View Full Version : American Politics
And if you didn't reprimand and punish your six year old for a blatant bit of lying by omission like yours in that post you might be guilty of negligent parent.
I said any suggestion that it was "down" under Obama or because of something Obama did is BS. You omitted that last part trying to pull a little porkie pie, didn't you?
The downward plunge trajectory all through Reagan wannabe Repub GW Bush's presidency unavoidably bled into Obama's presidency in the wake of GW Bush's Great Repub Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction. It was "down" under Obama for that reason and that reason alone until Obama's economy halted the plunge and reversed the trajectory. Which is what Trump inherited.
Look at that Max chart and anyone can see that dramatic and steady downward trajectory for Labor Force Participation all through Reagan wannabe GW Bush's economy had no more to do with anything Obama did to put it there before his economy dramatically reversed course on it than the dramatic and steady downward trajectory for the unemployment rate through Obama's presidency that bled into Trump's presidency had anything to do with it continuing to decline from 3. 9% to 3. 5% after his typical Repub waste of Trillions TCJA took effect.
Seriously, show your six year old that chart and this one below and find out what he can teach you about easily observable reality:
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000
Oh, be sure to set the above chart coverage range back to at least 2008. Your six year old can help you with that.Do you not understand the definition of the word "or"? Or do you not believe that the labor force participation rate went down between January, 2009 and December, 2016 because a Democrat was president? Or both?
I said that I had no idea whether Obama had anything to do with weak employment and GDP growth after the 2008/2009 recession. So you interpret that, and my link to and description of a St. Louis Fed data series, as a "vague suggestion" that Obama was responsible for a decline in labor force participation rate. And any vague criticism of a Democrat is a blatant lie.
I said that the anomalous increase in real median household income and wages and 50 year lows in the unemployment rate before COVID were partly attributable to the changes in corporate taxation in the TCJA and deregulation. I didn't relate that to the Republicans' big tax cuts for the middle class in 2018 (and in fact said there were valid arguments for and against them) or to the Bush tax cuts. You're really having to jump through hoops to try to show that Bush is responsible for the decline in the labor force participation rate when Obama was president. And I don't understand why you're doing that since you also said any suggestion that the labor force participation rate was down under Obama is B.S.
The unemployment rate declined from 4.7% at the start of Trump's term in office to 3.5% in February, 2020, and didn't fall below 4% until May of 2018. I'm not sure where you're coming up with 3.9%.
As to your unemployment chart, I give the Democrats, and Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin in particular, credit for not jacking the corporate tax rate (or other taxes) back up at the tail end of a recession. That was certainly helpful. And will point out that while we're at 3.7% unemployment again, the labor force participation rate is about one percentage point lower than it was in February, 2020. And while only 3.7 million people are looking for full time work, there are 10 million nonfarm job openings. Something's out of whack there. I won't attribute that to Democratic Party policies or the Biden administration, although you're free to take that as a vague criticism of Democrats and therefore a blatant lie.
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS13100000
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JTSJOL
I hear Biden has already assured doughy, infantile Ron "no Federal aid for Hurricane Sandy" DeSantis that real tax payers in responsible states like New York and California will pick up the tab for his massive shortfall on this.
Hurricane Ian could be Floridas costliest storm ever
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/09/30/business/hurricane-ian-cost
Considering Repub pols in states like Florida have for decades ignored the fact that their locations are ripe for the worst of ongoing Climate Change disasters, this might be a good time to start denying Federal assistance beyond immediate life-saving measures to states and districts whose Senators and Representatives did not vote for Biden's American Rescue Plan, Infrastructure Bill and especially the Inflation Reduction Act.
We'll see how inflation goes for those Repub areas when they get their wish to have all these issues taken care of and paid for from "smaller government" city, state and local tills and pay full boat to their ever popular private sector businesses from now on.
Darn it!
I was just about to report on this very same topic, w/r to PVMongers post on "red states" and you beat me to punch...WELL DONE!
Great post!Disaster relief is a sensible function of the federal government. It makes sense for us to have stockpiles of water, food, blankets, N95 masks, and other materials, and the manpower to respond to disasters in the states and Puerto Rico, instead of having each state prepare on its own. I've said as much when I praised George Bush for building up our stockpiles of PPE after SARS, and criticized the Trump and Obama administrations for letting them run down.
On the other hand, when it comes to rebuilding, Federal money after disasters has encouraged bad behavior. If people and their insurance companies had to shoulder most of the cost of rebuilding their beach homes, instead of government, then they wouldn't rebuild in some instances. And construct to higher standards in others. My opinion, if states and cities, other than where I live, want to pay for foolish behavior, let them have at it. It's none of my business and no skin off my back. But the federal government shouldn't take our tax dollars and spend them on foolishness. And unfortunately it does a lot of that.
Here's a link to an article in one of Toom's favorite newspapers, which I recently subscribed to, written by a professor at Western Carolina University, who directs their program for the study of developed shorelines.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/04/opinion/hurricane-ian-coast-rebuilding.html
Some excerpts,
Hurricane Ian is the latest devastating hurricane to confirm that coastal areas are failing to keep rebuilt or new development out of highly vulnerable areas.
Local emergency managers know all too well which places in their communities should not be built back after a storm. But they are rebuilt, because the federal government and states provide multiple incentives to rebuild rather than to relocate. The assumption is that taxpayers will always be there to back up private investment after even predictable natural hazards.
Mantoloking, N.J. , was a poster child in 2012 for Superstorm Sandy's destructiveness. The barrier island that the borough sits on was ripped in half. Homes were destroyed. Even the areas of greatest destruction were rebuilt. We know it will happen again.
The money for such rebuilding comes largely through the public assistance sections of the 1988 Stafford Act. This legislation created the federal system of emergency response. When the president makes a federal disaster declaration for a county, aid dollars flow in with few strings attached.
Federal and state taxpayers have spent billions of dollars over the past four decades pumping up beaches in front of coastal properties in what are known as beach nourishment projects. In Florida alone, almost $3 billion in public funds has been spent just to keep beaches in front of investment homes and oceanfront infrastructure. Studies in Florida have shown that these beach projects increase oceanfront development. Government spending is incentivizing this expansion into danger zones a classic example of moral hazard, in which there is no reason to protect against risk when the government or federally subsidized flood insurance is there to pick up the tab.
I am not callous about storm relief. There are many people who need help in Ian's aftermath, and the first order of business must be ensuring they get that assistance. But a national conversation is long overdue about the dollars we invest in rebuilding coastal resort communities and what we should expect in return. At the moment, taxpayers are getting little back from these investments.
Taxpayers should not be subsidizing the risk of irresponsible development, and we clearly shouldn't be rebuilding areas of known hazard multiple times.
Tiny's question: Do you think the NYT would have published something similar if the storm had hit New Jersey instead of Florida? My guess is no. They'd much prefer, like Tooms above, to take money from Republicans and only redistribute it to Democrats, whose representatives voted for the "American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure Bill and especially the Inflation Reduction Act."
FT MYERS, FL — In a desperate attempt to get help for its citizens and deal with the growing humanitarian crisis in the area, a Florida town devastated by Hurricane Ian has taken the unusual step of raising the Ukrainian flag, hoping to convince Congress to send aid.
"The Ukrainian government flies this flag, and they're just swimming in billions and billions of dollars in support from the United States. We're just swimming in sewage," said Ray Valdivia, the Response Coordinator working to assess the damage in the town. "We tried going through the normal channels to get help from the government, but Biden just sent us a letter of "best wishes" that looks like it may have been written in crayon."
Though the situation across the Sunshine State has been critical since the hurricane blew through last week, Congress has maintained a keen focus on funneling astronomical amounts of taxpayer money overseas to pay the salaries of Ukrainian government officials and support American defense contractors' war efforts against Russia.
"These requests coming in from Florida are small potatoes," Nancy Pelosi slurred at her meeting with the press when asked about providing hurricane relief. "Sending money to Florida would not save the world from Russia or effectively launder the taxpayer money in any way."
At publishing time, citizens of Ft. Myers were working on using fake Ukrainian accents and inviting Hollywood celebrities to visit their devastated towns, hoping to convince the ignorant actors that they were visiting war-torn Kyiv instead. . .
Disaster relief is a sensible function of the federal government. It makes sense for us to have stockpiles of water, food, blankets, N95 masks, and other materials, and the manpower to respond to disasters in the states and Puerto Rico, instead of having each state prepare on its own. I've said as much when I praised George Bush for building up our stockpiles of PPE after SARS, and criticized the Trump and Obama administrations for letting them run down.
On the other hand, when it comes to rebuilding, Federal money after disasters has encouraged bad behavior. If people and their insurance companies had to shoulder most of the cost of rebuilding their beach homes, instead of government, then they wouldn't rebuild in some instances. And construct to higher standards in others. My opinion, if states and cities, other than where I live, want to pay for foolish behavior, let them have at it. It's none of my business and no skin off my back. But the federal government shouldn't take our tax dollars and spend them on foolishness. And unfortunately it does a lot of that.
Nice try buckaroo, and definitely a better effort than "Houston has a Democratic mayor and gasoline prices there are lower than California. " But the price has been higher in California for a long time. Here's a comparison between two series for "the DOE Retail Automotive Gasoline All Grades Average Price" for California and Texas. I downloaded the data from Bloomberg to Excel, but if you're energetic you can probably do the same thing by going to the DOE web site.
How much more gasoline cost in California than Texas:
2015:43%.
2016:38%.
2017:34%.
2018:41%.
2019:56%.
2020:65%.
2021:50%.
2022 YTD: 48%.
By the way, the premium from 2006 to 2014 was in the range of 12% to 20%. I'm not sure what happened in 2015 to cause it to shoot up.Firstly, I said nothing of the kind re: "Houston has a Democratic mayor and gasoline prices there are lower than California. " What I said was in response to Canada saying, in essence, "Why are gasoline prices higher in Dem run cities". He, not I, used Houston and Tucson as examples. It is absolutely not my fault that his analysis was incorrect and it is not my fault that you willfully misunderstood.
Secondly, your analysis above fails to account for several issues. One issue is the number of refineries in the state. I'll bet that Texas has more than double the number of refineries as does California and has for a long time. Another issue is the fact that Texas has many more pipelines than does California. The third issue that you "forgot to mention" is that California requires special gasoline formulation that makes gasoline sold there more expensive.
As a reminder, I did not say that California gasoline was cheaper than Texas gasoline. You obviously interpreted it that way but, hey, show me where I said it.
Gee, why not count the number of refineries in California and the number of refineries in Texas? I'll bet dollars to donuts that Texas has more than double the number of refineries than California. And I would also bet that the disparity has existed for a long time. Sure, let's not mention that, right?
Let's also not mention that California has unique fuel blends that help control smog. After all, that wouldn't have anything to do with price either, would it? Sheesh, the lengths you guys go to dig yourselves into a hole is astounding.
And, since you can't read, Canada said in his post "Why is gas 80 to 100 percent higher in dem run cities? I pointed out that Houston and Tucson (both cities that he used in his rant to prove that gas was cheaper in Republican cities) both had Democratic mayors. I can't help it if his analysis was faulty and I can't help it if you can't read.That doesn't really explain it. Looking at unleaded regular in the year to date 2022, the PADD 1 C states, being states from Florida north to Virginia, the premium is 4% to Texas. For New York it's 14%. And for Denver it's 7%. Numbers again were downloaded from Bloomberg.
Reformulated gasoline to control smog is required in Houston and New York City, and I don't believe the cost is substantially higher than the respective statewide averages. Which again aren't at huge premiums to the price in Texas.
A quick glance at requirements for California gasoline makes me think the state is micromanaging formulations, without giving appropriate consideration to costs and benefits. That is, without allowing the refineries to use cheaper methods to produce similar results. But I don't know enough about refining to really know.
I don't view the issue as Republican vs. Democrat. Colorado and New York are blue and their prices aren't that out of whack with the rest of the country. I view it as a California issue. California is kind of like a "gasoline island", in that it doesn't have the oil and product pipelines (gasoline pipelines) that crisscross most of the rest of the USA. The reason was because California had lots of oil production and refinery capacity, so no need to interconnect. A person could make the same arguments about California and gasoline as you made about Texas and electricity, the big difference being that California is no longer a power house in terms of oil and gasoline production. And, in terms of power and fuel, Texas still is. California is exacerbating the problem, for people who spend a large % of their disposable income on gasoline, with high taxes and fees, by discouraging oil production, and, I think, by micromanaging gasoline formulations.
As to the refineries, I note that ten with capacity of 205,750 barrels per day were permanently shut down in Texas between 1990 and 2021, while fourteen with capacity of 998,050 barrels per day were shut in California. I'm using "total downstream charge capacity."
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/refinerycapacity/table13.pdf
I thank god every day that California knows how to apply sensible and responsible regulations and tax policy in order to make living and working there more attractive and profitable than most anywhere else in the country if not on Earth.Hmmm, I wonder why a net 261,902 people left California in the year ended June 30, 2021, while 310,288 moved to Texas. Texas is hot as hell in summer, cold in winter, doesn't have many mountains, has crappy beaches, and doesn't have a fraction of the things to do that California has. Well, the 13.3% state income tax rate probably had something to do with Elon Musk moving. Not sure about the rest. Anyway I hope all the Democrats stay in California. I don't want them moving to where I live and voting.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2022/04/25/-/media/data-visualizations/interactives/2016/fiscal-50/docs/2013/PopulationChangeData.xlsx?v=20220420
FT MYERS, FL In a desperate attempt to get help for its citizens and deal with the growing humanitarian crisis in the area, a Florida town devastated by Hurricane Ian has taken the unusual step of raising the Ukrainian flag, hoping to convince Congress to send aid...Hilarious! Our tax dollars at work.
Hilarious! Our tax dollars at work.I'll bet money that you thought Travv's post was true. It wasn't. Like every member of. The Moron Brigade who posts on this board, he didn't list the source. His source was the "Babylon Bee" a well-known satire site. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4098352/posts.
You really do need to get off your "everything blue is bad" horse.
Smdh.
Not great if you live on California but I have been advising all my clients to be buying oil and gas stocks the last few months and it is working for them. Oil stocks are the only stocks going up today. Biden is begging OPEC countries today to not make the cuts in oil production but they just laugh at him. OPEC knows Biden is a fool for devastating his energy program in USA and begging other countries to produce more. But the dumbest people in the USA will continue to support Biden stupidity and incompetence and just blame Trump or Putin.Biden stupidity at its finest. White House bragging 2 weeks ago that Biden releasing 1,000,000 barrels of a day from the USA strategic reserve in March was reducing gas prices and Biden taking credit. Today OPEC reduced production 2,000,000 barrels a day saying to Biden screw you. OPEC wants to see the USA Stategic reserve depleted to create national security issues for America. Biden begging them not to was laughed at by OPEC. Biden weakness has put the USA in an energy crises. The dumb asses will blame Putin, Trump or the Easter Bunny but the intelligent point the finger at Biden and they are correct. Yes and California will suffer more. That is why so many people are leaving California for other states.
That doesn't really explain it. Looking at unleaded regular in the year to date 2022, the PADD 1 C states, being states from Florida north to Virginia, the premium is 4% to Texas. For New York it's 14%. And for Denver it's 7%. Numbers again were downloaded from Bloomberg.
Reformulated gasoline to control smog is required in Houston and New York City, and I don't believe the cost is substantially higher than the respective statewide averages. Which again aren't at huge premiums to the price in Texas.
A quick glance at requirements for California gasoline makes me think the state is micromanaging formulations, without giving appropriate consideration to costs and benefits. That is, without allowing the refineries to use cheaper methods to produce similar results. But I don't know enough about refining to really know.
I don't view the issue as Republican vs. Democrat. Colorado and New York are blue and their prices aren't that out of whack with the rest of the country. I view it as a California issue. California is kind of like a "gasoline island", in that it doesn't have the oil and product pipelines (gasoline pipelines) that crisscross most of the rest of the USA. The reason was because California had lots of oil production and refinery capacity, so no need to interconnect. A person could make the same arguments about California and gasoline as you made about Texas and electricity, the big difference being that California is no longer a power house in terms of oil and gasoline production. And, in terms of power and fuel, Texas still is. California is exacerbating the problem, for people who spend a large % of their disposable income on gasoline, with high taxes and fees, by discouraging oil production, and, I think, by micromanaging gasoline formulations.
As to the refineries, I note that ten with capacity of 205,750 barrels per day were permanently shut down in Texas between 1990 and 2021, while fourteen with capacity of 998,050 barrels per day were shut in California. I'm using "total downstream charge capacity."
https://www.eia.gov/petroleum/refinerycapacity/table13.pdfHow many refineries exist in Texas right now? The answer is 32. How many refineries exist in California right now? 15. The total refining capacity of California refineries is about 1. 7 million BPD. The Texas capacity is more than triple that at almost 6 million BPD.
There is a lot going on re: reformulated gasoline. California uses as special blend called low-RVP gasoline. It costs more to produce and therefore costs more. But California does add a lot of excise tax to gasoline so it does cost more. Now, one can gripe and complain all they want, but the vast majority of Californians voted to lower their property taxes with Prop 13. The government needs to get the money somewhere.
"When a nation stays neutral, it's a sovereign country with free will, but when it joins a bloc like NATO, it becomes an army base of an over-ambitious superpower that wants to control world order. ".
"I hate war. Everything is bad about war. Pain, wounds, death, loss, tears and cruel memories for all life. But, once somebody told me, when everything is going negative, try to find out something positive there and this is life. Nowadays, everything is going badly in this world, but maybe after the Ukraine and Russia conflict one thing has been settled down. Maybe now no country will give their soil to illegitimate partners to use for terror against neighbouring countries. " - Mohammed Zaki Ansari, "Zaki's Gift Of Love".
ScatManDoo
10-06-22, 00:01
Ethanol is another false savior. It takes more than a gallon of gas to make a gallon of pure ethanol.,.I am very surprised to read this.
From what source did you get this?
I know just a little about the blending of Ethanol. Since I see the few stations that sell Ethanol, sell it at a slightly lower cost than regular gasoline, I was expecting that the opposite was true.
Hmmm, I wonder why a net 261,902 people left California in the year ended June 30, 2021, while 310,288 moved to Texas. Texas is hot as hell in summer, cold in winter, doesn't have many mountains, has crappy beaches, and doesn't have a fraction of the things to do that California has. Well, the 13.3% state income tax rate probably had something to do with Elon Musk moving. Just a wild guess since I am not from USA, but isn't California probitively expensive for many people, while Texas is much cheaper cost of living? Especially for families. I speculate that it might be a more common reason that the one you put fwd for Elon Musk.
Just a wild guess since I am not from USA, but isn't California probitively expensive for many people, while Texas is much cheaper cost of living? Especially for families. I speculate that it might be a more common reason that the one you put fwd for Elon Musk.Well, yes, we know the price of gasoline is higher in California.
This is a wild guess for me too, as I don't live in California. But judging from the following, you appear to be right, and the two biggest culprits would be high taxes and the high cost of buying or renting housing:
https://kmph.com/news/local/people-are-leaving-california-at-record-rates
It sounds like California just isn't affordable for the Workingman and retirees.
Just speculating, but I bet headaches and costs associated with permitting and rezoning are the main reasons the housing shortage exists in the Peoples Republic of California. Probably California Democratic politicians would instead blame that on limited land, and "everyone wants to live in California. " The part about limited land is true. Because if the governments won't grant permits or rezone, there's limited land to build housing on. And rent seekers like one of our posters here can clean up. And, sincerely, kudos to him for that. I wish I owned some prime California rental property I picked up many years ago.
Elvis 2008
10-06-22, 02:16
Just a wild guess since I am not from USA, but isn't California probitively expensive for many people, while Texas is much cheaper cost of living? Especially for families. I speculate that it might be a more common reason that the one you put fwd for Elon Musk.TK, they are both true. Musk moved to Austin, TX because he asked his employees where they wanted a second Tesla plant, and they all said Austin. They could not even come up with a second place. There are lakes, stunning scenery, golf courses where deer roam free, great places to eat, fellow liberals, and I talked to one Californian who moved here and she said there are not the threats of the drug doing homeless on every corner like there is in California.
Unlike its snobby brethren in Dallas and Houston, people in Austin are hippy types, the black sheep of the family. It is called the velvet rut. You go to Austin because you are burned out and stay because you are having so much fun that you cannot leave.
My ultimate Austin experience is Franklin's BBQ. The owner and his wife could be put in that 70's show and no one would blink. Their restaurant is a downtown trailer, but every day they are open, there is a line out the door and it takes hours to get food. Unlike California or New York, Texans do not do lines. You have one popular place you build 10 more but not Franklin's. There is just one.
There are great, great BBQ joints in Austin where you do not have to wait, but I have waited in this line, and you make friends. You talk about if you are stupid for waiting in line this long. You drink the local craft beers. You buy them for your new friends, make stupid toasts, and pretty soon the line no longer is a burden but a line of friends you love being with. That is classic Austin, friendly people who do not shy from admitting they are different and waiting three hours for BBQ is different. It is weird, and that is the slogan of the city, Keep Austin weird. It is the perfect slogan for this city. It really is.
So you get your meat. Plastic tray. Wax paper. Gourmet setting this is not. And then you take a bite of the brisket, and I will leave it to deceased international food critic Anthony Bourdain to take it from here. "How is it possible that this brisket is so good?" How do you take crummy brisket meat and make it more tasty than the most expensive filet mignon? The brisket is not just good. It is life affirming, proof that there is always something better to find and try.
But without the ranchers who tend to the beef, the Bible lovers who get the trains to run on time, the blue collar conservative oil workers who give the state its energy, the gun loving hunters, and the straight laced businessman, there would be no weird. The problem with California is the whole state is weird whereas in Texas we just have this one part, and that is why it works. You have a place with a nice climate, great food, friendly people, no state income taxes, and a city that although strangled by traffic is one that works.
Austin is what California should be.
Biden stupidity at its finest. White House bragging 2 weeks ago that Biden releasing 1,000,000 barrels of a day from the USA strategic reserve in March was reducing gas prices and Biden taking credit. Today OPEC reduced production 2,000,000 barrels a day saying to Biden screw you. OPEC wants to see the USA Stategic reserve depleted to create national security issues for America. Biden begging them not to was laughed at by OPEC. Biden weakness has put the USA in an energy crises. The dumb asses will blame Putin, Trump or the Easter Bunny but the intelligent point the finger at Biden and they are correct. Yes and California will suffer more. That is why so many people are leaving California for other states.Yes stupidity and in another 250 days the Strategic Reserve will be close to depleted. Then what? Yes Biden will be begging Saudi for $150 a barrel oil.
How many refineries exist in Texas right now? The answer is 32. How many refineries exist in California right now? 15. The total refining capacity of California refineries is about 1. 7 million BPD. The Texas capacity is more than triple that at almost 6 million BPD.
