake) have teamed up with the likes of NYT MSNBC WAPO National Review.

To demonize orange man.

For only one purpose.

Cheap slavery from CCP land.

Nothing else matters.

NYT started ME2 and hung Harvey.

They fueled BLM riots.

They were all about gay marriage and now cutting 5 yr olds dicks off.

Its all a BIG CON.

They are whoors that only care about one thing.

Manipulating the lemmings to support whatever they say in support.

Of the MACRO agenda.

Dirt cheap slavery operations in CCP land.

Well orange man fucked that up for them, so they cheated him out in 2020 and they will surely at least try in 2024.

Next stop is India, very ripe for exploitation.

https://pulitzercenter.org/blog/worlds-toilet-crisis

Watch this shit!

I have nothing to do with and have never communicated with Mitt Romney, the NYT, MSNBC, or National Review. I did have a short conversation with Jeff Flake. It was an honor to speak with the great man. And I trolled the WAPO message boards for a while, until my teaser subscription rate expired.

Globalism and free markets have lifted billions out of poverty. As to "slavery" in China, apparently you haven't visited the country or you'd know better. Per capita GDP increased from $197 in 1981 before Deng Xiaoping become Chairman to $12,720.

https://www.macrotrends.net/countrie...20 from%202019.

Adjusted for purchasing power, China's GDP per capita is around $22,000.

China doesn't have cheap labor any longer. If you want that you go to Vietnam, South Asia, Central America, etc.

I've worked in Asia off and on for 25 years, and few Asians would agree with your characterization of their labor forces.