There is a lot going on re: reformulated gasoline. California uses as special blend called low-RVP gasoline. It costs more to produce and therefore costs more.
That was my point in pulling the prices for gasoline in the southeastern USA, Denver and New York. The price is only a little higher in southeastern states than Texas. I tried to tell you why the price is higher in California, that is why the state is like an island unto itself when it comes to gasoline. The unique formulation requirements are big part of the reason but not all of it. Apparently I didn't do a very good job explaining as you didn't understand me.
Now, one can gripe and complain all they want, but the vast majority of Californians voted to lower their property taxes with Prop 13. The government needs to get the money somewhere.That's the strongest argument you've made. You have to get the money somewhere, and if you put gasoline in the same category as tobacco and alcohol, then it makes sense to tax it similarly. A carbon tax that exempts exports makes a lot more sense than government mandates, for EV's or fuel economy or whatever, IMHO because you're letting the market work, instead of relying on the omniscience of government.
The drawback is that it's a regressive tax that hurts the poorest among us. Or maybe I should say the poorest who own cars. I have one friend in particular who had a tough time paying for gas to get to and from work. It blew out his budget when gasoline prices went up. Also, I don't think anything we do will make a significant difference in global warming. We account for 15% of carbon emissions, and that number's going to go down a lot. The future is in the hands of rapidly growing and industrializing countries like China, India and Indonesia, and they're still building coal fired power plants.
I'll bet money that you thought Travv's post was true. It wasn't. Like every member of. The Moron Brigade who posts on this board, he didn't list the source. His source was the "Babylon Bee" a well-known satire site. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4098352/posts.
You really do need to get off your "everything blue is bad" horse.
Smdh.That's what that blue flag in the photo is, right? The Democrat flag.
I'm actually closer to the Democrat way of thinking on social issues. But I vote with my pocketbook. And believe, like the majority of Americans, that Republicans are better for the economy.
Biden stupidity at its finest. White House bragging 2 weeks ago that Biden releasing 1,000,000 barrels of a day from the USA strategic reserve in March was reducing gas prices and Biden taking credit. Today OPEC reduced production 2,000,000 barrels a day saying to Biden screw you. OPEC wants to see the USA Stategic reserve depleted to create national security issues for America. Biden begging them not to was laughed at by OPEC. Biden weakness has put the USA in an energy crises. The dumb asses will blame Putin, Trump or the Easter Bunny but the intelligent point the finger at Biden and they are correct. Yes and California will suffer more. That is why so many people are leaving California for other states.A couple of weeks ago when oil was in the mid 80's, the Biden administration elected to extend sales from the strategic reserve through November, probably to add a little extra insurance before the election. Not the brightest move, unless perhaps you're a Democrat running in November. Like you say, the SPR was created for purpose of protecting our national security. The amount to be released in November would average 330,000 BOPD, and like you said OPEC is reducing production by a lot more.
Elvis 2008
10-06-22, 03:03
I am very surprised to read this.
From what source did you get this?
I know just a little about the blending of Ethanol. Since I see the few stations that sell Ethanol, sell it at a slightly lower cost than regular gasoline, I was expecting that the opposite was true.It was disingenuous math from oil companies prior to shale oil. When the world did not put money into drilling in the 80's and 90's, the Malthusians or peak oil nuts as I called them, declared that oil was running out. Instead of promoting better drilling techniques, AKA fracking, which happened any way, there was a thought process that we were running out of oil and had to do all we could to secure it. This was the REAL motivation for the second war against Iraq. George WB swallowed the peak oil nuts theory whole.
You may scoff arrogantly at GWB, and he deserves it. Just know that I have equal contempt for those parading around with the notion of global warming and climate change.
Much like the data that refutes the notion of climate change and global warming, any alternative to oil was dismissed with the wave of a hand. In this case, there was the notion that it required more energy to produce a barrel of ethanol than was in the barrel of ethanol itself. The oil companies, which get tax breaks themselves, tried to say ethanol production from corn was not a viable alternative to energy without government subsidies. The oil companies used math "to prove" their claim, and it was as flawed as the math climate scientists used to prove so many places would be under water today.
Truth is that fracking is a much cheaper and better way to get energy than ethanol. Fracking led to huge natural gas finds and incredibly cheap electricity production in the USA and with it, the electric car that is supposed to save the day. The reason the electric car is so stupid is the storage. Natural gas is a great store of energy and can be used to power a car and very cleanly at that. Why you need to turn natural gas into electricity and use highly toxic batteries is beyond me.
In the USA, ethanol is traded on the market like oil. Thing is that it is going to vary with corn costs. So now it is cheaper than gasoline and it does have a government subsidy helping to make it cheaper. However, with the coming fertilizer shortage, I am not sure corn is going to stay cheap for long.
FWIW, the problem with corn based ethanol is that you had to use farm lands for energy production. That was not too much of a problem 10 years ago but now with the fertilizer shortage, there likely will be a food shortage, so ethanol really, really does not make sense now.
The most intriguing alternative energy sources were biodiesel from weeds that grew wild in India and from algae that could be grown in the desert. The problems with both of these methods were the yields were all over the place. With oil and gas that can be produced so cheaply and quickly with fracking, these methods for getting fuel are likely going to be on the shelf for centuries.
Do you not understand the definition of the word "or"? Or do you not believe that the labor force participation rate went down between January, 2009 and December, 2016 because a Democrat was president? Or both?
I said that I had no idea whether Obama had anything to do with weak employment and GDP growth after the 2008/2009 recession. So you interpret that, and my link to and description of a St. Louis Fed data series, as a "vague suggestion" that Obama was responsible for a decline in labor force participation rate. And any vague criticism of a Democrat is a blatant lie.
I said that the anomalous increase in real median household income and wages and 50 year lows in the unemployment rate before COVID were partly attributable to the changes in corporate taxation in the TCJA and deregulation. I didn't relate that to the Republicans' big tax cuts for the middle class in 2018 (and in fact said there were valid arguments for and against them) or to the Bush tax cuts. You're really having to jump through hoops to try to show that Bush is responsible for the decline in the labor force participation rate when Obama was president. And I don't understand why you're doing that since you also said any suggestion that the labor force participation rate was down under Obama is B.S.Do you not understand the definition of the word "details"?
By omitting the critical detail that the LFP was crashing down all through GW Bush's tax cuts galore presidency, which unavoidably bled into Obama's presidency along with that particular Great Repub Recession among many, that Obama's economy halted and reversed that trajectory and that already reversed trajectory is what Trump and his godawful waste of $2. 5+ Trillion TCJA met, you untruthfully "suggest" that the TCJA had something significant if at all to do with the reversal and increase in the LFP.
When it didn't.
Don't worry, boys, Nancy DeSantis is here to reduce the cost of gas for you!
DeSantis Takes Credit For Biden's Gas Tax Credit
https://crooksandliars.com/2022/10/gov-desantis-takes-credit-president-bidens
On October 3, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis celebrated an upcoming gas tax holiday in his state and tweeted out how in the month of October, working class Floridians will be saving money at the pump.
Our gas tax holiday went into effect on Saturday, which means Floridians will receive $0.25 off every gallon they purchase this month.
This relief will help hardworking families across the state save money at the pump.
- Ron DeSantis
October 3, 2022.Seriously, this bit where Repubs take undeserved credit for what the Dems shouldered all the heavy lifting and assumed all the political risk to accomplish has been so commonplace throughout history there are Repubs, pro Repub Bothsiders in typically pro Repub Mainstream Media and elsewhere along with other ill informed numbskulls who actually believe Repubs are better at handling the USA economy than Dems despite the overwhelming evidence, data and record of results proving the opposite.
"People will just believe you. You just tell them and they believe you", as Donald Trump said about his favorite target suckers.
Hmmm, I wonder why a net 261,902 people left California in the year ended June 30, 2021, while 310,288 moved to Texas. Texas is hot as hell in summer, cold in winter, doesn't have many mountains, has crappy beaches, and doesn't have a fraction of the things to do that California has. Well, the 13.3% state income tax rate probably had something to do with Elon Musk moving. Not sure about the rest. Anyway I hope all the Democrats stay in California. I don't want them moving to where I live and voting.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/articles/2022/04/25/-/media/data-visualizations/interactives/2016/fiscal-50/docs/2013/PopulationChangeData.xlsx?v=20220420You'll have to ask them. I can only say whatever drop in the bucket decline in population California has seen it hasn't noticeably detrimentally effected property values and rent rates in my area. It would be great if it meant fewer cars on the freeways though. Then my area would be an even more attractive location for buyers and renters.
Maybe, like me, a lot of retiring baby boomers took the greater income, pensions, savings and real estate investment gains they made in California and either moved to depressed areas in Texas and other Red States where they could pretty much buy for cash and enjoy a life of leisure lording over the locals or move to a place more different, fun, exotic, exciting and pleasurable than anywhere in America, such as Bangkok.
John Clayton
10-06-22, 06:22
...I tried to tell you why the price is higher in California, that is why the state is like an island unto itself when it comes to gasoline. The unique formulation requirements are big part...Gasoline here is currently about $2.60/ gallon higher than the national average. Although there is a slightly different formulation for gas here as well as a slightly greater state tax, there is still a 30% price differential between here and the rest of the US that can only be explained by greed. There are fourteen refineries in the state, four of which are currently off line -- why? Because the refiners and retailers make more money when supply is low. Gasoline prices, especially in California, are only weakly correlated with the price of crude. WTI is $85/ bbl today, which is about exactly where it was a year ago and yet gas probably is $2+ more/gallon. Refiners and retailers have tacitly agree to use the Russian war on Ukraine and the attendant instability to profiteer -- it's that simple.
The electricity that will be needed to charge the batteries will come from power plants, many of which are coal fired and a major contributor to air pollution as well as what the mining does to the earth. ... With only about 13%, of the US energy sources being renewable energy sources, this absolutely needs to improve. But I'm optimistic when I look around the world at various locations within places like Hawaii, Puerto Rico, German, Australia and China that are have decommissioned or shuddered their coal power plants for better renewable solutions. As have places in the US, like the Rhode Island Offshore Wind Development.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/marking-a-block-island-wind-farm-milestone-and-what-it-could-mean-e2-80-98a-lot-is-coming-fast-e2-80-99/ar-AA127LPF
Maybe nuclear plants most of which have exceeded their 20 year design life and what are they doing with the spent fuel that lasts longer than civilized man and also risks of Chernobyl or Tree Mile Island. ...With the cost of large scale energy renewable projects being less or on par with the cost of a nuclear plant, at least presents itself a good option over going back to nuclear.
Now the batteries are most likely lithium and mining lithium is destructive and the batteries don't last forever and are a destructive pollutant. Where will we get all the additional electricity to fuel all these cars when we are at near capacity and many times there are brownouts. Texas a couple years ago. ...Now battery tech is becoming so good, they are producing LFP / LMFP batteries (which use less lithium and no cobalt) and other type batteries that may not have any lithium in them. The charging cycles are 3 x to 5 x better than traditional NCM batteries and the density per weight and per cost is getting better and better as the tech matures.
Unlike the fossil fuel we burn, the lithium batters can be and are being recycled. So no need to endlessly dig up lithium.
American Battery Technology Company : Our Mission
https://americanbatterytechnology.com/solutions/lithium-ion-battery-recycling/
I'm sure with all the technology a very high mileage and les polluting gas engine can be designed and built. How about reducing the size of vehicles too? Do we really need all these huge pickups and SUV's? I'm always seeing women driving a huge SUV at the grocery store and no passengers. I'm just not as optimistic or a believer in EV's. I don't know the answer to this but how much does it cost to totally charge an EV? Also how long does it take to charge and if you only get 200 miles between charges it seems to me a trip over 200 miles is out of the question among other transits. ... While I don't necessarily share your sensibilities about vehicle size when it comes to large EVs, as the EV themselves aren't spewing toxic fumes in air and have very low engine noise.
EVs are the future for most vehicle transportation. Not all, but most. Just look around at the "legacy auto manufacturers", as they are frantically scrambling to keep up with the Teslas' and BYD's of the world. They're panicking right now, because many of them may not be around in 10 years time.
Lastly, take a look at what China (and Norway if you have the time) is doing. Granted China may still have quite a few coal plants servicing their electrical needs, but they are fast becoming the world's leader in renewable / cleaner energy sources.
EV sales in China are of the charts. Many of their auto manufacturers, like BYD won't be selling ICE vehicles by 2030. And it's only a matter of time before countries around the world will restrict the sale / import of ICE vehicles to some degree, due to very strict emissions standards or policy. Which then puts the "legacy auto manufacturers" that aren't making EVs, further into a bind.
Automakers, Countries, Cities Agree To Ban ICE Vehicles By 2040
https://insideevs.com/news/547093/countries-cities-automakers-ban-2040/
If China can figure out, how to serve their billions, in the years to come, when their populous go "plugging-in their EVs all at the same time", then why not the USA, with its populous of millions.
Most of the knocks on EV's, at least from the articles I've read, has been "The electric grid can't handle the load" and, to prove the point, the article uses logic like "what if everybody with an EV decided to charge them at the same time". What the article never mentions is "what if everybody with a gasoline powered car decided to fill up at the same time"? See, if that happened, gas stations would run out of gas. A typical gas station has 30 K gallons of gasoline in their underground tanks after a delivery. So that's about 1,500 cars and the station is dry.
The other knock is the range of the vehicle and that is where your battery technology comes into play.So true and it's a good thing, we all don't all wash our clothes at the time either. (...kkk!)
But, w/r to the battery technology, the breakthroughs and innovations being realized so quickly, that "range" and "charging times", have become more acceptable to the consumer and eventually they'll be less of a barrier to entry for those sitting on the fence about EVs. Now if we can just do something about the price?
What I also like is the advancement in energy storage batteries as well. With all the different battery chemistries and different materials being used, the solutions are varied and interesting.
That is a joke in itself. 2 trucks can save the day when there is no power in the area? What happens after 4 hours and the 2 trucks go dead? Propaganda at its best.Okay, maybe a bit of "salesmanship" on the part of reporter (who was probably incentivized by Ford), but the gist of report, was to highlight the fact that a couple mobile batteries did make a difference for a few relief crews and a few families in need of help.
With only about 13%, of the US energy sources being renewable energy sources, this absolutely needs to improve. But I'm optimistic when I look around the world at various locations within places like Hawaii, Puerto Rico, German, Australia and China that are have decommissioned or shuddered their coal power plants for better renewable solutions. As have places in the US, like the Rhode Island Offshore Wind Development.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/marking-a-block-island-wind-farm-milestone-and-what-it-could-mean-e2-80-98a-lot-is-coming-fast-e2-80-99/ar-AA127LPF
With the cost of large scale energy renewable projects being less or on par with the cost of a nuclear plant, at least presents itself a good option over going back to nuclear.
Now battery tech is becoming so good, they are producing LFP / LMFP batteries (which use less lithium and no cobalt) and other type batteries that may not have any lithium in them. The charging cycles are 3 x to 5 x better than traditional NCM batteries and the density per weight and per cost is getting better and better as the tech matures.
Unlike the fossil fuel we burn, the lithium batters can be and are being recycled. So no need to endlessly dig up lithium..Fossil fuels, primarily coal, accounted for 67% of power generation sources in 2020 (Figure 7). Coal will remain an important fuel in China's electric power sector in the coming years; 46.1 GW of coal-fired projects were approved in 2020. Aug 8, 2022.
With only about 13%, of the US energy sources being renewable energy sources, this absolutely needs to improve. But I'm optimistic when I look around the world at various locations within places like Hawaii, Puerto Rico, German, Australia and China that are have decommissioned or shuddered their coal power plants for better renewable solutions. As have places in the US, like the Rhode Island Offshore Wind Development.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/marking-a-block-island-wind-farm-milestone-and-what-it-could-mean-e2-80-98a-lot-is-coming-fast-e2-80-99/ar-AA127LPF
With the cost of large scale energy renewable projects being less or on par with the cost of a nuclear plant, at least presents itself a good option over going back to nuclear.
Now battery tech is becoming so good, they are producing LFP / LMFP batteries (which use less lithium and no cobalt) and other type batteries that may not have any lithium in them. The charging cycles are 3 x to 5 x better than traditional NCM batteries and the density per weight and per cost is getting better and better as the tech matures.
Unlike the fossil fuel we burn, the lithium batters can be and are being recycled. So no need to endlessly dig up lithium.
American Battery Technology Company : Our Mission
https://americanbatterytechnology.com/solutions/lithium-ion-battery-recycling/
While I don't necessarily share your sensibilities about vehicle size when it comes to large EVs, as the EV themselves aren't spewing toxic fumes in air and have very low engine noise.
EVs are the future for most vehicle transportation. Not all, but most. Just look around at the "legacy auto manufacturers", as they are frantically scrambling to keep up with the Teslas' and BYD's of the world. They're panicking right now, because many of them may not be around in 10 years time.
Lastly, take a look at what China (and Norway if you have the time) is doing. Granted China may still have quite a few coal plants servicing their electrical needs, but they are fast becoming the world's leader in renewable / cleaner energy sources.
EV sales in China are of the charts. Many of their auto manufacturers, like BYD won't be selling ICE vehicles by 2030. And it's only a matter of time before countries around the world will restrict the sale / import of ICE vehicles to some degree, due to very strict emissions standards or policy. Which then puts the "legacy auto manufacturers" that aren't making EVs, further into a bind.
Automakers, Countries, Cities Agree To Ban ICE Vehicles By 2040
https://insideevs.com/news/547093/countries-cities-automakers-ban-2040/
If China can figure out, how to serve their billions, in the years to come, when their populous go "plugging-in their EVs all at the same time", then why not the USA, with its populous of millions.China will continue to use coal for the next several decades to generate their electricity as they continue to build hundreds of new coal fired power plants along with build new coal fired factories.
Fossil fuels, primarily coal, accounted for 67% of power generation sources in 2020 . Coal will remain an important fuel in China's electric power sector in the coming years; 46.1 GW of coal-fired projects were approved in 2020. Aug 8, 2022.
China does have it figured out. They are buying coal from all the countries that are going to renewable's. That is why China will continue to have the cheapest power in the world. Russia and India also. China's emissions rise every year at 2 or 3 times the USA emissions go down. China is increasing their economy while Biden is killing our economy.
Biden stupidity at its finest. White House bragging 2 weeks ago that Biden releasing 1,000,000 barrels of a day from the USA strategic reserve in March was reducing gas prices and Biden taking credit. Today OPEC reduced production 2,000,000 barrels a day saying to Biden screw you. OPEC wants to see the USA Stategic reserve depleted to create national security issues for America. Biden begging them not to was laughed at by OPEC. Biden weakness has put the USA in an energy crises. The dumb asses will blame Putin, Trump or the Easter Bunny but the intelligent point the finger at Biden and they are correct. Yes and California will suffer more. That is why so many people are leaving California for other states.Biden begging didn't help. Probably made it worse. OPEC had said they were going to cut production by 1 to 1.5 million barrels a day. After Biden administration went in begging they increased the cut to 2 million barrels a day. Biden showing weakness just magnified the problem. Difficult to know if Biden is just plain stupid or just totally incompetent but either way he is hurting the poorest of Americans. He has blamed Putin and Trump to much lately so I think the blame has to be on the Easter Bunny.
Biden only choice now is to go crawling and begging to the USA oil producers but he isn't smart enough for that. High gas prices don't affect him or his family so it is not of importance to him. Inflation doesn't affect him or his family so it also is not a concern to him. In fact he thinks this will help him by making Americans poorer and more dependent on the government. This is the democrats way very similar to the communist way.
That's what that blue flag in the photo is, right? The Democrat flag.
I'm actually closer to the Democrat way of thinking on social issues. But I vote with my pocketbook. And believe, like the majority of Americans, that Republicans are better for the economy.Is this better? https://babylonbee.com/news/hurricane-ravaged-florida-town-raises-ukraine-flag-so-congress-will-send-aid.
In fact, when you google "Babylon Bee" it says "Fake News You Can Trust". But that still doesn't explain why you thought that the Babylon Bee satire was real, does it?
You believe that Republican's are better for the economy because you believe that voodoo economics actually works? I hate to break it to you but voodoo economics has never worked for the lower and middle ends of the economic spectrum. Ever. Where voodoo economics has worked, however, is at the 5% and above level. If you are among the top 5% of the richest Americans, you love voodoo economics because you get more money and are taxed less.
It was disingenuous math from oil companies prior to shale oil. When the world did not put money into drilling in the 80's and 90's, the Malthusians or peak oil nuts as I called them, declared that oil was running out. Instead of promoting better drilling techniques, AKA fracking, which happened any way, there was a thought process that we were running out of oil and had to do all we could to secure it. This was the REAL motivation for the second war against Iraq. George WB swallowed the peak oil nuts theory whole.
You may scoff arrogantly at GWB, and he deserves it. Just know that I have equal contempt for those parading around with the notion of global warming and climate change.
Much like the data that refutes the notion of climate change and global warming, any alternative to oil was dismissed with the wave of a hand. In this case, there was the notion that it required more energy to produce a barrel of ethanol than was in the barrel of ethanol itself. The oil companies, which get tax breaks themselves, tried to say ethanol production from corn was not a viable alternative to energy without government subsidies. The oil companies used math "to prove" their claim, and it was as flawed as the math climate scientists used to prove so many places would be under water today..Fracking made a huge difference in the oil and gas industry and the USA technology is far advanced in oil and gas production than the rest of the world. American oil companies are now drilling up to 24 wells on one pad leaving a very small footprint on landowners property. These wells are being drilled faster and cheaper than ever before. With this technology USA was and can be energy independent. There is enough oil and natural gas in USA and Canada for the next 300 years with being dependent on foreign oil. Trump was smart enough to see this. Biden reversed pretty much all of Trump ideas and blocked drilling on federal land, made drilling permits difficult to get and put stupid EPA regulations to slow down the process making oil companies lives difficult and forcing costs higher. Ultimately oil prices start rising. OPEC sees USA production down and the start raising prices. Biden tried to kill the USA producers but actually made them prosper as Biden caused prices to double. Yes Biden is incompetent. Yes he is probably the stupidest person in the USA except for VP Harris. Yes he has a diverse unqualified staff. But something has to change or Americans are in deep trouble.
TK, they are both true. Musk moved to Austin, TX because he asked his employees where they wanted a second Tesla plant, and they all said Austin..Yes, I hear Austin is an interesting place. Def an outlyer in Texas. It has thriving atheiest, humanist and LGBTQ+ communities.
But my point is that not many people form opinions based on the same criteria as Elon Musk.
DramaFree11
10-06-22, 16:25
Fracking made a huge difference in the oil and gas industry and the USA technology is far advanced in oil and gas production than the rest of the world. American oil companies are now drilling up to 24 wells on one pad leaving a very small footprint on landowners property. These wells are being drilled faster and cheaper than ever before. With this technology USA was and can be energy independent. There is enough oil and natural gas in USA and Canada for the next 300 years with being dependent on foreign oil. Trump was smart enough to see this. Biden reversed pretty much all of Trump ideas and blocked drilling on federal land, made drilling permits difficult to get and put stupid EPA regulations to slow down the process making oil companies lives difficult and forcing costs higher. Ultimately oil prices start rising. OPEC sees USA production down and the start raising prices. Biden tried to kill the USA producers but actually made them prosper as Biden caused prices to double. Yes Biden is incompetent. Yes he is probably the stupidest person in the USA except for VP Harris. Yes he has a diverse unqualified staff. But something has to change or Americans are in deep trouble.Biden is killing the middle class and the poor. His decision and policies are destroying the Black communities. Now he is fighting with OPEC, who is next Canada?
He is completely incompetent, hopefully the Democratic's will wake up. One bad decision after another.
Elvis 2008
10-06-22, 17:29
Yes, I hear Austin is an interesting place. Def an outlyer in Texas. It has thriving atheiest, humanist and LGBTQ+ communities.
But my point is that not many people form opinions based on the same criteria as Elon Musk.You would be surprised. They have a techie festival called South by Southwest that attracted a lot of the rich techies from California to Austin. That is likely how Musk's employees heard about Austin and why they visited it. The techies that have crashed in the Austin area now is staggering.
Yeah, you are right in that there are other things: low taxes, not dealing with the criminal homeless, lower cost of living, but there was one other huge one on the list, and that was how California handled Covid. People could not make a living in many of the blue states like California and moved to red ones like Texas.
A cousin in California told me the role of government should be to "take care of us". That type of thinking is offensive to Texans who do not trust government and who think when given a choice between what is best for the people and what is best for government that government will never choose us.
What bugs me about Democrats is the portrayal of Republicans and Texans as greedy and self-serving. The truth is that if you provide Texans with a good service and product, they will throw money at you in appreciation and in part that is because they have money to begin with.
And while I personally do not do it, I have never met more people in a place who tithe. Granted, the media is filled with stories about churches abusing their position and wasting their money, but honestly, Texans trust the churches far more than government when it comes to really helping the poor. I get why people are atheists, but even atheists should be applauding the churches when they help their fellow man.
Fracking made a huge difference in the oil and gas industry and the USA technology is far advanced in oil and gas production than the rest of the world. American oil companies are now drilling up to 24 wells on one pad leaving a very small footprint on landowners property. These wells are being drilled faster and cheaper than ever before. With this technology USA was and can be energy independent. There is enough oil and natural gas in USA and Canada for the next 300 years with being dependent on foreign oil. Trump was smart enough to see this. Biden reversed pretty much all of Trump ideas and blocked drilling on federal land, made drilling permits difficult to get and put stupid EPA regulations to slow down the process making oil companies lives difficult and forcing costs higher. Ultimately oil prices start rising. OPEC sees USA production down and the start raising prices. Biden tried to kill the USA producers but actually made them prosper as Biden caused prices to double. Yes Biden is incompetent. Yes he is probably the stupidest person in the USA except for VP Harris. Yes he has a diverse unqualified staff. But something has to change or Americans are in deep trouble.Saudi Arabia is mocking Biden despite the begging and threats by Biden. Today they announced a price cut to Europe but are increasing the price to USA. Saudi is taunting a weak incompetent USA president. Biden stupidity continues as today his administration is trying to block all offshore drilling. OPEC is smiling and doing what they do best. Screwing America. The only people dumber than Biden and his administration are the people who voted for him and still support his stupidity and incompetence.
China will continue to use coal for the next several decades to ...
China does have it figured out. They are buying coal from all the countries that are going to renewable's. ...
Fossil fuels, primarily coal, accounted for 67% of power generation sources in 2020 (Figure 7). Coal will remain an important fuel in China's electric power sector in the coming years; 46.1 GW of coal-fired projects were approved in 2020. Aug 8, 2022.To which articles/links are you referring to?
Don't worry, boys, Nancy DeSantis is here to reduce the cost of gas for you!
DeSantis Takes Credit For Biden's Gas Tax Credit
https://crooksandliars.com/2022/10/gov-desantis-takes-credit-president-bidens
Seriously, this bit where Repubs take undeserved credit for what the Dems shouldered all the heavy lifting and assumed all the political risk to accomplish has been so commonplace throughout history there are Repubs, pro Repub Bothsiders in typically pro Repub Mainstream Media and elsewhere along with other ill informed numbskulls who actually believe Repubs are better at handling the USA economy than Dems despite the overwhelming evidence, data and record of results proving the opposite.
"People will just believe you. You just tell them and they believe you", as Donald Trump said about his favorite target suckers.For Republican governors, all economic success is local.
https://www.latimes.com/world-nation/story/2022-08-20/for-republican-governors-all-economic-success-is-local
What else is new. Gingrich and his Reps always attributed Clinton's economic success to Republican governors. Yeah, right.
... Ethanol is another false savior. It takes more than a gallon of gas to make a gallon of pure ethanol and mileage is
much less than pure gas. So it really pollutes more and uses more fuel...I am very surprised to read this.
From what source did you get this?
I know just a little about the blending of Ethanol. Since I see the few stations that sell Ethanol, sell it at a slightly lower cost than regular gasoline, I was expecting that the opposite was true.While I think this maybe true, I would be interested in the source also.
Bare in mind this is maybe based on the 2005 Renewable Fuel Standard, when companies were encouraged to come up with creative ways (as another BM wrote "disingenuous math from oil companies"), to reduce gas emissions, expand renewable fuel sources, while reducing the reliance on foreign oil (at least according to the EPA website).
It was disingenuous math from oil companies prior to shale oil. ...
The oil companies used math "to prove" their claim, and it was as flawed as the math climate scientists used to prove so many places would be under water today. ...
But you conveniently omitted the part where big oil and gas companies, had done studies decades ago, showing their products were driving climate change and then lied about it and denied the findings, just like big tobacco or big pharma with the fentanyl opioid crisis.
Let's just all continue to rape the public, for ever more greed and profit and deny all the human rights, suffering and mayhem, our products cause.
Big Oil CEOs deny lying to the public about climate change:
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/big-oil-ceos-deny-lying-public-climate-change-rcna4033
Big oil and gas kept a dirty secret for decades. Now they may pay the price
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/30/climate-crimes-oil-and-gas-environment
Crime of the Century: How Big Pharma Fueled the Opioid Crisis That Killed 500,000 and Counting
https://www.democracynow.org/2021/7/19/opioid_crisis_documentary_alex_gibney
Fracking led to huge natural gas finds and incredibly cheap electricity production in the USA and with it, the electric car that is supposed to save the day. The reason the electric car is so stupid is the storage. Natural gas is a great store of energyand can be used to power a car and very cleanly at that. Why you need to turn natural gas into electricity and use highly toxic batteries is beyond me. ... Fair points, w/r to nat. gas currently being cheaper, but clean renewables are closing that gap, fast. Also, maybe "currently cheaper", but definitely not cleaner.
1. Are you saying US auto manufacturers should be making nat. gas cars powered cars? (There is definitely a case to be made: https://www.kbb.com/car-news/what-ever-happened-to-natural-gas-powered-cars/ )
2. BTW, just curious, where did you get the info on "toxic batteries"?
While I don't share your opinions on EVs, as I think EVs are better the option than ICE vehicles, going forward, your post makes me think about hydrogen cars and if the same "flawed math" is being used in the generation of hydrogen fuel, related to the amount of electricity needed to generate said fuel? Couple that with consumers just aren't buying their cars.
Having said that, if they do happen to get the science (or "flawed math") to work, I can see it being a more viable fuel source for larger industrial type vehicles or machinery. But also keep in mind battery tech is evolving at a pretty good clip.
To which articles/links are you referring to?See'Mon., man. The Moron Brigade never or almost never posts sources. And when they do, the source is some rightwingnut source like FUX Snooze or Breitbart or something like that.
But you can be virtually certain that when you post a source that they will deride the source as "fake news". Because that's all they know how to do since their cornbread ain't quite done in the middle.
Fracking made a huge difference in the oil and gas industry and the USA technology is far advanced in oil and gas production than the rest of the world. American oil companies are now drilling up to 24 wells on one pad leaving a very small footprint on landowners property. These wells are being drilled faster and cheaper than ever before. With this technology USA was and can be energy independent. There is enough oil and natural gas in USA and Canada for the next 300 years with being dependent on foreign oil. Trump was smart enough to see this. Biden reversed pretty much all of Trump ideas and blocked drilling on federal land, made drilling permits difficult to get and put stupid EPA regulations to slow down the process making oil companies lives difficult and forcing costs higher. Ultimately oil prices start rising. OPEC sees USA production down and the start raising prices. Biden tried to kill the USA producers but actually made them prosper as Biden caused prices to double. Yes Biden is incompetent. Yes he is probably the stupidest person in the USA except for VP Harris. Yes he has a diverse unqualified staff. But something has to change or Americans are in deep trouble.Actually, the dumbest people in the US are the ones who voted for Donnie the Dumbass.
Nobody seems to be counting on a significant Red Wave anymore, much less a Red Tsunami, this time around. If anything, the writer's conclusions are showing a below average gain in this midterm for the non White House Party.
I should mention that Joe Biden's Job Approval and Favorability Ratings on the demonstrably Repub-leaning RealClearPolitics site have both just seen an uptick from when this article was written:
Three Views on the Election.
A collection of competitive Senate races will make for interesting viewing on the night of November 8. Three leading pollsters provide keys.
October 5, 2022
https://amgreatness.com/2022/10/05/three-views-on-the-election/
Actually, the dumbest people in the US are the ones who voted for Donnie the Dumbass.The last 2 years prove your statement is a lie. Biden by far the worst president ever. The dumbest president ever. The most incompetent president ever. These are facts. All Americans have witnessed this. Only people in other countries watching fake CNN news have not seen it. But 300,000,000 Americans have witnessed the dumbest, most incompetent and worst president in history. No one can deny this. And yes the people who voted for him were conned. The people who still support him have proven beyond doubt that they are the dumbest people on the USA because they have witnessed his stupidity and they are to dumb to know it.
To which articles/links are you referring to?Just Google it. Every article Google posts confirms China is dependent on coal and is continuing to add more coal fired power daily. No secret. It is easier for you to Google it than me posting 100 articles supporting this.
Biden is killing the middle class and the poor. His decision and policies are destroying the Black communities. Now he is fighting with OPEC, who is next Canada?
He is completely incompetent, hopefully the Democratic's will wake up. One bad decision after another.Some democrats appear to be waking up. The Latinos are abandoning him. The blacks are abandoning him. The only people that are too stupid to see the obvious are the progressives and wacko climate idiots. Biden is begging Saudi and OPEC to not cut production until after November. He doesn't care about high gas prices. He cares about democrats holding congress so they can continue to screw Americans. But the dumbest Americans in USA still support him. Go figure. One thing to be stupid but to continue to show it after every Biden failure is really telling the world that they are possibly the dumbest people in the world.
Saudi Arabia loved Trump and his Repubs because they allowed Saudi Arabia to get away with anything, would even praise and defend them for it, they proved to be a reliable source for anti democratic, pro dictatorship mission weaponry and, most important, Trump himself could be bought to help them weaken democracies and promote dictatorships around the world for them just as he did for Putin, Xi and Kim. For cheap.
Not so for Biden and the Dems.
For Trump, defense of Saudi Arabia is another Helsinki moment
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/trump-defense-saudi-arabia-another-helsinki-moment-n921076
In Extraordinary Statement, Trump Stands With Saudis Despite Khashoggi Killing
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/20/world/middleeast/trump-saudi-khashoggi.html
Trump says he appreciates Saudi purchase of U.S. military equipment
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-g20-summt-trump-mbs/trump-says-he-appreciates-saudi-purchase-of-u-s-military-equipment-idUSKCN1TU008
Saudis welcome Trump with gold medal, receive arms package
https://www.defensenews.com/global/mideast-africa/2017/05/21/saudis-welcome-trump-with-gold-medal-receive-arms-package/
How Foreign Influence Can Corrupt a President. Legally.
Close this loophole.
https://www.pogo.org/analysis/2021/06/how-foreign-influence-can-corrupt-a-president-legally
After Trump's Embrace, Saudis Brace for a Chillier Tone From Biden.
No more "dangerous blank check"
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/20/world/middleeast/saudi-arabia-biden-trump.html
Trump was as busy licking Saudi ass from day one as he was busy licking Putin's, Xi's and Kim's ass.
ChuchoLoco
10-07-22, 15:51
I am very surprised to read this.
From what source did you get this?
I know just a little about the blending of Ethanol. Since I see the few stations that sell Ethanol, sell it at a slightly lower cost than regular gasoline, I was expecting that the opposite was true.I wrote a lengthy reply which was mostly lies from the past and I go back more years than most. My reply did not get posted. Something wrong with my tablet or connection most likely. Not blaming administration. No single source. I have read about Ethanol for years. Just did a Google search and many articles out there. I live in an area where 10% ethanol is mandatory due to EPA Regs so that's all we can buy. Cross the county line and it's pure gas for less and better mileage but don't believe me, do some research and see for yourselves. I'm an energy conservationist but don't believe all their solutions as most are profit driven scams. The EV's are another. How long to fill a tank of gas vs fully charging? How many charging stations with how many chargers will it take and everyone won't fill up at same time. They don't now so a bad analogy with the laundry. Mining for battery minerals, the making of the battery and disposing are all environmentally harmful. Put our scientist and engineers to work on a high mileage minimal to no pollution gas engines and get rid of all the huge monster vehicles. Coal or nuclear power plants are not energy or environmentally friendly. Ice friendly discussion though. No name calling. Very refreshing to see differences of opinions expressed civilly like men not boys who know it all. P.S.: I'm not a fan of big oil and actually look at then as the worst but IF and if is a big word, we can do what I mentioned, it would be a more immediate and less harmful solution.
DramaFree11
10-07-22, 16:18
Some democrats appear to be waking up. The Latinos are abandoning him. The blacks are abandoning him. The only people that are too stupid to see the obvious are the progressives and wacko climate idiots. Biden is begging Saudi and OPEC to not cut production until after November. He doesn't care about high gas prices. He cares about democrats holding congress so they can continue to screw Americans. But the dumbest Americans in USA still support him. Go figure. One thing to be stupid but to continue to show it after every Biden failure is really telling the world that they are possibly the dumbest people in the world.Exactly, he and his advisors only care about keeping prices low until the election. They do not care, when will America wake up. Gas went up $. 20 over night in Texas, there no reason for this, just horrible leadership and policies. Europe is not doing much better, we will see what happens in November.
The Hispanic's are definitely waking up that Democratic policies are ruining there lives. I doubt the black community will vote in December.
DramaFree11
10-07-22, 16:50
You would be surprised. They have a techie festival called South by Southwest that attracted a lot of the rich techies from California to Austin. That is likely how Musk's employees heard about Austin and why they visited it. The techies that have crashed in the Austin area now is staggering.
Yeah, you are right in that there are other things: low taxes, not dealing with the criminal homeless, lower cost of living, but there was one other huge one on the list, and that was how California handled Covid. People could not make a living in many of the blue states like California and moved to red ones like Texas.
A cousin in California told me the role of government should be to "take care of us". That type of thinking is offensive to Texans who do not trust government and who think when given a choice between what is best for the people and what is best for government that government will never choose us.
What bugs me about Democrats is the portrayal of Republicans and Texans as greedy and self-serving. The truth is that if you provide Texans with a good service and product, they will throw money at you in appreciation and in part that is because they have money to begin with.
And while I personally do not do it, I have never met more people in a place who tithe. Granted, the media is filled with stories about churches abusing their position and wasting their money, but honestly, Texans trust the churches far more than government when it comes to really helping the poor. I get why people are atheists, but even atheists should be applauding the churches when they help their fellow man.You are correct, Austin is great, especially for work. The weather is amazing and crime is low, but there is a huge homeless crisis like every where else, maybe even a little worse. Also, is becoming very expensive, especially for housing.
Every article on Google Oh really, I would never have guessed, (rolling my eyes...ugh!)
Just Google it. Every article Google posts confirms China is dependent on coal and is continuing to add more coal fired power daily. No secret. It is easier for you to Google it than me posting 100 articles supporting this. And yet in the time it took you write your post, you could have included, any number of said links to support your opinion with your so called article/source.
Would this be the just tired typical lazy posting from QAnon/Repubs/Bothsidesists, that we should come to expect?
See'Mon., man. The Moron Brigade never or almost never posts sources. And when they do, the source is some rightwingnut source like FUX Snooze or Breitbart or something like that.
But you can be virtually certain that when you post a source that they will deride the source as "fake news". Because that's all they know how to do since their cornbread ain't quite done in the middle. Seems You Might Be Right!!! (....kkkk!)
Elvis 2008
10-07-22, 17:56
But you conveniently omitted the part where big oil and gas companies, had done studies decades ago, showing their products were driving climate change and then lied about it and denied the findingsSpidy,
I lived in the Northern USA when we had snow storms that drenched us with snow 5 feet deep, and magazine headlines showed the next ice age coming. Now it is global warming. 99% of climate change global warming nuts blow off the fact that scientists were predicting an ice age even as CO2 levels rose. 1% have an explanation. They say the banning of CFCs which were destroying the ozone layer was the reason for that change. So now guys at Freakonomics proposed putting a huge hose into the sky and flooding the sky with CFCs. I just shake my head at all this. That man can control the weather and that someone has an answer to weather problems is the oldest con in the history of mankind.
I would not be shocked if the oil companies lied but the climate scientists have not been honest either. There was no bigger climate change nut than Bill Maher and even he has gotten tired of defending the climate "scientists" who predicted so much of the world would be under water now. There was no more arrogant phrasing than "saving the planet" as if we could even do that. We are not stronger than mother earth.
That said, I do not want to breathe dirty air, and the worst for that among energy production is the use of coal. Autism rates skyrocket the closer children live to coal plants and coal plants actually puts our more radiation than a nuclear plant does. When you look at what goes into making windmills and solar panels, it is a myth that those are clean sources of energy. Nuclear has been so much safer and cleaner than any other form of energy.
Natural gas cars do not need to be manufactured. Gasoline cars can be converted to natural gas with an $800 kit well. This is done in Mexico and Brazil all the time where there is not so much red tape. Doing it in the USA for some fucked up reason is $8000. If you go to Brazil (highly recommended for the women), you will see many taxis with a big tank in their windows. That is natural gas and when I was there, the taxis were filling up their cabs with that for like $5.
If you take a picture from a satellite at night, you can see what areas of the country are lit up, and it typically corresponds to populated areas. The exceptions to this are in West Texas and North Dakota. Those areas produce a tremendous amount of oil and they do not have pipeline capacity to transport all the natural gas produced as a by product so they burn it off and create enormous amounts of light.
Spidy, wouldn't you rather we use that natural gas to power our cars or be shipped to Europe? The Europeans are going to be freezing this winter and they have money and would pay us for that versus going cold. All that needs to happen is that there be pipelines built to LNG terminals, and we do not have those pipelines so they can be built right?
Pipelines are a great business. Warren Buffett said the best business to own was a toll road, and pipe lines are like that. The oil and gas companies have to pay the pipeline companies to move their product. Kinder Morgan, the largest pipeline operator in the USA, is a great long term investment. The risk? Well, the biggest risk is if you have a president who is fucking dumb ass who screws pipeline companies over to the tune of billions of dollars his first day in office.
You do not need to do futuristic predictions. Nuclear is cleaner and safer than coal so let us build nuclear. Subsidizing electric cars that get their electricity from coal is not clean energy. It is virtue signaling and fucking stupid. Why are we not building pipelines and using natural gas to power vehicles versus burning it off? It is a complete fucking waste. The reason it costs $8000 to convert a car to natural gas is because of EPA regulations. Again, it is $800 in Mexico and Brazil.
PVM admitted that Trump was right when he lectured the Europeans on being dependent on Russian natural gas was stupid. His response was a broken clock is right twice a day, but look at what Biden is doing. You can deal with Exxon and Chevron and Kinder Morgan but not Biden. No, he would rather drain the SPR, and talk to the Iranians and Venezuelans. He tried talking to the Saudis and they had nothing to do with him. They cannot stand him.
A lot of inflation is not Biden's fault but energy is totally on him and with energy inflation, the Fed has to raise rates and crash the market. In the book the Big Short, there was one guy who was rolling his eyes at the stupidity of the real estate market as he cashed in. That is me with Biden. I roll my eyes at Biden's stupidity as the money flows in.
Jim Rogers is one of my favorite long term investors. He says he does not invest as much as picks up money. I bet oil prices were going to come down with Obama. Oil was $100 a barrel then. That was picking up money. We had 1700 rigs drilling for oil, oil prices were sure to come down and they did.
The price is close to $100 now, and we have only 700 rigs and Biden is draining the SPR. Going long oil now is just picking up bags of money too. Why argue as opposed to get rich? This is not a Democrat-Republican issue. It is a smart stupid issue. Leave Trump out if you want. Obama was smart on energy, and Biden is a fucking moron.
MarquisdeSade1
10-07-22, 18:01
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/06/poll-hispanic-conservatives-show-65-point-shift-towards-republicans-since-2012/
Mucho mas BLM BLM BLM por favor!!
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2022/10/04/kanye-west-everyone-knows-that-black-lives-matter-was-a-scam-now-its-over/
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2022/10/07/sharon-osbourne-wants-her-900000-donation-back-after-kanye-west-called-out-black-lives-matter-as-a-scam/
https://www.breitbart.com/entertainment/2022/10/05/watch-the-daily-show-mocks-kamala-harris-word-salad-speeches-with-julia-louis-dreyfus-veep-montage/
Nancy These Boots Are Made For Walking DeSantis to the rescue!
Don't worry, boys, Nancy DeSantis is here to reduce the cost of gas for you!
DeSantis Takes Credit For Biden's Gas Tax Credit
https://crooksandliars.com/2022/10/gov-desantis-takes-credit-president-bidens
Seriously, this bit where Repubs take undeserved credit for what the Dems shouldered all the heavy lifting and assumed all the political risk to accomplish has been so commonplace throughout history there are Repubs, pro Repub Bothsiders in typically pro Repub Mainstream Media and elsewhere along with other ill informed numbskulls who actually believe Repubs are better at handling the USA economy than Dems despite the overwhelming evidence, data and record of results proving the opposite.
"People will just believe you. You just tell them and they believe you", as Donald Trump said about his favorite target suckers.
Is it any wonder, Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf, became a billionaire, by grifting off of these very same suckers, as he pockets millions in campaign donations.
And when Repubs are not lying, turns out they're great at being hypocrites. Take this fool and philander running for the Senate in Atlanta, GA, Herschell Walker. It's jokingly said, the dude has more kids from different women, than Nick Cannon. (...kkkk!) Story is, one of his many women (thereby more out there), had an abortion paid by him and she has "the receipts" to prove it.
So here's the rub or put it in political terms, where the hypocrisy comes in. The dead beat dad and philander, has been campaigning on "Christian family values" and the "ban abortion" planks of the campaign and by both accounts have failed to uphold any of these so called "right-wing Christian Repub" values.
His own kid and ex-wife, have called him out on social-media, for being a dead beat dad and abusive husband. This is the joker (one of many) the Rebups, have running for office....ugh!
The Real Reason Herschel Walkers Abortion Scandal Hurts the GOP
https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/herschel-walker-abortion-gop/
GOP moves to contain Herschel Walker's latest scandal
https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/04/politics/herschel-walker-abortion-republican-reaction/index.html
But much like, Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf, the Repub dumb-dumbs, will rally around the dead beat dad and philander, because people of ACTUAL character, that ACTUALLY stand by their mconvictions, is no longer the party we claim to be. Or perhaps the Repubs NEVER were.
So, yet another case of QAnon/Repub/Bothsidesism of, "he stands for nothing and falls for everything".
I'll bet money that you thought Travv's post was true. It wasn't. Like every member of. The Moron Brigade who posts on this board, he didn't list the source. His source was the "Babylon Bee" a well-known satire site. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/4098352/posts.
You really do need to get off your "everything blue is bad" horse.
Smdh.
Is this better? https://babylonbee.com/news/hurricane-ravaged-florida-town-raises-ukraine-flag-so-congress-will-send-aid.
In fact, when you google "Babylon Bee" it says "Fake News You Can Trust". But that still doesn't explain why you thought that the Babylon Bee satire was real, does it?Let's see, I posted this:
Disaster relief is a sensible function of the federal government. It makes sense for us to have stockpiles of water, food, blankets, N95 masks, and other materials, and the manpower to respond to disasters in the states and Puerto Rico, instead of having each state prepare on its own. Travv replied with satirical criticism of USA Aid to Ukraine.
I replied to Travv with.
Hilarious! Our tax dollars at work.Why would I criticize government spending on disaster relief, right after I said it made sense?
You must think that all Republicans and Libertarians are just as gullible as 2500 pour souls who trespassed on the grounds of the Capitol on January 6, 2021. Or as some of the Democrats who post in political forums on hooker boards.
I was referring to the $60 billion+ that the USA has committed to Ukraine. Now to all Democratic politicians and many Republicans, that's a drop in the bucket. But to some of us, the ones who are paying the taxes, that's real money. We're enabling a war. Many people will die in Ukraine. Others will die in Africa because grain shipments were cut. Perhaps some in Europe this winter because they can't afford to heat their homes. The Ukrainian economy has been devastated and a huge % of the population displaced. And we're shoveling fuel on the fire.
If Trump had stolen the election in 2020 I bet Russia never would have invaded Ukraine. Trump wasn't above kissing an autocrat's ass, especially when that autocrat controls the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. On the other hand, Joe Biden, like George W. Bush and Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton before him, often emphasizes sanctimony and moral superiority in USA Foreign and defense policy over other considerations.
Elvis, Canada and Cali Guy, great posts on energy! This excerpt from a news article in today's Wall Street Journal might be of interest.
Administration officials have been exploring export bans on gasoline and diesel as a potential response to worst-case scenarios if shortages emerge around the country. But officials have acknowledged that isnt an ideal option, and oil industry analysts say it could backfire by spreading fear or creating bottlenecks in the markets that raise prices themselves.
The White House also called on U.S. oil producers to increase their output. But their appetite for doing so has been hamstrung by Wall Street investors who, stung by years of low returns in the 2010s, have asked that they focus on returning cash to shareholders via buybacks, paying down debt and dividends rather than reinvesting it in more oil production.
They believe that theres a finite period in which they have to operate, Bart Melek, global head of commodity markets strategy at investment bank TD Securities, said of U.S. oil-and-gas producers. (Tiny's note: They believe if Biden and like minded politicians maintain control of the federal government, we won't have a domestic oil and gas industry. So why invest?)
A government-led push to transition away from fossil fuels and into alternative energies is having an impact on refining capacity, a capital-intensive industry that requires multibillion-dollar investments to build gasoline-making plants, industry experts said.
In Washington, lawmakers focused their attention on Saudi Arabia, saying the country has aligned with Russia despite its attack on Ukraine, making the kingdom unfit for U.S. support.
They are pitching bills that would potentially seize the assets that OPEC member countries own in the U.S., or mandate the removal of U.S. armed forces from Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.
As a candidate, Mr. Biden had threatened similar action against Saudi Arabia, which isnt a formal ally, but he moved to soften that stance this year amid fears over high energy prices and Saudi Arabias drift toward Russia and China.
The president has overseen the release of nearly a third of what had been over 600 million barrels in the federal governments strategic petroleum reserves as of last Novembera move that analysts said helped ease surging energy prices.
But that brings the reserves down near levels the U.S. may not be able to go below without violating international agreements. And it limits the presidents capacity to respond if prices surge again, analysts say, just a month before midterm elections in which inflation and energy prices are a key issue.
White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese told reporters traveling aboard Air Force One on Thursday that the industry is charging consumers at margins about a third higher than it has historically, and that it should cut those costs for consumers at a time of record-high profits.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-takes-aim-at-opec-for-oil-production-cuts-11665096529
I'm not sure whether the Biden Administration is serious about some of these stupid criticisms and ideas, or if all this is just part of the propaganda effort before the mid term elections.
Deese's comment, and similar things Biden has said, crack me up.
The long term net profit margin for refiners and marketers is around 2. 2% on average. The industry isn't that profitable. Refineries were shut down during COVID as a result, never to re-open. If you knee cap the refiners during the good times, what kind of effect do you think that will have on refining capacity and gasoline prices in the longer term? Well, we know, although some of our anti-capitalist friends here probably don't.
Biden, more so than Deese, has complained about price gouging by the refiners. The last couple of quarters, the net profit margin of the refiners has been abnormally high, around 4. 4% on average. So how much difference will that extra 2% margin make in the price of a gallon of gasoline? Well, maybe about $4. 00 x. 02 = eight cents per gallon?
Also, here's an excerpt from an editorial today from the same newspaper, which I believe we'll all agree with. The "international drama, referenced below, refers to the Biden administration cozying up to Maduro and Venezuela.
All of this international drama, and growing American economic vulnerability, could have been avoided if the Biden Administration hadnt made a policy of waging war on the domestic U.S. oil-and-gas industry. The White House blames the industry for high gas prices while it does everything it can to make drilling more difficult and financially risky.
As an act of strategic self-sabotage, this is matched only by Germanys determination over two decades to make itself vulnerable to Russian natural gas.
Amid a war in Europe, a global energy crisis, and a risk of a global recession, a serious U.S. Administration would do everything in its power to encourage more domestic energy production. This Administration would rather make America more dependent on the constructive steps of dictators.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-biden-and-the-oil-dictators-venezuela-nicolas-maduro-oil-supply-opec-energy-production-11665073129
Gasoline here is currently about $2.60/ gallon higher than the national average. Although there is a slightly different formulation for gas here as well as a slightly greater state tax, there is still a 30% price differential between here and the rest of the US that can only be explained by greed. There are fourteen refineries in the state, four of which are currently off line -- why? Because the refiners and retailers make more money when supply is low. Gasoline prices, especially in California, are only weakly correlated with the price of crude. WTI is $85/ bbl today, which is about exactly where it was a year ago and yet gas probably is $2+ more/gallon. Refiners and retailers have tacitly agree to use the Russian war on Ukraine and the attendant instability to profiteer -- it's that simple.You bring up some interesting points. I don't buy the explanation though. Margins in refineries would have to be through the roof in California for greed to account for a significant part of the difference. I have no idea what kind of margins are realized by California refiners, and have no doubt they may be higher than average in part because of some of the reasons you cite. But as I noted in another post, for the USA, the S&P 500 Refining & Marketing Index, the long term net margins in the business average 2.2%, and the two most recent quarters, which were phenomenal, were 4. 4%. Apply a 2. 2% margin to $3. 00 a gallon gas and you get $. 07 per gallon net profit. Apply 4.4% to $5. 00 a gallon gas and you get $0. 22 per gallon net profit. That's nothing compared to the $1. 00 a gallon extracted by the state of California, according to this.
https://ktla.com/news/taxes-fees-make-up-1-18-per-gallon-of-gas-in-california/
Elvis, Canada and Cali Guy, great posts on energy! This excerpt from a news article in today's Wall Street Journal might be of interest.
Administration officials have been exploring export bans on gasoline and diesel as a potential response to worst-case scenarios if shortages emerge around the country. But officials have acknowledged that isnt an ideal option, and oil industry analysts say it could backfire by spreading fear or creating bottlenecks in the markets that raise prices themselves.
The White House also called on U.S. oil producers to increase their output. But their appetite for doing so has been hamstrung by Wall Street investors who, stung by years of low returns in the 2010s, have asked that they focus on returning cash to shareholders via buybacks, paying down debt and dividends rather than reinvesting it in more oil production.
They believe that theres a finite period in which they have to operate, Bart Melek, global head of commodity markets strategy at investment bank TD Securities, said of U.S. oil-and-gas producers. (Tiny's note: They believe if Biden and like minded politicians maintain control of the federal government, we won't have a domestic oil and gas industry. So why invest?)
A government-led push to transition away from fossil fuels and into alternative energies is having an impact on refining capacity, a capital-intensive industry that requires multibillion-dollar investments to build gasoline-making plants, industry experts said.
In Washington, lawmakers focused their attention on Saudi Arabia, saying the country has aligned with Russia despite its attack on Ukraine, making the kingdom unfit for U.S. support.
They are pitching bills that would potentially seize the assets that OPEC member countries own in the U.S., or mandate the removal of U.S. armed forces from Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.
As a candidate, Mr. Biden had threatened similar action against Saudi Arabia, which isnt a formal ally, but he moved to soften that stance this year amid fears over high energy prices and Saudi Arabias drift toward Russia and China.
The president has overseen the release of nearly a third of what had been over 600 million barrels in the federal governments strategic petroleum reserves as of last Novembera move that analysts said helped ease surging energy prices.
But that brings the reserves down near levels the U.S. may not be able to go below without violating international agreements. And it limits the presidents capacity to respond if prices surge again, analysts say, just a month before midterm elections in which inflation and energy prices are a key issue.
White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese told reporters traveling aboard Air Force One on Thursday that the industry is charging consumers at margins about a third higher than it has historically, and that it should cut those costs for consumers at a time of record-high profits.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-takes-aim-at-opec-for-oil-production-cuts-11665096529
I'm not sure whether the Biden Administration is serious about some of these stupid criticisms and ideas, or if all this is just part of the propaganda effort before the mid term elections.
Deese's comment, and similar things Biden has said, crack me up.
The long term net profit margin for refiners and marketers is around 2. 2% on average. The industry isn't that profitable. Refineries were shut down during COVID as a result, never to re-open. If you knee cap the refiners during the good times, what kind of effect do you think that will have on refining capacity and gasoline prices in the longer term? Well, we know, although some of our anti-capitalist friends here probably don't.
Biden, more so than Deese, has complained about price gouging by the refiners. The last couple of quarters, the net profit margin of the refiners has been abnormally high, around 4. 4% on average. So how much difference will that extra 2% margin make in the price of a gallon of gasoline? Well, maybe about $4. 00 x. 02 = eight cents per gallon?
Also, here's an excerpt from an editorial today from the same newspaper, which I believe we'll all agree with. The "international drama, referenced below, refers to the Biden administration cozying up to Maduro and Venezuela.
All of this international drama, and growing American economic vulnerability, could have been avoided if the Biden Administration hadnt made a policy of waging war on the domestic U.S. oil-and-gas industry. The White House blames the industry for high gas prices while it does everything it can to make drilling more difficult and financially risky.
As an act of strategic self-sabotage, this is matched only by Germanys determination over two decades to make itself vulnerable to Russian natural gas.
Amid a war in Europe, a global energy crisis, and a risk of a global recession, a serious U.S. Administration would do everything in its power to encourage more domestic energy production. This Administration would rather make America more dependent on the constructive steps of dictators.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-biden-and-the-oil-dictators-venezuela-nicolas-maduro-oil-supply-opec-energy-production-11665073129
Great post. It really shows the incompetence and stupidity of Biden and his staff. Biden is putting the USA in severe energy consequences. National security with wiping out the Stategic Oil Reserve along with increasing inflation which is horrendous for low and middle income families. And he doesn't care because it doesn't affect them. Now he is letting out criminals right before the mid terms because he has nothing positive to report. Does he think these criminals will run out and vote? I guess to vote democrat you need to be illegal, criminal, druggie or just plain stupid.
Spidy,
I lived in the Northern USA when we had snow storms that drenched us with snow 5 feet deep, and magazine headlines showed the next ice age coming. Now it is global warming. 99% of climate change global warming nuts blow off the fact that scientists were predicting an ice age even as CO2 levels rose. 1% have an explanation. They say the banning of CFCs which were destroying the ozone layer was the reason for that change. So now guys at Freakonomics proposed putting a huge hose into the sky and flooding the sky with CFCs. I just shake my head at all this. That man can control the weather and that someone has an answer to weather problems is the oldest con in the history of mankind.
I would not be shocked if the oil companies lied but the climate scientists have not been honest either. There was no bigger climate change nut than Bill Maher and even he has gotten tired of defending the climate "scientists" who predicted so much of the world would be under water now. There was no more arrogant phrasing than "saving the planet" as if we could even do that. We are not stronger than mother earth.
That said, I do not want to breathe dirty air, and the worst for that among energy production is the use of coal. Autism rates skyrocket the closer children live to coal plants and coal plants actually puts our more radiation than a nuclear plant does. When you look at what goes into making windmills and solar panels, it is a myth that those are clean sources of energy. Nuclear has been so much safer and cleaner than any other form of energy.
Natural gas cars do not need to be manufactured. Gasoline cars can be converted to natural gas with an $800 kit well. This is done in Mexico and Brazil all the time where there is not so much red tape. Doing it in the USA for some fucked up reason is $8000. If you go to Brazil (highly recommended for the women), you will see many taxis with a big tank in their windows. That is natural gas and when I was there, the taxis were filling up their cabs with that for like $5.
If you take a picture from a satellite at night, you can see what areas of the country are lit up, and it typically corresponds to populated areas. The exceptions to this are in West Texas and North Dakota. Those areas produce a tremendous amount of oil and they do not have pipeline capacity to transport all the natural gas produced as a by product so they burn it off and create enormous amounts of light
.Great post. You summed it up perfectly and with facts. Only the Biden and the dumbest people in America would disagree.
Only MAGAts believe that President Biden is the worst President ever. Most presidential historians rate Donnie the Dumbass in the bottom 5. You, of course, don't believe that because you believe Donnie the Dumbass when he fantasizes that he'd beat a P-VP combo of Washington and Lincoln.The last 2 years have proved Biden is worst president ever. Inflation today near 10%. Biden depression is nearing the depression of the 1930's. Please name one presidential historian that thinks Biden the dumbest president ever. Trump compared to Biden looks like the smartest president ever. Even Jimmy Carter looks smart compared to Biden. But possibly the people who voted for Biden and still support him are the dumbest ever of any voter in history. I will check with the historians like you did. I am sure they will agree with me.
You sound like Donnie the Dumbass. Maybe you are him, who knows.
By the way, if you consistently posted just 1 or 2 sources, that'd be enough.
Only an idiot would think that somebody else is going to do your work for youYou did Google it and you saw I was right. If you had time to reply to any post you can check. But obviously you know I am right so you just pretend you didn't look. Everyone else on this forum has googled it.
Just Google it. Every article Google posts confirms China is dependent on coal and is continuing to add more coal fired power daily. No secret. It is easier for you to Google it than me posting 100 articles supporting this.I did Google it and in one minute I saw pages of articles on China increasing coal fired factories and power plants steadily over the past 5 years. India not far behind them and now Europe starting to convert some power plants back to coal. Canada and USA have been selling the majority of their coal to China.
Elvis, Canada and Cali Guy, great posts on energy! This excerpt from a news article in today's Wall Street Journal might be of interest.
Administration officials have been exploring export bans on gasoline and diesel as a potential response to worst-case scenarios if shortages emerge around the country. But officials have acknowledged that isnt an ideal option, and oil industry analysts say it could backfire by spreading fear or creating bottlenecks in the markets that raise prices themselves.
The White House also called on U.S. oil producers to increase their output. But their appetite for doing so has been hamstrung by Wall Street investors who, stung by years of low returns in the 2010s, have asked that they focus on returning cash to shareholders via buybacks, paying down debt and dividends rather than reinvesting it in more oil production.
They believe that theres a finite period in which they have to operate, Bart Melek, global head of commodity markets strategy at investment bank TD Securities, said of U.S. oil-and-gas producers. (Tiny's note: They believe if Biden and like minded politicians maintain control of the federal government, we won't have a domestic oil and gas industry. So why invest?)
A government-led push to transition away from fossil fuels and into alternative energies is having an impact on refining capacity, a capital-intensive industry that requires multibillion-dollar investments to build gasoline-making plants, industry experts said.
In Washington, lawmakers focused their attention on Saudi Arabia, saying the country has aligned with Russia despite its attack on Ukraine, making the kingdom unfit for U.S. support.
They are pitching bills that would potentially seize the assets that OPEC member countries own in the U.S., or mandate the removal of U.S. armed forces from Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.
As a candidate, Mr. Biden had threatened similar action against Saudi Arabia, which isnt a formal ally, but he moved to soften that stance this year amid fears over high energy prices and Saudi Arabias drift toward Russia and China.
The president has overseen the release of nearly a third of what had been over 600 million barrels in the federal governments strategic petroleum reserves as of last Novembera move that analysts said helped ease surging energy prices.
But that brings the reserves down near levels the U.S. may not be able to go below without violating international agreements. And it limits the presidents capacity to respond if prices surge again, analysts say, just a month before midterm elections in which inflation and energy prices are a key issue.
White House National Economic Council Director Brian Deese told reporters traveling aboard Air Force One on Thursday that the industry is charging consumers at margins about a third higher than it has historically, and that it should cut those costs for consumers at a time of record-high profits.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-takes-aim-at-opec-for-oil-production-cuts-11665096529
I'm not sure whether the Biden Administration is serious about some of these stupid criticisms and ideas, or if all this is just part of the propaganda effort before the mid term elections.
Deese's comment, and similar things Biden has said, crack me up.
The long term net profit margin for refiners and marketers is around 2. 2% on average. The industry isn't that profitable. Refineries were shut down during COVID as a result, never to re-open. If you knee cap the refiners during the good times, what kind of effect do you think that will have on refining capacity and gasoline prices in the longer term? Well, we know, although some of our anti-capitalist friends here probably don't.
Biden, more so than Deese, has complained about price gouging by the refiners. The last couple of quarters, the net profit margin of the refiners has been abnormally high, around 4. 4% on average. So how much difference will that extra 2% margin make in the price of a gallon of gasoline? Well, maybe about $4. 00 x. 02 = eight cents per gallon?
Also, here's an excerpt from an editorial today from the same newspaper, which I believe we'll all agree with. The "international drama, referenced below, refers to the Biden administration cozying up to Maduro and Venezuela.
All of this international drama, and growing American economic vulnerability, could have been avoided if the Biden Administration hadnt made a policy of waging war on the domestic U.S. oil-and-gas industry. The White House blames the industry for high gas prices while it does everything it can to make drilling more difficult and financially risky.
As an act of strategic self-sabotage, this is matched only by Germanys determination over two decades to make itself vulnerable to Russian natural gas.
Amid a war in Europe, a global energy crisis, and a risk of a global recession, a serious U.S. Administration would do everything in its power to encourage more domestic energy production. This Administration would rather make America more dependent on the constructive steps of dictators.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/joe-biden-and-the-oil-dictators-venezuela-nicolas-maduro-oil-supply-opec-energy-production-11665073129
Another great post. Facts are facts but the dumb ass socials won't like it.
Spidy,
I lived in the Northern USA when we had snow storms that drenched us with snow 5 feet deep, and magazine headlines showed the next ice age coming. Now it is global warming. 99% of climate change global warming nuts blow off the fact that scientists were predicting an ice age even as CO2 levels rose. 1% have an explanation. They say the banning of CFCs which were destroying the ozone layer was the reason for that change. So now guys at Freakonomics proposed putting a huge hose into the sky and flooding the sky with CFCs. I just shake my head at all this. That man can control the weather and that someone has an answer to weather problems is the oldest con in the history of mankind.
I would not be shocked if the oil companies lied but the climate scientists have not been honest either. There was no bigger climate change nut than Bill Maher and even he has gotten tired of defending the climate "scientists" who predicted so much of the world would be under water now. There was no more arrogant phrasing than "saving the planet" as if we could even do that. We are not stronger than mother earth.
That said, I do not want to breathe dirty air, and the worst for that among energy production is the use of coal. Autism rates skyrocket the closer children live to coal plants and coal plants actually puts our more radiation than a nuclear plant does. When you look at what goes into making windmills and solar panels, it is a myth that those are clean sources of energy. Nuclear has been so much safer and cleaner than any other form of energy.
Natural gas cars do not need to be manufactured. Gasoline cars can be converted to natural gas with an $800 kit well. This is done in Mexico and Brazil all the time where there is not so much red tape. Doing it in the USA for some fucked up reason is $8000. If you go to Brazil (highly recommended for the women), you will see many taxis with a big tank in their windows. That is natural gas and when I was there, the taxis were filling up their cabs with that for like $5.
If you take a picture from a satellite at night, you can see what areas of the country are lit up, and it typically corresponds to populated areas. The exceptions to this are in West Texas and North Dakota. Those areas produce a tremendous amount of oil and they do not have pipeline capacity to transport all the natural gas produced as a by product so they burn it off and create enormous amounts of light.
Spidy, wouldn't you rather we use that natural gas to power our cars or be shipped to Europe? The Europeans are going to be freezing this winter and they have money and would pay us for that versus going cold. All that needs to happen is that there be pipelines built to LNG terminals, and we do not have those pipelines so they can be built right?
Pipelines are a great business. Warren Buffett said the best business to own was a toll road, and pipe lines are like that. The oil and gas companies have to pay the pipeline companies to move their product. Kinder Morgan, the largest pipeline operator in the USA, is a great long term investment. The risk? Well, the biggest risk is if you have a president who is fucking dumb ass who screws pipeline companies over to the tune of billions of dollars his first day in office.
You do not need to do futuristic predictions. Nuclear is cleaner and safer than coal so let us build nuclear. Subsidizing electric cars that get their electricity from coal is not clean energy. It is virtue signaling and fucking stupid. Why are we not building pipelines and using natural gas to power vehicles versus burning it off? It is a complete fucking waste. The reason it costs $8000 to convert a car to natural gas is because of EPA regulations. Again, it is $800 in Mexico and Brazil.I live in the northern USA states also and in the oil and gas service business and you are totally right. Unless Biden stupidity ends of his trying to destroy the USA oil and gas and pipelines the energy crises is here to stay. Today rather than talk to domestic oil companies to increase drilling he is talking to Venezuela and Iran our enemies.
Meanwhile, the Unemployment Rate is way down and the Labor Force Participation Rate is way up for Hispanics, Blacks, Whites, Asians, Men, Women, really all demographics since Biden received the worst across-the-board conditions hand off in history from Trump and took office:
Hispanic unemployment rate falls sharply, but fewer workers join labor force.
(see longer term trend charts here).
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/07/hispanic-unemployment-rate-falls-sharply-in-september-but-fewer-workers-join-labor-force.html?__source=androidappshare
Fluctuations are common in monthly reports and require several consecutive periods of a similar move before one can deduce a trend.Thanks Joe, Nancy, Chuck, the Dems and everyone who voted for them. Too bad about the less than stellar Fed Chairman that Trump appointed though. Oh well. Those historic Biden economic, chips, infrastructure, cost-reduction and revenue enhancing legislative achievements will more than make up for that kind of thing.
The last 2 years prove your statement is a lie. Biden by far the worst president ever. The dumbest president ever. The most incompetent president ever. These are facts. All Americans have witnessed this. Only people in other countries watching fake CNN news have not seen it. But 300,000,000 Americans have witnessed the dumbest, most incompetent and worst president in history. No one can deny this. And yes the people who voted for him were conned. The people who still support him have proven beyond doubt that they are the dumbest people on the USA because they have witnessed his stupidity and they are to dumb to know it.The last 2 years do prove you are right. Biden is the worst president ever. And correct only the dumbest people in America would disagree.
Elvis 2008
10-07-22, 23:12
In Washington, lawmakers focused their attention on Saudi Arabia, saying the country has aligned with Russia despite its attack on Ukraine, making the kingdom unfit for U.S. support.
They are pitching bills that would potentially seize the assets that OPEC member countries own in the U.S., or mandate the removal of U.S. armed forces from Saudi Arabia and the U.A.E.
As a candidate, Mr. Biden had threatened similar action against Saudi Arabia, which isnt a formal ally, but he moved to soften that stance this year amid fears over high energy prices and Saudi Arabias drift toward Russia and China.Oh brother! Eih's post about Biden's tough talk cracks me up as does this. Oil was $40 to $60 a barrel under Trump and it is $80 to $100 under Biden, and these evil oil companies and the evil Saudis are making money hand over fist with Biden as president. Hell, they should probably donate to his re-election campaign.
And there was this article today. https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/biden-welcomes-venezuela-oil-he-prepares-block-all-us-offshore-drilling.
Yesterday afternoon. After reports that the Biden admin would ease sanctions if Venezuela would pleeeeease pump more oil, at BradHuston succinctly opined on Twitter:
So basically Biden is saying that domestic producers are more evil than Venezuela's Nicholas Maduro. ".
This morning, it appears the Biden administration is doubling down on that as Fox Business reports that the Biden administration is nearing a decision on the future of federal offshore fossil fuel drilling and hasn't ruled out a complete block on new leases.
End of link. This should not be news. It should be satire from the Babylon Bee but it is not.
Tiny, if you were an oil company would you bid on one of these leases after the Keystone fiasco and Elizabeth Warren and her windfall profit tax? I would not touch this if I were Exxon or Chevron. I would be looking at other countries to invest in. There is a shale field in Argentina as big as the Permian. I would probably invest there. You wonder if Chevron would rather deal with Maduro over Biden. I cannot believe I actually typed that.
Oh well, the Saudis are laughing all the way to the bank.
I was referring to the $60 billion+ that the USA has committed to Ukraine. Now to all Democratic politicians and many Republicans, that's a drop in the bucket. But to some of us, the ones who are paying the taxes, that's real money. We're enabling a war. Many people will die in Ukraine. Others will die in Africa because grain shipments were cut. Perhaps some in Europe this winter because they can't afford to heat their homes. The Ukrainian economy has been devastated and a huge % of the population displaced. And we're shoveling fuel on the fire. We aren't "shoveling fuel on any fire" but are helping an ally defend themselves against a tyrant who has said in no uncertain terms that the Ukraine belongs to Russia and has no right to exist. Take a while and read Putin's speech prior to the invasion. Take him and Russian state news at their word. Ukrainians are willing to pay the price to preserve their land and identity, and to ward off the genocidal and murderous actions of Russia. They are grateful to the US and NATO for the requested help, and to our citizens, that is those of us that don't whine about paying taxes toward standing for democracy in Europe. Thankfully such are very much a minority of Republicans in the House and Senate, only 11 senators voting against the latest aid package, 57 of 212 Repub Congressmen.
If Trump had stolen the election in 2020 I bet Russia never would have invaded Ukraine. Trump wasn't above kissing an autocrat's ass, especially when that autocrat controls the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. On the other hand, Joe Biden, like George W. Bush and Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton before him, often emphasizes sanctimony and moral superiority in USA Foreign and defense policy over other considerations.Trump wasn't going to steal anything. His only hope would have been martial law which in the end would not have proved successful. If Pence had tried the recommended stunt he'd have been laughed out of the chamber.
Poots has had his sights on Ukraine for ages. He waited though as Trump was the gift that kept on giving, wrecking US democracy with stolen election lies, killing us off bungling a pandemic, looking the other way at hacks on our government cyber infrastructures, sowing divisions in NATO and other isolationist nonsense, believing Poots over our own intelligence, etc and essentially making himself the laughing stock of Europe. Why distract from all that by invading Ukraine? This couldn't continue though without us sinking more into isolation and autocracy with a corrupt grifter at the helm. With Trump gone Poots then asks for the impossible, that the US guarantee that the Ukraine will never be admitted into NATO while knowing full well that no US president has that authority. NATO has an open door policy, and excluding any country perpetually is against the charter. But this wasn't the issue anyway as Poots wants to rebuild empire, and for now, wants the Ukraine, their industries, farmlands, and ports. And thanks to us, our NATO partners, and the bravery and skill of the Ukrainians Russia is losing.
As to nukes, Russia's arsenal is only slightly larger than ours but we don't know what sort of repair it's in. Given what they've shown us of their army it's all plenty questionable. The odds of them using it remains small as it would mean that Russia would then lose the handful of world players that will still have something to do with them. Regardless we the US do not shirk at nuclear saber rattling. While you are whining about Bush, Obama, and Biden don't forget Reagan who led us to victory in the Cold War. Without a doubt he's turning in his grave considering Trump and his followers and the isolationist and appeasement tendencies of the same.
Now go write me up a novel. If you're anything it's chatty, plus it seems you have plenty of time on your hands. Wink.
MarquisdeSade1
10-08-22, 02:32
The last 2 years do prove you are right. Biden is the worst president ever. And correct only the dumbest people in America would disagree.https://time.com/5936036/secret-2020-election-campaign/
The oligarchs knew they weren't enough dummies voting to get Joe in there legitimately or they wouldn't of spent billions to cheat.
MarquisdeSade1
10-08-22, 02:36
Only MAGAts believe that President Biden is the worst President ever. Most presidential historians rate Donnie the Dumbass in the bottom 5. You, of course, don't believe that because you believe Donnie the Dumbass when he fantasizes that he'd beat a P-VP combo of Washington and Lincoln.I see you like insulting 90% of ISG, good job working the ref!!
Great post. It really shows the incompetence and stupidity of Biden and his staff. Biden is putting the USA in severe energy consequences. National security with wiping out the Stategic Oil Reserve along with increasing inflation which is horrendous for low and middle income families. And he doesn't care because it doesn't affect them. Now he is letting out criminals right before the mid terms because he has nothing positive to report. Does he think these criminals will run out and vote? I guess to vote democrat you need to be illegal, criminal, druggie or just plain stupid.That's what I thought too. Biden's pulling out all stops to try to help with the midterms. In addition to the pardons and the releases from the SPR when oil was $85 a barrel, there was also the student loan forgiveness. And the tax subsidies in the ridiculously-named Inflation Reduction Act for people who want EV's. He's buying votes.
I don't have a problem with pardons for marijuana possession, but the timing sure is suspicious.
Oh brother! Eih's post about Biden's tough talk cracks me up as does this. Oil was $40 to $60 a barrel under Trump and it is $80 to $100 under Biden, and these evil oil companies and the evil Saudis are making money hand over fist with Biden as president. Hell, they should probably donate to his re-election campaign.
And there was this article today. https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/biden-welcomes-venezuela-oil-he-prepares-block-all-us-offshore-drilling.
Yesterday afternoon. After reports that the Biden admin would ease sanctions if Venezuela would pleeeeease pump more oil, at BradHuston succinctly opined on Twitter:
So basically Biden is saying that domestic producers are more evil than Venezuela's Nicholas Maduro. ".
This morning, it appears the Biden administration is doubling down on that as Fox Business reports that the Biden administration is nearing a decision on the future of federal offshore fossil fuel drilling and hasn't ruled out a complete block on new leases.
End of link. This should not be news. It should be satire from the Babylon Bee but it is not.
Tiny, if you were an oil company would you bid on one of these leases after the Keystone fiasco and Elizabeth Warren and her windfall profit tax? I would not touch this if I were Exxon or Chevron. I would be looking at other countries to invest in. There is a shale field in Argentina as big as the Permian. I would probably invest there. You wonder if Chevron would rather deal with Maduro over Biden. I cannot believe I actually typed that.
Oh well, the Saudis are laughing all the way to the bank.Well, to answer your question Elvis, no, I would not. After an oil company acquires an offshore lease, it may acquire seismic data, drill exploration wells, and then drill development wells if it finds commercial oil. Then there's all the infrastructure that has to go in to produce the wells. It could be ten years before the lease is actually producing oil. By that time, if the Democrats (except Joe Manchin) have their way, there won't be an oil industry. The industry, Wall Street, and lenders all have concerns about investing billions and then ending up with stranded assets.
We aren't "shoveling fuel on any fire" but are helping an ally defend themselves against a tyrant who has said in no uncertain terms that the Ukraine belongs to Russia and has no right to exist. Take a while and read Putin's speech prior to the invasion. Take him and Russian state news at their word. Ukrainians are willing to pay the price to preserve their land and identity, and to ward off the genocidal and murderous actions of Russia. They are grateful to the US and NATO for the requested help, and to our citizens, that is those of us that don't whine about paying taxes toward standing for democracy in Europe. Thankfully such are very much a minority of Republicans in the House and Senate, only 11 senators voting against the latest aid package, 57 of 212 Repub Congressmen.
Trump wasn't going to steal anything. His only hope would have been martial law which in the end would not have proved successful. If Pence had tried the recommended stunt he'd have been laughed out of the chamber.
Poots has had his sights on Ukraine for ages. He waited though as Trump was the gift that kept on giving, wrecking US democracy with stolen election lies, killing us off bungling a pandemic, looking the other way at hacks on our government cyber infrastructures, sowing divisions in NATO and other isolationist nonsense, believing Poots over our own intelligence, etc and essentially making himself the laughing stock of Europe. Why distract from all that by invading Ukraine? This couldn't continue though without us sinking more into isolation and autocracy with a corrupt grifter at the helm. With Trump gone Poots then asks for the impossible, that the US guarantee that the Ukraine will never be admitted into NATO while knowing full well that no US president has that authority. NATO has an open door policy, and excluding any country perpetually is against the charter. But this wasn't the issue anyway as Poots wants to rebuild empire, and for now, wants the Ukraine, their industries, farmlands, and ports. And thanks to us, our NATO partners, and the bravery and skill of the Ukrainians Russia is losing.
As to nukes, Russia's arsenal is only slightly larger than ours but we don't know what sort of repair it's in. Given what they've shown us of their army it's all plenty questionable. The odds of them using it remains small as it would mean that Russia would then lose the handful of world players that will still have something to do with them. Regardless we the US do not shirk at nuclear saber rattling. While you are whining about Bush, Obama, and Biden don't forget Reagan who led us to victory in the Cold War. Without a doubt he's turning in his grave considering Trump and his followers and the isolationist and appeasement tendencies of the same.
Now go write me up a novel. If you're anything it's chatty, plus it seems you have plenty of time on your hands. Wink.I still love you Paulie, even if you are a warmonger.
I wrote a lengthy reply which was mostly lies from the past and I go back more years than most. My reply did not get posted. Something wrong with my tablet or connection most likely. Not blaming administration. No single source. I have read about Ethanol for years. Just did a Google search and many articles out there. Yet another "just Google it" reply. There are "many articles out there", yet it is unbelievable as to why you can't provide even one (1). Yes, yes, I know you had tablet/connection problems, but please feel free to respond at a later date with any one of many said Googled articles, to support your opinions/arguments...I'll wait!!
Okay, Okay, I know, I know. Asked and answered, as I told another BM, not so long ago. But really...not even a single article link of reference? Okay...enough said!!!
... I live in an area where 10% ethanol is mandatory due to EPA Regs so that's all we can buy. Cross the county line and it's pure gas for less and better mileage but don't believe me, do some research and see for yourselves. I'm an energy conservationist but don't believe all their solutions as most are profit driven scams. The EV's are another. How long to fill a tank of gas vs fully charging? How many charging stations with how many chargers will it take and everyone won't fill up at same time. They don't now so a bad analogy with the laundry. Mining for battery minerals, the making of the battery and disposing are all environmentally harmful. Put our scientist and engineers to work on a high mileage minimal to no pollution gas engines and get rid of all the huge monster vehicles. Coal or nuclear power plants are not energy or environmentally friendly. Ice friendly discussion though. No name calling. Very refreshing to see differences of opinions expressed civilly like men not boys who know it all. P.S.: I'm not a fan of big oil and actually look at then as the worst but IF and if is a big word, we can do what I mentioned, it would be a more immediate and less harmful solution.
Most gasoline sold in the US contains 10% ethanol. Gas is cheaper, but not always, as fuel prices can be volatile. How many people have gas (CNG) vehicles or would buy gas vehicles? Is big auto going to manufacture gas vehicles for people to buy? Would people still convert to gas, if the conversion costs were lower? How long would it take for CNG fueling stations/infrastructure to catch up to the level gasoline fueling stations?
Natural Gas Vehicles: Why Arent We Buying Them?
https://www.compare.com/ways-to-save/vehicle/natural-gas-vehicles-guide
Most businesses, except of course when they call themselves a "non-profit" business, are profit driven, with the goal of providing the consumer a viable product that they'll want to buy. Where is the scam in selling people EVs, that want to buy them?
How long to fill a tank of gas vs fully charging? Well, the consumer will usually buy (or not) knowing "charging issues" they are willing to put up with vs. pumping gas.
Also, the charging vs. filling up and charging stations infrastructure gap is closing. Laundry was a joke of course, to poke fun at the anti-EV nay-sayers who make the argument about "EVs being plugged-in all at once". Mining for the current, battery LFP/LMFP materials is no more harmful than current oil, oil-sands or gas mining practices. Other battery chemistries (not requiring tons of mining), are being developed and will look to diversify our reliance on harmful mining. EV batteries are being recycled, that's great for the environment.
Nuclear is the better option than coal, but still has it's drawbacks. More wind and solar are coming online and the tech is getting better and becoming more mature, given time. EVs/Electrification is the way to go, going forward, with most forms of transportation.
What you said, it most definitely sure is refreshing. It would also be very refreshing to have posters who substantiate and support their arguments/opinions with even the occasional articles/source or link(s), thereby giving more context to the readers of said post.
Even MDS1 posts links, albeit mostly from his favourite fascist right-wing media source(s).
I still love you Paulie, even if you are a warmonger.Sadly evil exists thus we need cops with guns and even armies and bombs and alliances.
The isolationist whataboutists including some far left academics and a past his prime Pat Buchanan want to talk about the failures of democracy in the Greater Middle East, while the primary aim there was the War on Terror. Ongoing but we hear a lot less out of al qaeda and isis these days. But my whatabouts that Pat and the Noam Chomskys ignore completely is what about Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Estonia to name a few? Or Ukraine? Though democracy is often challenged, all these countries get drastically higher freedom scores than Russia.
https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores
And this is all in part due to their desires for freedom in a post Soviet world along with support from freedom loving countries in Western Europe and the US. And before anyone talks about NATO expansion, Central and Eastern Europe expanded into NATO not the other way around. They enjoyed freedom and democracy and asked for integration and protection, thus analysis that attempts to demonize the West so often completely ignores the agencies of these countries. The agency of Ukraine at present is the most obvious.
This while Russia has so often been invited to join the civilized world but have chosen kleptocracy and apathy instead. But the social contract was just broken, which was that Putin essentially promised to improve standards of living if the people stayed out of politics. This latest mobilization and mass exodus of young men reflect a wake up call.
P.S. We have hammered this out thoroughly on the stupid shit in Kyiv thread in the Ukraine forum if anyone cares to check out the posts there.
You sound like Donnie the Dumbass. Maybe you are him, who knows.
By the way, if you consistently posted just 1 or 2 sources, that'd be enough.
Only an idiot would think that somebody else is going to do your work for you Right Again!!!
Low and behold, some idiot dumbass, did do his work for him....kkkk!
You did Google it and you saw I was right. If you had time to reply to any post you can check. But obviously you know I am right so you just pretend you didn't look. Everyone else on this forum has googled it.Nope, I didn't google it. Nobody with a functional brain has googled it.
But members of the Moron Brigade have googled it and have admitted to googling it. Remember that I said that nobody but an idiot would do your work for you.
Washington DC — The world has never been closer to the brink of total nuclear annihilation, according to President Joe Biden's comments at a press conference in between strategy sessions to continue waging his proxy war with nuclear-armed Russia.
This is a dangerous time, folks," Biden said to the assembled media. "No other leader has brought our nation — and the world — closer to nuclear destruction than I have in my short time as President. " Reporters were puzzled as to why Biden seemed to be lauding this as an achievement, though they all agreed these were some of the more coherent comments he's made as of late.
The statement of foreboding was odd in that the Biden administration continues to funnel billions of dollars in aid and military weaponry to arm the Ukrainians in their ongoing war with Russia. Former President Donald Trump was quick to take Biden to task in a statement released on his Truth Social account. "We experienced the biggest time of peace and economic prosperity during my wonderful presidency, the greatest presidency of all time, maybe even in all history, so much big, beautiful peace. Now Biden has completely thrown it all away and is going to get everybody nuked! Sad!
At publishing time, Biden continued to sound the alarm about escalating tensions with Russia. "Now is the time for swift, decisive leadership. Now is the time to put an end to. And end to. To.you know. Waffle maker," Biden said before being whisked away to his secure basement shelter beneath the White House. . .
We aren't "shoveling fuel on any fire" but are helping an ally defend themselves against a tyrant who has said in no uncertain terms that the Ukraine belongs to Russia and has no right to exist. Take a while and read Putin's speech prior to the invasion. Take him and Russian state news at their word. Ukrainians are willing to pay the price to preserve their land and identity, and to ward off the genocidal and murderous actions of Russia. They are grateful to the US and NATO for the requested help, and to our citizens, that is those of us that don't whine about paying taxes toward standing for democracy in Europe. Thankfully such are very much a minority of Republicans in the House and Senate, only 11 senators voting against the latest aid package, 57 of 212 Repub Congressmen.
Trump wasn't going to steal anything. His only hope would have been martial law which in the end would not have proved successful. If Pence had tried the recommended stunt he'd have been laughed out of the chamber.
Poots has had his sights on Ukraine for ages. He waited though as Trump was the gift that kept on giving, wrecking US democracy with stolen election lies, killing us off bungling a pandemic, looking the other way at hacks on our government cyber infrastructures, sowing divisions in NATO and other isolationist nonsense, believing Poots over our own intelligence, etc and essentially making himself the laughing stock of Europe. Why distract from all that by invading Ukraine? This couldn't continue though without us sinking more into isolation and autocracy with a corrupt grifter at the helm. With Trump gone Poots then asks for the impossible, that the US guarantee that the Ukraine will never be admitted into NATO while knowing full well that no US president has that authority. NATO has an open door policy, and excluding any country perpetually is against the charter. But this wasn't the issue anyway as Poots wants to rebuild empire, and for now, wants the Ukraine, their industries, farmlands, and ports. And thanks to us, our NATO partners, and the bravery and skill of the Ukrainians Russia is losing.
As to nukes, Russia's arsenal is only slightly larger than ours but we don't know what sort of repair it's in. Given what they've shown us of their army it's all plenty questionable. The odds of them using it remains small as it would mean that Russia would then lose the handful of world players that will still have something to do with them. Regardless we the US do not shirk at nuclear saber rattling. While you are whining about Bush, Obama, and Biden don't forget Reagan who led us to victory in the Cold War. Without a doubt he's turning in his grave considering Trump and his followers and the isolationist and appeasement tendencies of the same.
Now go write me up a novel. If you're anything it's chatty, plus it seems you have plenty of time on your hands. Wink.
The last 2 years do prove you are right. Biden is the worst president ever. And correct only the dumbest people in America would disagree.The only people who believe that President Biden is "the worst president ever" are members of the Moron Brigade. These are the same fools who believe that Donnie the Dumbass ranks somewhere in the top 5 of all presidential rankings. Presidential historians, who actually have functional brains, believe differently. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1123920/us-presidents-historian-ranking/ and https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/who-was-worst-president-everand-how-do-historians-decide-180978105/ and https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/08/13/nation/chart-how-do-historians-rank-us-presidents/ and https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall among others.
ChuchoLoco
10-08-22, 16:02
Yet another "just Google it" reply. There are "many articles out there", yet it is unbelievable as to why you can't provide even one (1). Yes, yes, I know you had tablet/connection problems, but please feel free to respond at a later date with any one of many said Googled articles, to support your opinions/arguments...I'll wait!!
Okay, Okay, I know, I know. Asked and answered, as I told another BM, not so long ago. But really...not even a single article link of reference? Okay...enough said!!!
Most gasoline sold in the US contains 10% ethanol. Gas is cheaper, but not always, as fuel prices can be volatile. How many people have gas (CNG) vehicles or would buy gas vehicles? Is big auto going to manufacture gas vehicles for people to buy? Would people still convert to gas, if the conversion costs were lower? How long would it take for CNG fueling stations/infrastructure to catch up to the level gasoline fueling stations?
Natural Gas Vehicles: Why Arent We Buying Them?
https://www.compare.com/ways-to-save/vehicle/natural-gas-vehicles-guide
Most businesses, except of course when they call themselves a "non-profit" business, are profit driven, with the goal of providing the consumer a viable product that they'll want to buy. Where is the scam in selling people EVs, that want to buy them?
How long to fill a tank of gas vs fully charging? Well, the consumer will usually buy (or not) knowing "charging issues" they are willing to put up with vs. pumping gas.
Also, the charging vs. filling up and charging stations infrastructure gap is closing. Laundry was a joke of course, to poke fun at the anti-EV nay-sayers who make the argument about "EVs being plugged-in all at once". Mining for the current, battery LFP/LMFP materials is no more harmful than current oil, oil-sands or gas mining practices. Other battery chemistries (not requiring tons of mining), are being developed and will look to diversify our reliance on harmful mining. EV batteries are being recycled, that's great for the environment.
Nuclear is the better option than coal, but still has it's drawbacks. More wind and solar are coming online and the tech is getting better and becoming more mature, given time. EVs/Electrification is the way to go, going forward, with most forms of transportation.
What you said, it most definitely sure is refreshing. It would also be very refreshing to have posters who substantiate and support their arguments/opinions with even the occasional articles/source or link(s), thereby giving more context to the readers of said post.
Even MDS1 posts links, albeit mostly from his favourite fascist right-wing media source(s).Too funny. Say no more por favor. You want links but are too lazy to look to find out for yourself and have made more than one claim but only one link. Should I post a link to what a hypocrite is? Anyone can post a link that agrees with what they say even if it is the only link that agrees with them and all others don't and you gave the perfect example. You spent more time writing and will spend even more waiting than what it would take to do some research. There may even be a link to support your claims to post. Ok, ok, ok,ok. Do you own an EV or what type of vehicle? Feel free to write an answer, no link required.
I lived in the Northern USA when we had snow storms that drenched us with snow 5 feet deep, and magazine headlines showed the next ice age coming.
...
I would not be shocked if the oil companies lied but the climate scientists have not been honest either...
Quite the long monologue of random stories and thoughts, meant to confuse the reader or inform the reader???
Anyway, I'll try to break down each paragraph, so as to address some of things that I think you tried to answer my quoted post.
Here we go then:
You start with: Stories of living in Northern USA with 5 feet of snow, headlines of the impending ice age coming, CO2 levels rose, banning of CFCs which were destroying the ozone, then flooding the sky with CFCs, and then you use Bill Maher, the comedian, to some how bolster your argument as a credible climate scientist?
Not sure what you were trying to convey in any of this paragraph of random stories/thoughts, other than, you seem very confused about climate change and you turned to Bill Maher, the comedian for climate change advice. Is that about it? Yeah, well as good of a comedian, as Bill Maher is, he ain't no scientist.
Followed by: Confession of not being shocked oil companies lied, the world would be under water by now, arrogant phrasing such as "saving the planet", we are not stronger than mother earth, not wanting to breathe dirty air, energy production of coal being the worst, Autism rates skyrocket, coal worst then nuclear, solar/wind myth and nuclear is better.
So you're not shocked oil and gas companies lie, meaning you expected them to lie to Americans, about the harmful mining and production of their products on the environment, but you're okay with it? But you are shocked when climate scientists lie or get something incorrect? And you're NOT okay with? I see why you turn to Bill Maher advice....no not really.
One third of Pakistan, might disagree and have something to say about being under water by now. Breath clean air, no-brainer, hence cleaner energy sources.
Nuclear/Solar/Wind are good options, have their pro/cons and should be assessed for viability given application/location were being applied. All better than coal.
Followed by: Nat. gas (CNG) vehicles conversions can had for $800 vs $8000, see Brazilian CNG taxis and the women are great, West Texas and North Dakota lights and pipelines in the night sky, CNG cars here vs. gas in Europe, Warren Buffett and pipelines as toll roads, Kinder Morgan want to get richer with their pipelines but Biden won't let them.
Natural Gas Vehicles: Why Arent We Buying Them?
https://www.compare.com/ways-to-save/vehicle/natural-gas-vehicles-guide
In the end the consumer driven car market (wrongly or rightly) will decide what survives as viable car products, going forward. Currently, the trend is, consumers are buying more and more EVs, especially in Europe and China, where ICE vehicles won't be sold as much, in the coming years.
Followed by: Nuclear cleaner than nat. gas, subsidizing EVs using coal electricity is not clean, why not build pipelines and nat. gas for CNG cars vs. burning it?, $800 vs. $8000 CNG conversion cost dilemma again, Trump lectured Europe on stupid Russian nat. gas and Biden not wanting to deal with lying US petroleum companies.
See link above "Natural Gas Vehicles: Why Aren't We Buying Them?" and my comments above on Nuclear/Solar/Wind. Subsidies for cleaner ideas/products, drinking at the gov't water trough, will promote cleaner energy tech/thinking and innovation.
What subsidies do oil companies receive?
https://www.fuelfreedom.org/oil-company-subsidies/
W/R to Trump/Europe and Ruskie nat. gas, perhaps it was the case of "the messenger rather than the message"?
And lastly: Biden energy inflation bad and inflation good, Big Short with rolling eyes and making money and cashing-in off Biden, Jim Rogers and making more money off Dems presidents like Obama in oil and then something about not Dems vs. Repubs but Obama good with Trump out and Biden bad.
Bully for you, if you're able to make money, no matter the good, the bad and the ugly presidents, that's great. I guess you just have to figure out how to make money when the scientists to lie to you.
Okay, well, I think I got it all. If I missed anything then fill me in and feel free to re-address any issue.
Too funny. Say no more por favor. You want links but are too lazy to look to find out for yourself and have made more than one claim but only one
link. Should I post a link to what a hypocrite is? Anyone can post a link that agrees with what they say even if it is the only link that agrees with them and all others don't and you gave the perfect example. You spent more time writing and will spend even more waiting than what it would take to do some research. There may even be a link to support your claims to post. Ok, ok, ok,ok. Do you own an EV or what type of vehicle? Feel free to write an answer, no link required. I think PVMonger said it best:
By the way, if you consistently posted just 1 or 2 sources, that'd be enough.
Only an idiot would think that somebody else is going to do your work for youYou should probably check your own hypocrite logic on the matter, it seems you may not know the meaning of the word.
Recall I said the following:
Okay, Okay, I know, I know. Asked and answered, as I told another BM, not so long ago. But really...not even a single article link of reference? Okay...enough said!!!All I asked for was at the very least, one (1) single link. Check, my posts, I supplied on several occasions, at least one link to one of the subject matters that were being discussed, with you.
So I didn't ask anything of you that I didn't provide myself. So where the hypocrisy in that?
I think you need to go re-think your use of the word, hypocrite.
PS: 1. The point of providing "a reference/link" when submitted, is so that the reader of your post may garner new insights into your POV, or your frame of reference, or perhaps read what a more accomplished writer/expert has to say on the matter, that you maybe referencing.
2. Or are you claiming to know everything on the subject matters you post about and therefore we are to simply take your word for it?
ChuchoLoco
10-08-22, 21:03
I think PVMonger said it best:
You should probably check your own hypocrite logic on the matter, it seems you may not know the meaning of the word.
Recall I said the following:
All I asked for was at the very least, one (1) single link. Check, my posts, I supplied on several occasions, at least one link to one of the subject matters that were being discussed, with you.
So I didn't ask anything of you that I didn't provide myself. So where the hypocrisy in that?
I think you need to go re-think your use of the word, hypocrite.
PS: 1. The point of providing "a reference/link" when submitted, is so that the reader of your post may garner new insights into your POV, or your frame of reference, or perhaps read what a more accomplished writer/expert has to say on the matter, that you maybe referencing.
2. Or are you claiming to know everything on the subject matters you post about and therefore we are to simply take your word for it?So you want to change the discussion to linking and not what I said about gasohol? If you want to not agree with what I said, then you post some links disputing my post. You and your boys and I do mean boys can cut and paste all you like you can even finger paint or draw cartoons and then take your toys and go home. Only idiots would tell someone to do something and turn around and say it was his work to do as told.
Sadly evil exists thus we need cops with guns and even armies and bombs and alliances.
The isolationist whataboutists including some far left academics and a past his prime Pat Buchanan want to talk about the failures of democracy in the Greater Middle East, while the primary aim there was the War on Terror. Ongoing but we hear a lot less out of al qaeda and isis these days. But my whatabouts that Pat and the Noam Chomskys ignore completely is what about Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, and Estonia to name a few? Or Ukraine? Though democracy is often challenged, all these countries get drastically higher freedom scores than Russia.
https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores
And this is all in part due to their desires for freedom in a post Soviet world along with support from freedom loving countries in Western Europe and the US. And before anyone talks about NATO expansion, Central and Eastern Europe expanded into NATO not the other way around. They enjoyed freedom and democracy and asked for integration and protection, thus analysis that attempts to demonize the West so often completely ignores the agencies of these countries. The agency of Ukraine at present is the most obvious.
This while Russia has so often been invited to join the civilized world but have chosen kleptocracy and apathy instead. But the social contract was just broken, which was that Putin essentially promised to improve standards of living if the people stayed out of politics. This latest mobilization and mass exodus of young men reflect a wake up call.
P.S. We have hammered this out thoroughly on the stupid shit in Kyiv thread in the Ukraine forum if anyone cares to check out the posts there.Paulie, The point of my post was to give PVMonger a good ass kicking for claiming I believe there are a bunch of Floridians walking around with fake Ukrainian accents so they'll get disaster aid money.
I just really don't want to engage with you on this. I'm like a snot nosed bully who only picks on kids who are smaller than he is. This works pretty well as long as I stick to taxes and energy, and maybe economics, because I know those better than most. You're however better informed and more passionate about our involvement with Ukraine than I am, and you'll kick my ass if I don't run the other way. I pretty well already expended the extent of my purported knowledge in the first post anyway.
I'll come back with a reply to your comments on the Middle East. I have to hop right now.
Typically pro Repub Mainstream Media might be resistant to connecting the blatantly obvious dots in their own reports for fear that they will lead directly to their beloved giant Orangutan who refuses to leave the room. But patriotic Americans, supporters and defenders of democracy around the world should not be afraid to do so and ask the inevitable question:
Given Donald Helsinki Trump's consistent allegiance and devotion to Putin and his mission to destroy democracy in America and around the world, what did Putin know about American allies' ultimate nuclear capabilities that emboldened him to invade Ukraine and essentially declare war on democracy and the Western Alliances, when did he know it and which perennially desperately financially strapped giant Orangutan likely gave him the intel he wanted in order to proceed with the plan?
Document seized from Trump home described foreign govt's nuclear capabilities
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/document-seized-trump-home-described-foreign-governments-nuclear-capabilities-2022-09-07/
Timeline of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine
Why has Russia invaded Ukraine and what does Putin want?
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589
Putin threatens to use nuclear weapons as he escalates his invasion of Ukraine: 'This is not a bluff'
https://www.businessinsider.com/putin-threatens-nuclear-weapons-over-ukraine-says-not-bluffing-2022-9
Biden warns risk of nuclear 'Armageddon' is highest since Cuban Missile Crisis
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/joe-biden/biden-warns-risk-nuclear-armageddon-highest-cuban-missile-crisis-rcna51146
So you want to change the discussion to linking and not what I said about gasohol? If you want to not agree with what I said, then you post some links disputing my post. You and your boys and I do mean boys can cut and paste all you like you can even finger paint or draw cartoons and then take your toys and go home. Only idiots would tell someone to do something and turn around and say it was his work to do as told.Can't help it, if you're not able to read and comprehend what was posted, in plain English.
Don't plan to do what has already been done / posted. Go back and "READ" my posts, for real this time and maybe it will finally sink in and you'll get your "A-ha! Moment!" Good Luck!
If NOT, DON'T WORRY! Don't loose any sleep over it.
Try as he might too little too late, Trump's originally appointed Fed Chairman can't seem to artificially induce a mini recession many want to occur in Biden's roaring economy.
Of course, Biden had little choice but to re-appoint him so as not to spook the titans of industry even more than they were already justifiably spooked into abject terror at the time of the historically horrific Trump-to-Biden hand off.
And Biden promised in the 2020 campaign and has tried to govern ever since his landslide victory to work with Repubs and to include them wherever possible. Which has really been his only significant mistake and failing as POTUS so far.
September job gains affirm that the Fed has a long way to go in inflation fight
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/07/september-job-gains-affirm-that-the-fed-has-a-long-way-to-go-in-inflation-fight.html?__source=androidappshare
Septembers jobs report provided both assurance that the jobs market remains strong and that the Federal Reserve will have to do more to slow it down.
The 263,000 gain in nonfarm payrolls was just below analyst expectations and the slowest monthly gain in nearly a year and a half.
But a surprising drop in the unemployment rate and another boost in worker wages sent a clear message to markets that more giant interest rate hikes are on the way.
Low unemployment used to feel so good. Everybody who seems to want a job is getting a job, said Ron Hetrick, senior economist at labor force data provider Lightcast. But weve been getting into a situation where our low unemployment rate has absolutely been a significant driver of our inflation.
Paulie, The point of my post was to give PVMonger a good ass kicking for claiming I believe there are a bunch of Floridians walking around with fake Ukrainian accents so they'll get disaster aid money.
I just really don't want to engage with you on this. I'm like a snot nosed bully who only picks on kids who are smaller than he is. This works pretty well as long as I stick to taxes and energy, and maybe economics, because I know those better than most. You're however better informed and more passionate about our involvement with Ukraine than I am, and you'll kick my ass if I don't run the other way. I pretty well already expended the extent of my purported knowledge in the first post anyway.
I'll come back with a reply to your comments on the Middle East. I have to hop right now.Ass kicking? Really?
Who was the person who commented on the post as if it was real news? Not me. You didn't even know that the site that the OP copied-and-pasted from (without citation I might add) was even satire. If you had, you'd have commented differently. But sure, believe what you want to believe.
Some great news coming out of USA. A highly important legal case is being brought against the government on sensorship:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8z9mFeu59UA
I am really wishing it well.
Try as he might too little too late, Trump's originally appointed Fed Chairman can't seem to artificially induce a mini recession many want to occur in Biden's roaring economy.
Of course, Biden had little choice but to re-appoint him so as not to spook the titans of industry even more than they were already justifiably spooked into abject terror at the time of the historically horrific Trump-to-Biden hand off.
And Biden promised in the 2020 campaign and has tried to govern ever since his landslide victory to work with Repubs and to include them wherever possible. Which has really been his only significant mistake and failing as POTUS so far.
September job gains affirm that the Fed has a long way to go in inflation fight
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/07/september-job-gains-affirm-that-the-fed-has-a-long-way-to-go-in-inflation-fight.html?__source=androidappshareWe get it. Your social security checks will be up 9% over last year after the next COLA. You're making maybe 15% more on your California rental properties. Meanwhile the Thai Baht has plunged to 37 or 38 to the dollar. So in THB terms, your income is up maybe 30%. Instead of getting blowjobs from skanky wh*s at Star of Light, now you're probably doing sideliners at La Belle. Several a day. Well, that doesn't do much good for the workingman who's struggling to pay more for food, gasoline, electricity, hookers and rent. He's not going to vote for the Biden crowd. Why else would Republicans be favored to win the House, after the Supreme Court abortion decision. And when over half the Republican representatives voted not to certify the 2020 election. People are mad as hell at their decline in purchasing power. And they're not going to take it any more.
Quite the long monologue of random stories and thoughts, meant to confuse the reader or inform the reader???
Anyway, I'll try to break down each paragraph, so as to address some of things that I think you tried to answer my quoted post.
Followed by: Confession of not being shocked oil companies lied, the world would be under water by now, arrogant phrasing such as "saving the planet", we are not stronger than mother earth, not wanting to breathe dirty air, energy production of coal being the worst, Autism rates skyrocket, coal worst then nuclear, solar/wind myth and nuclear is better.
So you're not shocked oil and gas companies lie, meaning you expected them to lie to Americans, about the harmful mining and production of their products on the environment, but you're okay with it? But you are shocked when climate scientists lie or get something incorrect? And you're NOT okay with? I see why you turn to Bill Maher advice....no not really.
One third of Pakistan, might disagree and have something to say about being under water by now. Breath clean air, no-brainer, hence cleaner energy sources.
Nuclear/Solar/Wind are good options, have their pro/cons and should be assessed for viability given application/location were being applied. All better than coal.
Subsidies for cleaner ideas/products, drinking at the gov't water trough, will promote cleaner energy tech/thinking and innovation.
What subsidies do oil companies receive?
https://www.fuelfreedom.org/oil-company-subsidies/
About the issues you bring up above, first the only people who care about the alleged "lies" big oil companies made about global warming are two Democratic constituencies. The plaintiff's bar has run up our medical bills by suing doctors and hospitals and drug companies. They also ran companies out of business that made private propeller engine planes, silicone breast implants, and products that people depend on every day. Now they've set their sights on oil and gas companies for the biggest payday ever. And since they're sugardaddies for the Democratic Party, they're getting help from the politicians.
The second constituency is the environmentalists who want to see an end to oil and gas production in the USA.
This is not like tobacco. Could you imagine Joe Biden threatening to put a windfall profits tax on American tobacco companies if they don't lower the price of their product? Or threatening to strong arm some tobacco cartel or big tobacco producing country? Well, that's what Biden, Schumer, Newsome and others are doing to American oil producers and refiners. And OPEC and Saudi Arabia. They're doing their dead level best to get the price of gasoline down, which will INCREASE consumption of gasoline in the USA and INCREASE carbon dioxide emissions.
As to Pakistan, it's getting its incremental power supply from coal, and building coal fired power plants financed by China. So to some extent are China, India, Indonesia, and other developing countries. We account for only 14% of worldwide carbon emissions, and that number will go down with every passing year. In Bernie Sanders' wet dream, where we ban fracking immediately and otherwise immolate ourselves like Europe so that some of our people will die because they can't afford to heat their homes, we can't make a significant difference in worldwide emissions through restrictions on our fossil fuel producers.
And as to your link about oil company subsidies, the writer, Nathan Taft, is a dumb ass. Canada and I both know about 1000% more about taxation of energy companies than he does. Taft's apparently unaware that the intangible drilling cost deduction represents the same tax treatment as 100% bonus depreciation, received by all American companies in all industries. Or that the deduction for IDC doesn't reduce the amount of tax paid by an oil company, it only affects the timing of when the taxes are paid. Also he fails to note that oil and gas companies pay severance taxes, which other companies don't pay. The rate in Texas is 7.5% on gas and 4.6% on oil, and higher and lower in other states. This amount comes off of GROSS revenues, so it's significant. Oil companies pay much higher property taxes than many other companies, because most of their assets, outside of accounts receivable and cash, are subject to ad valorem taxes. Take these factors into account, and also take into account that the subsidies are negligible compared to income, and the oil and gas industry is more heavily taxed and receives less subsidies than average. And I'm not even counting gasoline taxes, you can arguably say are paid by the consumer instead of the industry.
Most bizarrely, Taft doesn't even note the one significant "unfair" tax break given to smaller American producers, the percentage depletion deduction. Taft doesn't know sh*t.
Ask me for links and sources. I dare you. I double dare you.
"And the federal government doesn't have jack to do with that, except to take taxpayer money and inefficiently redistribute part of it to states and cities."
I am all for the Federal government not sending jack shit of what they collect back to the states. Since "red states" receive a disproportionate amount of those federal funds, they'll all wither and die. https://sipanews.fiu.edu/2021/03/24/2021s-most-least-federally-dependent-states/.The red state / blue state thing is a red herring.
According to this link from 2021, only 36% of people making over $200,000 per year supported Democrats, compared to 63% making less than $15,000 per year.
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-...ics-democrats/
And from this link, people making over $221,572 paid 59.4% of the income tax.
https://taxfoundation.org/publicatio...come-tax-data/
Tie the two together. Republicans on average undoubtedly pay more to the federal government than they get out of it in benefits. As to Democrats, I'm not sure. But our system at the federal level is so wasteful and inefficient I suspect they get a bum deal too.
Two (2) hours after the Herschel Walker scandal drops, Walker is on Foxy news, as they try to get ahead of the scandalous story and push this pathetic dead horse, named Hershel Walker, across the Georgia senate finishing line.
Round #1 on Foxy News, the anti-abortion political hot mess of hypocrisy that is Herschel Walker, gets "Hannitized" on the Sean Hannity show, where he's spoon fed a bunch of lame soft questions, which he can barely answer (one to many football blows to the head), in a blatant attempt to try to rehabilitate their senate candidate for Georgia.
So pandering to their base, they trot out the right-wing Repub playbook and enact rule #1, Deny it and "blame the libs" But this does not work and goes badly and no one is buying his BS story, about "blaming the Dems / Libs".
So Round #2, a day later, Foxy News props him back up and he gets "Hannitized" again and this time, they enact rule #2, Use the right-wing Christian Religious card, to redeem yourself.
So naturally, Walker, all of a sudden has "religion" and hey "I'm born again, I'm repentant, I've seen the errors of my way....blah, blah, blah".
The GOPs Herschel Walker dilemma is Sean Hannitys fault
https://www.mediamatters.org/fox-news/gops-herschel-walker-dilemma-sean-hannitys-fault
Herschel Walker went on 'Hannity' to deny that he paid a woman to get an abortion
https://news.yahoo.com/herschel-walker-went-hannity-deny-035449591.html
Meanwhile the never asking the hard questions:
1. About the Repub party / red state beliefs / laws around abortion baby killers going to jail?
2. How do you, justify not going to jail for baby killing yourself, when your campaigning hard against a raped 10 yr old and millions of others seeking an abortion.
3. Isn't your "Pro-Life" campaign really just hypocrisy and by extension, the Repub anit-abortion policies?
4. And does he think he should be in jail? If not why not? If no one is above the law, then why are you the exception?
What a spectacle and pathetic display of pseudo reporting and all-a-round embarrassment, trying to prop up this "born-again" hypocrite as contrite and penitent.
Two (2) hours after the Herschel Walker scandal drops, Walker is on Foxy news, as they try to get ahead of the scandalous story and push this pathetic dead horse, named Hershel Walker, across the Georgia senate finishing line.You fail to mention the other suck ass candidates, in addition to Walker, who are only got the Republican nomination because of support from Trump. And yet the punters are giving Republicans a 47% probability of controlling the Senate and an 82% probability of controlling the House. Apparently the electorate isn't happy with the status quo, where Democrats control the presidency, House and Senate.
https://www.predictit.org/markets/2/Congress
Sadly evil exists thus we need cops with guns and even armies and bombs and alliances....OK Paulie, I'm intuitively inclined to agree with about 1/3rd of what you posted in your two messages and disagree with the rest. I promised I'd get back with you on the Mideast.
I believe we went way overboard in waging the war on terror. The second Iraq war in particular. I see in Wikipedia that one group estimated the war resulted in 151,000 violent deaths and another estimated there were about 1 million excess deaths. Business Insider is notoriously untrustworthy, but they provide estimates of $2 trillion spent in Iraq and $6. 4 trillion spent on the War on Terror in total. From 1995 to 2014, the total number of Americans killed in terrorist attacks was 3503, worldwide, according to this.
https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Oct2015.pdf
Our reaction was way, way disproportionate to the damage we suffered on 9/11. We spent too much money, and too many people, mostly foreigners have died. I'd bet that the number of American servicemen and contractors who died in Iraq and Afghanistan outnumber the American civilians (excluding the contractors) who died in terrorist attacks.
A better use of money and manpower would be to aggressively prepare ourselves from threats from outside, be they attacks like 9/11, bioweapons, cyberattacks, or whatever. Similar to protecting ourselves from COVID or a future pandemic, which you alluded to in one of your posts, we could dump a lot of money into preventative measures like these and and it would be a fraction of what we'd spend on another effort like Afghanistan or Iraq.
And while I don't follow the pronouncements of Noam Chomsky, who you mentioned, I suspect he has said if we'd keep our nose out of other peoples' business, we wouldn't have the threat we do now from terrorists. I agree with that.
Back on Ukraine, kind of, there was a good episode on Taiwan this evening on 60 minutes. The ex chief of the Taiwanese armed forces said it's not a matter of if the Chinese will invade, but rather when. And he complained that Taiwan couldn't get the smaller arms like hand held missiles that could be used to arm the citizenry and make China think twice about invading. Why? Taiwan's willing to pay for them. Well, unfortunately, all that we can manage to produce is going to Ukraine.
On the other hand, what's happening in Ukraine, and what Biden's said about what the U.S. would and wouldn't do in the event of a Chinese attack, would have to give the Chinese pause to invading Taiwan.
Another kind of unrelated thought, TSMC, the company that makes the majority of the worlds' high end chips, is located in Taiwan. Our politicians are moving to cut China off from supplies of chips from TSMC. This could backfire. Right now, according to the 60 minutes piece, the thinking goes that China wouldn't pursue an all out war in Taiwan because the risk to TSMC's plants. But if China develops its own plants to replace what they're buying from TSMC, then they can scorch Taiwan. The rest of the world will suffer and the Chinese will be in the cat bird's seat. This is all above my paygrade though.
Finally, a Swiss acquaintance of mine who lives in Singapore asked me what would the USA have done years ago if Mexico or Canada had been looking to join the Warsaw Pact. I didn't have an answer.
MarquisdeSade1
10-10-22, 03:36
I think its going to be a bloodbath.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2022/10/08/useless-nasty-joe-biden-has-revealed/
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/09/report-illegal-alien-criminal-record-charged-murdering-two-americans-las-vegas-stabbing-spree/
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/09/french-rail-company-quit-california-for-less-dysfunctional-north-africa/
We get it. Your social security checks will be up 9% over last year after the next COLA. You're making maybe 15% more on your California rental properties. Meanwhile the Thai Baht has plunged to 37 or 38 to the dollar. So in THB terms, your income is up maybe 30%. Instead of getting blowjobs from skanky wh*s at Star of Light, now you're probably doing sideliners at La Belle. Several a day. Well, that doesn't do much good for the workingman who's struggling to pay more for food, gasoline, electricity, hookers and rent. He's not going to vote for the Biden crowd. Why else would Republicans be favored to win the House, after the Supreme Court abortion decision. And when over half the Republican representatives voted not to certify the 2020 election. People are mad as hell at their decline in purchasing power. And they're not going to take it any more.I've never been to Star of Light.
Was that one of your favorite haunts during the Great Recessions and Massive Job Losses under Reagan, Bush2 and Trump when the American working man was doing fabulously well?
The non presidential Party has won seats in Congress in all but 2-3 of these first midterms since the Civil War.
This time around that would be your beloved Republican Party.
It turns out lack of interest by the Party that most recently won the Presidency is a primary culprit. Nothing to do with high inflation or no inflation, mythical CRT that is not taught in public schools, transgender toilets, wokeness, immigration or any other sucker social issues.
The voters whose Party just won the presidency are simply satisfied that they "did their part" already and don't show up to vote in large numbers in the next midterm.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2018/10/09/historically-the-presidents-party-performs-poorly-in-the-midterms-infographic/
That ought to be doubly beneficial to your beloved Great Recession / Massive Jobs Destruction Repubs this time around for a couple of additional reasons aside from mere overwhelming historical tradition:
1. According to your beloved Repub Party's most iconic and beloved leader of all time, former and defeated so-called president Trump, Biden's 2020 win was a "landslide."
2. Biden and his Dems accomplished so much historically positive legislation and results in these first two years it almost doesn't matter which Party controls Congress for the next two years. Legislatively, I mean. It's not like Biden needs the House to approve budgetary support for more economic recovery, stimulus, expansion and growth for the time being. Nobody expects another SCOTUS vacancy anytime soon. And Biden will be there to veto any idiotic nonsense a Repub-controlled Senate tries to pull anyway.
MarquisdeSade1
10-10-22, 09:34
OK Paulie, I'm intuitively inclined to agree with about 1/3rd of what you posted in your two messages and disagree with the rest. I promised I'd get back with you on the Mideast.
I believe we went way overboard in waging the war on terror. The second Iraq war in particular. I see in Wikipedia that one group estimated the war resulted in 151,000 violent deaths and another estimated there were about 1 million excess deaths. Business Insider is notoriously untrustworthy, but they provide estimates of $2 trillion spent in Iraq and $6. 4 trillion spent on the War on Terror in total. From 1995 to 2014, the total number of Americans killed in terrorist attacks was 3503, worldwide, according to this.
https://www.start.umd.edu/pubs/START_AmericanTerrorismDeaths_FactSheet_Oct2015.pdf
Our reaction was way, way disproportionate to the damage we suffered on 9/11. We spent too much money, and too many people, mostly foreigners have died. I'd bet that the number of American servicemen and contractors who died in Iraq and Afghanistan outnumber the American civilians (excluding the contractors) who died in terrorist attacks.
A better use of money and manpower would be to aggressively prepare ourselves from threats from outside, be they attacks like 9/11, bioweapons, cyberattacks, or whatever. Similar to protecting ourselves from COVID or a future pandemic, which you alluded to in one of your posts, we could dump a lot of money into preventative measures like these and and it would be a fraction of what we'd spend on another effort like Afghanistan or Iraq.
And while I don't follow the pronouncements of Noam Chomsky, who you mentioned, I suspect he has said if we'd keep our nose out of other peoples' business, we wouldn't have the threat we do now from terrorists. I agree with that.Made in China specs you got to love them LMAO.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/29/t...echnology.html
https://www.businessinsider.com/chin...llapses-2012-8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDEXLp5VbjM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-35262802#text=A%20 hospital%20 in%20 China%20 has%20 been%20 bulldozed%20 while, amid%20 a%20 land%20 dispute%2 see%20 Xinhua%20 news%20 agency%20 said.
https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/07/china...pse/index.html
https://www.newsweek.com/china-suffe...rescue-1609067
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jrjLsn30Xzs
A gentle reminder that the initially Repub-appointed Fed Chairman who was there for all of it, Ben Bernanke, was among many who understood and pointed out that the repeal of Glass-Steagall was irrelevant to the Bush2 Financial Crisis:
Bernanke: I'm 'puzzled' by the focus on Glass-Steagall.
Oct. 21, 2015
https://www.politico.com/story/2015/10/ben-bernanke-puzzled-by-democrats-glass-steagall-214996
"Im actually a little puzzled by the focus on that particular provision, Bernanke said during a discussion with POLITICOs Ben White at an Americas Fiscal Future event in Manhattan. I think that if you look at the actual, what happened a few years ago in the crisis, that Glass-Steagall was pretty irrelevant to it because you had banks like Wachovia or Washington Mutual that went bad because they made bad loans, and you had investment banks like Bear Stearns and Lehman that went bad because of their investment banking activities.
Even if Glass-Steagall were still in place at the time of the financial crisis, it would have had no effect on most of these firms, he said, including AIG, which required massive and repeated bailouts.Uh. The Federal agency charged with conducting oversight on savings bank loans and savings and loans institutions is the Office of Thrift Supervision in the Treasury Department of a president's Cabinet. That is the where the ball was dropped on protecting the USA economy from that particular Great Repub Crash and Recession.
Nope, it wasn't about Clinton or his Treasury Department not doing its job. And, nope, it was not about Obama or his Treasury Department not doing its job.
It was about a different president from a different political Party and his Treasury Department not doing its job. In gigantic fashion producing horrific domestic and global results.
They always find a way.
The only people who believe that President Biden is "the worst president ever" are members of the Moron Brigade. These are the same fools who believe that Donnie the Dumbass ranks somewhere in the top 5 of all presidential rankings. Presidential historians, who actually have functional brains, believe differently. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1123920/us-presidents-historian-ranking/ and https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/who-was-worst-president-everand-how-do-historians-decide-180978105/ and https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/08/13/nation/chart-how-do-historians-rank-us-presidents/ and https://www.c-span.org/presidentsurvey2021/?page=overall among others.Republicans and all intelligent people know Biden is the dumbest president ever because Biden is proving it every day. Democrats obviously are too stupid to see the facts and the democrats are counting on the dumbest people in America to continue to vote democrat. History has proven that if you are are stupid, a criminal, an illegal or on government assistance then you are a democrat.
The red state / blue state thing is a red herring.
According to this link from 2021, only 36% of people making over $200,000 per year supported Democrats, compared to 63% making less than $15,000 per year.
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-...ics-democrats/
And from this link, people making over $221,572 paid 59.4% of the income tax.
https://taxfoundation.org/publicatio...come-tax-data/
Tie the two together. Republicans on average undoubtedly pay more to the federal government than they get out of it in benefits. As to Democrats, I'm not sure. But our system at the federal level is so wasteful and inefficient I suspect they get a bum deal too.So, richer people support MAGAts and poorer people support Democrats. Gee, tell me something I didn't already know. In fact, everybody in the US already knew that.
But, more to the point, you call the red state vs blue state thing a "red herring". It isn't. It is a fact that red states receive more federal money than they pay in taxes. There are numerous sources that support this. Like https://www.moneygeek.com/living/states-most-reliant-federal-government/ and https://smartasset.com/data-studies/states-most-dependent-on-the-federal-government-2022 among others.
We get it. Your social security checks will be up 9% over last year after the next COLA. You're making maybe 15% more on your California rental properties. Meanwhile the Thai Baht has plunged to 37 or 38 to the dollar. So in THB terms, your income is up maybe 30%. Instead of getting blowjobs from skanky wh*s at Star of Light, now you're probably doing sideliners at La Belle. Several a day. Well, that doesn't do much good for the workingman who's struggling to pay more for food, gasoline, electricity, hookers and rent. He's not going to vote for the Biden crowd. Why else would Republicans be favored to win the House, after the Supreme Court abortion decision. And when over half the Republican representatives voted not to certify the 2020 election. People are mad as hell at their decline in purchasing power. And they're not going to take it any more.If inflation only affected the USA, you'd have a point. If you can prove to me that no other country in the world suffers from inflation, I will accept your conclusion that inflation is President Biden's fault.
MarquisdeSade1
10-10-22, 18:39
Like Mitch McConell Sen Cornyn Romney et al.
Like Reagan and both Bush dirtbags.
https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2022/10/10/mark-levin-the-democrats-hate-america/
It really kicked in high gear with Bubba, Bush 43 and Barry Hussein, those 24 yrs just about destroyed the United States.
They completely gutted the middle class and left the country a microcosm of the dystopian hellhole known as California.
Now we have hunger games for all, Biden style 2022.
Our Lord and Savior can't return soon enough.
The second coming is coming!
Republicans and all intelligent people know Biden is the dumbest president ever because Biden is proving it every day. Democrats obviously are too stupid to see the facts and the democrats are counting on the dumbest people in America to continue to vote democrat. History has proven that if you are are stupid, a criminal, an illegal or on government assistance then you are a democrat.What history has proven is that Donnie the Dumbass was one of the worst presidents of all time. The links I posted show that. Those links are from scholarly publications with real historians. Of course, Repubs don't believe that Donnie the Dumbass was bad because Repubs got what they wanted. They got a crook who was worse than Slippery Dick Nixon. They got a liar with 30,000 documented falsehoods. They got authoritarianism. They got the normalization of white supremacy. They got the Christian Taliban.
And they'll get more of the same if us dummies don't wake up.
What history has also proven is that there are 74+ million American voters who don't have enough IQ points to decorate a domino and they all voted for Donnie the Dumbass.
Republicans and all intelligent people know Biden is the dumbest president ever because Biden is proving it every day. Democrats obviously are too stupid to see the facts and the democrats are counting on the dumbest people in America to continue to vote democrat. History has proven that if you are are stupid, a criminal, an illegal or on government assistance then you are a democrat.Voters with a functioning frontal cortex and a working moral compass did not and would not ever support the chaos, confusion and cruelty of this former president who attempted to overthrow our government to keep himself in power, against the will of the American people. Defending this man on any level speaks volumes about one's character.
And yet the Moron Brigade defends Donnie the Dumbass with every fiber of their being. Character counts and they don't have it.
About the issues you bring up above, first the only people who care about the alleged "lies" big oil companies made about global warming are two Democratic constituencies. The plaintiff's bar ...
The second constituency is the environmentalists who want to see an end to oil and gas production in the USA. ...
Two (2) that's it, in your opinion. Nope, there are millions of people who care (or suffered), w/r to the big oil & gas companies lying. If you're talking about "people", meaning interested "groups of people" (ie. organizations/instutions), then you would be dead wrong their too.
Such groups, such as hedge funds, investors, capitalists, lobbyists, PACs, NGOs or governments from municipals, states and federal worldwide, would also naturally be invested in some form or another with regards to the "big lies".
Oil And Gas Giants Spend Millions Lobbying To Block Climate ...
https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2019/03/25/oil-and-gas-giants-spend-millions-lobbying-to-block-climate-change-policies-infographic/
Look, behind all the politicking, I DO NOT believe Dems (and the world at large) want to see big oil & gas companies, FAIL outright (as oil is still need and Dems do still lobby for Oil & Gas, just no way near the spending of Repubs). But they do what to see them MORE ACCOUNTABLE for their actions/lies. Being accountable, something that big oil & gas companies seem to have in common with Repubs.
Lobbying spending of oil & gas companies in the United States during election cycles from 1990 to 2022, by receiving political party
https://www.statista.com/statistics/788056/us-oil-and-gas-lobbying-spend-by-party/
So just like big tobacco and big pharma, the big oil & gas companies, should be held accountable for their harmful lies/product/practices.
Big oil and gas kept a dirty secret for decades...
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/jun/30/climate-crimes-oil-and-gas-environment
As to Pakistan, it's getting its incremental power supply from coal, and building coal fired power plants financed by China. ... In Bernie Sanders' wet dream, where we ban fracking immediately and otherwise immolate ourselves like Europe ...
My Pakistan reference was w/r to Elvis's story being duped by Bill Maher and scientists. Whether its activists, comedians, politicians or capitalists and their "wet dreams", Europe/Ukraine should be a wake up call for better energy independence, with more emphasis on renewable clean energy, were appropriate and viable.
And as to your link about oil company subsidies, the writer, Nathan Taft, is a dumb ass. Canada and I both know about 1000% more about taxation of energy companies than he does. ... Take these factors into account, and also take into account that the subsidies are negligible compared to income, and the oil and gas industry is more heavily taxed and receives less subsidies than average. ...
Most bizarrely, Taft doesn't even note the one significant "unfair" tax break given to smaller American producers, the percentage depletion deduction. Taft doesn't know sh*t Nathan Taff, may say the same of you, that you don't know "sh*t", if he perhaps read one of your papers (assuming of course you've written one) on, "Oil Companies Subsidies/Taxation". After all he's not here to defend himself.
Sure his paper suits my narrative and the accounting factors you've presented may very well, not have be taken into account by Taft. But my question is, if the oil & gas companies are "more heavily taxed" as you say, wouldn't they lobby hard, to be treated just as fairly, tax wise, like most businesses/companies? Why would gov't even need to have special tax breaks just for oil & gas, shouldn't all companies be treated equally?
Ask me for links and sources. I dare you. I double dare you.
Dare excepted!
Your links on Oil Companies Subsidies/Taxation, might be interesting. I don't know why you didn't include them in the first place (as you usually do), other than to perhaps grandstand.
So the "Oil & Gas Bedtime Fairy Tale reading", may prove educating and I'll learn something new or at the very least I should get a good nights sleep, well enough.
DramaFree11
10-11-22, 01:26
You fail to mention the other suck ass candidates, in addition to Walker, who are only got the Republican nomination because of support from Trump. And yet the punters are giving Republicans a 47% probability of controlling the Senate and an 82% probability of controlling the House. Apparently the electorate isn't happy with the status quo, where Democrats control the presidency, House and Senate.
https://www.predictit.org/markets/2/CongressYes, Biden is the worst Pres. Ever, but the idiots he has around him are even worse. So sad, what they are doing to this country. Hopefully the country will wake up and vote these clowns out of office in Nov.
You fail to mention the other suck ass candidates, in addition to Walker, who are only got the Republican nomination because of support from Trump. And yet the punters are giving Republicans a 47% probability of controlling the Senate and an 82% probability of controlling the House. Apparently the electorate isn't happy with the status quo, where Democrats control the presidency, House and Senate.
https://www.predictit.org/markets/2/Congress
Nope! I've been very prolific indeed. Ask around, check my posts or check with your fellow QAnon/Repubs/Bothsidesists. I've more than mentioned those "suck ass candidates" (as you put it) on several occasions, like (R) Donald C. Bolduc of New Hampshire, and several of those dumb-dumb Repubs along with a number of decent civic minded Repubs, here: http://www.internationalsexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?2467-American-Politics&p=2745900&viewfull=1#post2745900 .
Polls are nice and make for good "water cooler" talks, if you're into it. I'll let the results speak for themselves. Same goes for the electorate.
But the question is, you've failed to say, why on earth would I need to mention the other "suck ass Repub candidates", like Dr. Mehmet Oz, Donald C. Bolduc and others that Agent Orange endorsed, in a post that was clearly and solely about one (1) candidate, the hypocrite, pro-life, anti-abortionist that is Hershel Walker?
https://www.newsweek.com/heres-growing-list-trump-endorsed-2022-candidates-1673241
Surely, you're smart enough to make that connection "by extension", given the all-time historical ineptitude of Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf? Not to mention the massive failure of the Repubs, to allow Donnie J. Dummkopf to "hijack" their "vigorous" due diligence when vetting candidates.
Dare excepted! ...
Correction, that should read "Dare accepted!"
The red state / blue state thing is a red herring.
According to this link from 2021, only 36% of people making over $200,000 per year supported Democrats, compared to 63% making less than $15,000 per year.
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-...ics-democrats/
And from this link, people making over $221,572 paid 59.4% of the income tax.
https://taxfoundation.org/publicatio...come-tax-data/
Tie the two together. Republicans on average undoubtedly pay more to the federal government than they get out of it in benefits. As to Democrats, I'm not sure. But our system at the federal level is so wasteful and inefficient I suspect they get a bum deal too.I wanted to take a look at your sources but received a "404 - Sorry, we couldn't find what you were looking for! Message. Upon closer inspection, I looked at your links here in your post, and they have "..." ellipses in the URL, which doesn't make for a valid link URL.
So my guess is, it's either because:
1. you used "copy" instead of "copy link", when constructing your post (this has happened to me); or
2. the pages have been taken down, which would be strange after a few days
Could you please provide the correct URLs you were referencing?
I wanted to take a look at your sources but received a "404 - Sorry, we couldn't find what you were looking for! Message. Upon closer inspection, I looked at your links here in your post, and they have "..." ellipses in the URL, which doesn't make for a valid link URL.
So my guess is, it's either because:
1. you used "copy" instead of "copy link", when constructing your post (this has happened to me); or
2. the pages have been taken down, which would be strange after a few days
Could you please provide the correct URLs you were referencing?
I don't think that's what caused the problem. I don't know what did. They were working yesterday. Some of the Marquis' links died as well. These are working now, and I'll repeat without the URL tag so you can cut and paste if you wish
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-democrats/
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-democrats/
https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/
https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/
Nope! I've been very prolific indeed. Ask around, check my posts or check with your fellow QAnon/Repubs/Bothsidesists. I've more than mentioned those "suck ass candidates" (as you put it) on several occasions, like (R) Donald C. Bolduc of New Hampshire, and several of those dumb-dumb Repubs along with a number of decent civic minded Repubs, here: http://www.internationalsexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?2467-American-Politics&p=2745900&viewfull=1#post2745900 .
Polls are nice and make for good "water cooler" talks, if you're into it. I'll let the results speak for themselves. Same goes for the electorate.
But the question is, you've failed to say, why on earth would I need to mention the other "suck ass Repub candidates", like Dr. Mehmet Oz, Donald C. Bolduc and others that Agent Orange endorsed, in a post that was clearly and solely about one (1) candidate, the hypocrite, pro-life, anti-abortionist that is Hershel Walker?
https://www.newsweek.com/heres-growing-list-trump-endorsed-2022-candidates-1673241
Surely, you're smart enough to make that connection "by extension", given the all-time historical ineptitude of Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf? Not to mention the massive failure of the Repubs, to allow Donnie J. Dummkopf to "hijack" their "vigorous" due diligence when vetting candidates.
Correction, that should read "Dare accepted!"Hey, I'm just adding color to your post. Herschel Walker is the tip of the iceberg. I'm totally amazed Republicans are favored to win the House.
I agree, you can't trust polls. This is because they under-represent Republican views. Republicans are naturally paranoid. Just look at the theories about Dominion voting machines. Or the belief among some of my more radical brethren that the COVID vaccines cause COVID. When pollsters call, we lie, because we figure they're Democrat IRS agents looking for people to audit. Even I'm paranoid and I'm a Republican lite. I've contributed to a couple of Democratic candidates. Although I've given more to Republicans by about a 20:1 margin, I figure those two small donations to Democrats, which are public record along with the rest, along with a good line of bull sh*t will be enough to keep me safe when the woke crowd comes gunning for me, with torches and pickaxes in hand.
Predict. Org, the link, is a betting site. The numbers are determined by people risking their own money. Theoretically it should be more accurate than polls.
If inflation only affected the USA, you'd have a point. If you can prove to me that no other country in the world suffers from inflation, I will accept your conclusion that inflation is President Biden's fault.The economic destruction, closures, massive job losses, supply-chain collapse and the inevitable and unavoidable recovery Inflation due to Trump's Pandemic has even occurred where I live in arguably the best location in one of the top 2 Best Cities in one of the top 3 Best Countries in the World, according to America's international travelers:
Thailand is 3rd Best Country, Bangkok is 2nd Best Big City in the World - Conde Naste Reader's Choice Awards 2022
https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/2408833/thailand-third-in-best-country-survey
Gas prices here pre-Trump were generally 27-29 baht per litre. Post-Trump they have been 45+ baht per litre. Food prices also increased while portions got noticably smaller. Of course, that has zero to do with Biden and his Dems' historically successful USA recovery from the latest Great Repub Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction.
Even so, Tiny12 inadvertently lurched toward the truth about how my decision many years ago to vote exclusively Democrat, avoid unnecessary, time-consuming gambling in the stock market, intelligently invest for the long term, live, work and set up rental property in California and get my ducks in a row in order to have a more fun, pleasurable and financially advantageous second half where I now live in one of the above ranked "Bests" has paid off quite well for me.
Trump-triggered Inflation has even effected my favorite past time here in one of the top 3 "Bests"; providing nominal financial aid to select local females. Just last night the adorable 21 year old Thong Lo area hotel receptionist who came over for a night of lovely BBFS+CIP asked if she could come over again in 2-3 days for BBBJ+CIM+SWALLOW since she is behind on her rent (due in part to Trump's Pandemic Inflation elsewhere) but will likely be on her period by then. I told her I will think about it and tell her later. These are busy times for me.
That is otherwise known by the Repubs and pro Repub Bothsiders here as "fucking skanks in the shithole" where I have to live.
Dare excepted!
Your links on Oil Companies Subsidies/Taxation, might be interesting. I don't know why you didn't include them in the first place (as you usually do), other than to perhaps grandstand.What I wrote is original content from my experience in the industry.
EhiTooms, PVMonger and you accept what you read and hear in the left of center media without critical analysis. And you believe that links to pontifications of people who think exactly like you do proves you're right. And you demand we provide links to prove our point. What do you want, a Breitbart for every Intercept? Research papers with footnotes? If you don't know that China's building lots of coal fired power plants, or you don't believe GDP or inflation numbers, then instead of asking for links, do some research.
I'm left shaking my head at some of the requests for links. For example, anyone who knows much about energy knows that China is building coal fired power plants.
But maybe you're right. If I'd provided Tooms a link to the definition of the word "or" in advance of saying that the Labor Force Participation was absolutely, undeniably down under Obama, maybe it would have prevented a misunderstanding.
As to the rest of your post, I already addressed most of your misconceptions so don't see any point in doing it again. If the critics of the "lies" of oil and gas companies were to abandon cars, plane travel, electricity, and home heating, and go back to horses and buggies, I'd take what they say more seriously. I will say however that your beliefs about what the Russia Ukraine war is teaching us about renewables and energy security is ass backwards. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I don’t know a better way to say it. Europeans are scrambling to re-open coal fired power plants and Germany and other countries are rethinking their bans on fracking. The price of coal and LNG have shot through the roof. Progressive Democrats would have us in a similar situation if they’d been able to ban fracking the use of thermal coal — we’d be looking at a cold winter too.
ScatManDoo
10-11-22, 06:47
Predict. Org, the link, is a betting site. The numbers are determined by people risking their own money. Theoretically it should be more accurate than polls.If you wanted to bet on Predictit. Org that the Democrats would hold the Senate:
Back in February 2022 through April 2022 the site was giving out 3 for 1 odds.
In other words, to buy a $1 winning "share" the cost was around 25 cents.
Toward the end of July, those shares were costing 50 cents.
By the middle of August, those shares were around 60 cents.
The first two weeks of September had share prices peak in value at 63 cents.
Currently those bets on the site go for 55 cents.
Spidy, to clarify, our utilities pay a small fraction of what the Europeans pay for coal and natural gas, and we don't have shortages of either. As a result the Europeans will have a much tougher time this winter than we will.
What I wrote is original content from my experience in the industry.
EhiTooms, PVMonger and you accept what you read and hear in the left of center media without critical analysis. And you believe that links to pontifications of people who think exactly like you do proves you're right. And you demand we provide links to prove our point. What do you want, a Breitbart for every Intercept? Research papers with footnotes? If you don't know that China's building lots of coal fired power plants, or you don't believe GDP or inflation numbers, then instead of asking for links, do some research.
I'm left shaking my head at some of the requests for links. For example, anyone who knows much about energy knows that China is building coal fired power plants.
But maybe you're right. If I'd provided Tooms a link to the definition of the word "or" in advance of saying that the Labor Force Participation was absolutely, undeniably down under Obama, maybe it would have prevented a misunderstanding.
As to the rest of your post, I already addressed most of your misconceptions so don't see any point in doing it again. If the critics of the "lies" of oil and gas companies were to abandon cars, plane travel, electricity, and home heating, and go back to horses and buggies, I'd take what they say more seriously. I will say however that your beliefs about what the Russia Ukraine war is teaching us about renewables and energy security is ass backwards. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I dont know a better way to say it. Europeans are scrambling to re-open coal fired power plants and Germany and other countries are rethinking their bans on fracking. The price of coal and LNG have shot through the roof. Progressive Democrats would have us in a similar situation if theyd been able to ban fracking the use of thermal coal wed be looking at a cold winter6 too.Hang onto the word "or" like a rat on a rafter if you must. Your post tried to untruthfully "suggest" Trump's waste of $2. 5+ Trillion Tax Cut bill turned around the decline in the Labor Force Participation Rate when it most certainly did not.
The dramatic decline in that rate that began and continued all through the previous famous Repub tax cutter GW Bush's presidency was halted and reversed under Obama, not under Trump.
It was "down" for a portion of Obama's presidency only because the downward trajectory he inherited from GW Bush was so dramatic. The same way the downward trajectory for the unemployment rate for 8-9 years before Trump's Tax Cuts bill took effect continued its decline from 3. 9% to 3. 5%, by all reason having little to nothing to do with tax cuts the vast majority of corporation simply used to buy back their own company stocks and did not use to hire more employees. As predictable as night following day when it comes to Repub tax cuts.
Review my previously posted links for Dems at the city and state level increasing the minimum wage and by a meaningful amount, in defiance of Trump and his Repubs' objections and opposition to it, for why the Labor Force Participation Rate increased and unemployment rates for Hispanics, Blacks, Women and minorities in general fell to historic lows during that time period. No amount of private spread sheet ticks, tocks and wiggles you secretly review in your spare time will show those disproportionately beneficial tax cuts for corporations had much of anything to do with it.
The same goes for the steady, near month-over-month decline in inflation that began almost a year before Reagan took office in January 1981. Neither he nor his classic Repub Supply-Side / Trickle-Down policies and abandonment of sensible regulations had a thing to do with it.
The economic destruction, closures, massive job losses, supply-chain collapse and the inevitable and unavoidable recovery Inflation due to Trump's Pandemic has even occurred where I live in arguably the best location in one of the top 2 Best Cities in one of the top 3 Best Countries in the World, according to America's international travelers:
Thailand is 3rd Best Country, Bangkok is 2nd Best Big City in the World - Conde Naste Reader's Choice Awards 2022
https://www.bangkokpost.com/business/2408833/thailand-third-in-best-country-survey
Gas prices here pre-Trump were generally 27-29 baht per litre. Post-Trump they have been 45+ baht per litre. Food prices also increased while portions got noticably smaller. Of course, that has zero to do with Biden and his Dems' historically successful USA recovery from the latest Great Repub Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction.
Even so, Tiny12 inadvertently lurched toward the truth about how my decision many years ago to vote exclusively Democrat, avoid unnecessary, time-consuming gambling in the stock market, intelligently invest for the long term, live, work and set up rental property in California and get my ducks in a row in order to have a more fun, pleasurable and financially advantageous second half where I now live in one of the above ranked "Bests" has paid off quite well for me.
Trump-triggered Inflation has even effected my favorite past time here in one of the top 3 "Bests"; providing nominal financial aid to select local females. Just last night the adorable 21 year old Thong Lo area hotel receptionist who came over for a night of lovely BBFS+CIP asked if she could come over again in 2-3 days for BBBJ+CIM+SWALLOW since she is behind on her rent (due in part to Trump's Pandemic Inflation elsewhere) but will likely be on her period by then. I told her I will think about it and tell her later. These are busy times for me.
That is otherwise known by the Repubs and pro Repub Bothsiders here as "fucking skanks in the shithole" where I have to live.You can blame Thai inflation and the weakness of the THB on the following. Trump was responsible for none of this:
1. Higher prices of imports, petroleum in particular.
2. Fall off in the tourist trade, which along with higher import prices has resulted in a weaker economy and Thailand going from a current account surplus to current account deficit.
3. The Bank of Thailand's reluctance to raise interest rates more aggressively, which has led to sharply negative real interest rates.
4. The strength of the dollar.
5. Shortages and supply chain glitches, attributable in large part to COVID policies of China, Thailand and to a lesser extent other countries.
I think you should write a book and call it Das Trump. Or Das Republicans. You could blame all the world's problems on Trump and the Republicans. Kind of like Karl Marx did when he wrote Das Kapital and blamed all the world's problems on capitalists.
And PLEASE. If she's on her period don't invite her over. I imagine you're paying at least 3 brown ones for what you could get for under 1000 Baht at the Star of Light.
If you wanted to bet on Predictit. Org that the Democrats would hold the Senate:
Back in February 2022 through April 2022 the site was giving out 3 for 1 odds.
In other words, to buy a $1 winning "share" the cost was around 25 cents.
Toward the end of July, those shares were costing 50 cents.
By the middle of August, those shares were around 60 cents.
The first two weeks of September had share prices peak in value at 63 cents.
Currently those bets on the site go for 55 cents.You might find this interesting. How I Turned $400 into $400,000 Trading Political Futures (on predictit.org).
https://luckboxmagazine.com/trends/how-i-turned-400-into-400000-trading-political-futures/
What I wrote is original content from my experience in the industry. Since this is a political discussion group (located in a Sex Forum), you should by now realize, even those with experience in said fields of industry/business are very often going to get push back, perhaps more so, because of said bias. Also realize, when things become politicized, wrightly or wrongly, is when, even "experience" gets pushed aside.
EhiTooms, PVMonger and you accept what you read and hear in the left of center media without critical analysis. And you believe that links to pontifications of people who think exactly like you do proves you're right.
Again, personally for me, it's not about ME being "right" or YOU being "wrong". More often than not, I have opposing political opinions, views and beliefs and provide them as counterpoints, to your political arguments, most times they may not align, sometimes they do.
Since the right-wing media infrastructure/block, has 1500+ English and 300+ Spanish radio stations across America and of course blanket Nationwide coverage of Fox News
(I am not entirely sure), but a conservative estimate, puts right-wing distribution of propaganda, maybe about 15:1 right vs. left radio stations. As well as a vast right-wing internet and social-media influence, online.
Right-wing PAC, dark money groups, special donors and right-wing billionaires pumping millions/billions into legal political bribery (thanks to a right-wing POTUS 1972) on the right, far out paces anything on the left. The fact that Repubs, are constantly "banging their drums" and messaging through this massive right-wing media block, it's a wonder at all, those of us with an opposing opinions on the left, get heard.
And you think, those on the left, are the ones that are brainwashed, or should I say, "...accept things without critical analysis".
And you demand we provide links to prove our point. What do you want, a Breitbart for every Intercept? Research papers with footnotes? If you don't know that China's building lots of coal fired power plants, or you don't believe GDP or inflation numbers, then instead of asking for links, do some research.
I didn't demand anything. I asked a simply a question. Show me where I disputed China's stance on coal. I primarily highlighted China's impressive march toward more cleaner energy solutions.
As I told another BM:
... PS: 1. The point of providing "a reference/link" when submitted, is so that the reader of your post may garner new insights into your POV, or your frame of reference, or perhaps read what a more accomplished writer/expert has to say on the matter, that you maybe referencing. ...
Sorry I don't believe everything I hear on right-wing media and I didn't go to Trump University.
"People will just believe you. You just tell them and they believe you"
What Donnie "the devil" J. Dummkopt said about his favorite target suckers. So unless your calling BMs suckers, I'll continue to ask for references, should I think it's appropriate. And no doubt I'll get the standard QAnon/Repub/Bothsidesist reply of "Google it!" or "Do the research, man!"
So if we DO NOT included links to articles/references, does that mean we are "MORE" believable?
I will say however that your beliefs about what the Russia Ukraine war is teaching us about renewables and energy security is ass backwards. Sorry if that sounds harsh but I dont know a better way to say it. Europeans are scrambling to re-open coal fired power plants and Germany and other countries are rethinking their bans on fracking. ...
Sure in the short term they should. In the long term not so much. It will be the US, who's caught with its pants down, going forward, if we don't get our act together on cleaner renewables and electrification of the US.
You can blame Thai inflation and the weakness of the THB on the following. Trump was responsible for none of this:
1. Higher prices of imports, petroleum in particular.
2. Fall off in the tourist trade, which along with higher import prices has resulted in a weaker economy and Thailand going from a current account surplus to current account deficit.
3. The Bank of Thailand's reluctance to raise interest rates more aggressively, which has led to sharply negative real interest rates.
4. The strength of the dollar.
5. Shortages and supply chain glitches, attributable in large part to COVID policies of China, Thailand and to a lesser extent other countries..Finally! Now, please point me to where in your list it states "the Thai Government". I've read the list several times and I couldn't find "the Government" listed anywhere. I couldn't find "the King" listed either.
Just as the Thai government isn't completely responsible for inflation in Thailand (or Thighland as Donnie the Dumbass calls it), President Biden isn't completely responsible for inflation in the USA.
Imports cost more, primarily because of the cost of shipping. Thailand is a big tourist destination but not as big as the USA ($15 BB vs $84 BB). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.RCPT.CD?locations=TH But the per capita figures show the USA only about 10% higher. As I recall, the Fed didn't raise interest rates much either initially. And, yes, supply chain glitches and shortages are still with us. So all of the factors that you listed are exactly the same for the USA. As they are with almost every other country in the world.
What I wrote is original content from my experience in the industry.
EhiTooms, PVMonger and you accept what you read and hear in the left of center media without critical analysis. And you believe that links to pontifications of people who think exactly like you do proves you're right. And you demand we provide links to prove our point. What do you want, a Breitbart for every Intercept? Research papers with footnotes? If you don't know that China's building lots of coal fired power plants, or you don't believe GDP or inflation numbers, then instead of asking for links, do some research.
I'm left shaking my head at some of the requests for links. For example, anyone who knows much about energy knows that China is building coal fired power plants.
But maybe you're right. If I'd provided Tooms a link to the definition of the word "or" in advance of saying that the Labor Force Participation was absolutely, undeniably down under Obama, maybe it would have prevented a misunderstanding.
As to the rest of your post, I already addressed most of your misconceptions so don't see any point in doing it again..We want sources because without sources anybody's post is mere opinion. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion but they are not entitled to their own facts. So if you want to demonstrate you superior knowledge of a subject, provide a source.
What is a source? Any source from the middle should be acceptable. As well as industry-specific publications. https://adfontesmedia.com/static-mbc/.
Since this is a political discussion group (located in a Sex Forum), you should by now realize, even those with experience in said fields of industry/business are very often going to get push back, perhaps more so, because of said bias. Also realize, when things become politicized, wrightly or wrongly, is when, even "experience" gets pushed aside.
Again, personally for me, it's not about ME being "right" or YOU being "wrong". More often than not, I have opposing political opinions, views and beliefs and provide them as counterpoints, to your political arguments, most times they may not align, sometimes they do.
Since the right-wing media infrastructure/block, has 1500+ English and 300+ Spanish radio stations across America and of course blanket Nationwide coverage of Fox News
(I am not entirely sure), but a conservative estimate, puts right-wing distribution of propaganda, maybe about 15:1 right vs. left radio stations. As well as a vast right-wing internet and social-media influence, online.
Right-wing PAC, dark money groups, special donors and right-wing billionaires pumping millions/billions into legal political bribery (thanks to a right-wing POTUS 1972) on the right, far out paces anything on the left. The fact that Repubs, are constantly "banging their drums" and messaging through this massive right-wing media block, it's a wonder at all, those of us with an opposing opinions on the left, get heard.
And you think, those on the left, are the ones that are brainwashed, or should I say, "...accept things without critical analysis".
I didn't demand anything. I asked a simply a question. Show me where I disputed China's stance on coal. I primarily highlighted China's impressive march toward more cleaner energy solutions.
As I told another BM:
Sorry I don't believe everything I hear on right-wing media and I didn't go to Trump University.
So unless your calling BMs suckers, I'll continue to ask for references, should I think it's appropriate. And no doubt I'll get the standard QAnon/Repub/Bothsidesist reply of "Google it!" or "Do the research, man!"
So if we DO NOT included links to articles/references, does that mean we are "MORE" believable?
Sure in the short term they should. In the long term not so much. It will be the US, who's caught with its pants down, going forward, if we don't get our act together on cleaner renewables and electrification of the US.Massive right wing media conspiracy, haha! I don't know about cable service where you live, but all I have on the right is Fox. MSNBC on the left is more extreme than Fox, while CNN, also on the left, is in the same league with Fox in terms of level of partisanship. The networks, NBC, ABC and CBS, are somewhat left of center.
At the party level, Democrats and Republicans raise about the same amount of money:
https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/index.php?cmte=&cycle=2022
At the candidate level I believe Democrats raise more, although I don't have a hallowed link to support that.
You conveniently fail to mention all those left wing billionaire campaign donors. Democrats now make greater use of dark money than Republicans:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/29/us/politics/democrats-dark-money-donors.html
On China, here are more hallowed links, related to your belief that China is making great strides in renewable energy:
https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/
https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/usa/
In the last 15 years, USA emissions are down from about 7.4 billion tons per year to 6.3 billion tons in 2021. That's thanks largely to the substitution of natural gas, produced by American oil companies, for coal. The same oil companies that some constituencies of the Democratic Party want to put out of business for their "lies." Meanwhile, China's emissions of GHG's have risen from 8.5 billion tons per year to 13 billion tons per year.
Also, Tooms, if you read this, look at the great strides made by President Trump at the end of his term! In the last year of his administration, green house gas emissions fell by almost 10%! If we'd kept that up, emissions would be down to about 1 billion tons by 2040, just 14% of the level fifteen years ago!
Unfortunately Biden and Democrats were elected in 2020. And you know what happens under Democrats. The whole world falls apart. We're in the middle of the Biden Recession. The Biden Inflation is the highest since 1981! And still CO2 emissions are going up! Biden's going to destroy the world as we know it!!
BTW Spidy, I have no idea what a BM is. Bowel movement? Please speak English.
Ass kicking? Really?
Who was the person who commented on the post as if it was real news? Not me. You didn't even know that the site that the OP copied-and-pasted from (without citation I might add) was even satire. If you had, you'd have commented differently. But sure, believe what you want to believe.
PVMonger, since you have a tough time realizing what's satirical and what's real without checking your "sources", I'll save you some time. What I posted above about Trump and Biden is 100% sarcasm, aimed at EhiTooms. The "Trump Pandemic" was Toom's brainchild.
MarquisdeSade1
10-11-22, 21:59
I think she could make a fine VP for our Lord and Savior.
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/11/tulsi-gabbard-announces-shes-leaving-the-democratic-party/
Massive right wing media conspiracy, haha! I don't know about cable service where you live, but all I have on the right is Fox. MSNBC on the left is more extreme than Fox, while CNN, also on the left, is in the same league with Fox in terms of level of partisanship. The networks, NBC, ABC and CBS, are somewhat left of center.
At the party level, Democrats and Republicans raise about the same amount of money:
https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/index.php?cmte=&cycle=2022
At the candidate level I believe Democrats raise more, although I don't have a hallowed link to support that.
You conveniently fail to mention all those left wing billionaire campaign donors. Democrats now make greater use of dark money than Republicans:.I know what is satire and what is not. It is you that can't tell the difference.
Finally! Now, please point me to where in your list it states "the Thai Government". I've read the list several times and I couldn't find "the Government" listed anywhere. I couldn't find "the King" listed either.
Just as the Thai government isn't completely responsible for inflation in Thailand (or Thighland as Donnie the Dumbass calls it), President Biden isn't completely responsible for inflation in the USA.
Imports cost more, primarily because of the cost of shipping. Thailand is a big tourist destination but not as big as the USA ($15 BB vs $84 BB). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/ST.INT.RCPT.CD?locations=TH But the per capita figures show the USA only about 10% higher. As I recall, the Fed didn't raise interest rates much either initially. And, yes, supply chain glitches and shortages are still with us. So all of the factors that you listed are exactly the same for the USA. As they are with almost every other country in the world.I agree with your first two paragraphs completely. Kudos for not taking Tooms' low road and blaming inflation in Thailand in October, 2022, entirely on Donald Trump. Like Michelle Obama and me, you took the high road.
Your third paragraph contains a few misconceptions and fallacies. The appropriate way to look at tourism as to its effect on the economy of Thailand versus the USA is as a percent of GDP. If your numbers are correct, tourism accounts for 17% of Thailand's GDP and 0.4% of the USA's GDP. For a long while it was much easier traveling to the USA than Thailand. You didn't have to quarantine if you came to the USA.
Prominent Democrat economists Larry Summers and Jason Furman agree that the Democrats' ill conceived $1. 9 trillion American Rescue Plan (ARP) supercharged inflation. From the time that Biden's $1400 per person checks hit peoples' mailboxes, inflation started its steady March upwards in the USA. And yes, inflation in certain European countries now, at this point in time, is comparable to current inflation in the USA. However, it was slower developing in Europe, because Europe didn't have the massive, overdone stimulus in 2021, that we did because of the ARP. Furman says as much on his Twitter feed. The fact that, say, UK inflation is NOW as high as ours doesn't do much for the American workingman. The American is farther behind the eight ball, because of lost purchasing power in 2021 and the first quarter of 2022. For example, at 7/31/2021, YoY CPI inflation was only 2% in the UK. It was 5.4% in the USA.
As Furman put it, according to the Washington Post,
"The USA Fiscal response in 2020 was among the largest in the world. It was comparable to, or slightly smaller than, the responses in a few other countries like Germany and Canada, but roughly the same. The fiscal response in 2021 so far in the United States is massively larger than what any other country has done to date or is currently discussing."
Furman, if you've forgotten, was chairman of Obama's Council of Economic Advisors.
Do a search on my username and "Summers" for similar thoughts expressed by Clinton's Secretary of the Treasury and Obama's Director of the NEC, Larry Summers.
And no, Biden and the Democrats aren't entirely responsible for inflation in the USA. Like Thailand, you can blame central bank policy and supply chain glitches too. Commodity prices were a factor, but thanks in part to the strong dollar, that's not necessarily still the case.
I'd even go so far as to admit the Fed should shoulder more of the blame than Biden for inflation in the USA. It'll be a cold day in hell before Tooms admits something similar about Bernanke and George W. Bush and the 2008/2009 recession.
Republicans and all intelligent people know Biden is the dumbest president ever because Biden is proving it every day. Democrats obviously are too stupid to see the facts and the democrats are counting on the dumbest people in America to continue to vote democrat. History has proven that if you are are stupid, a criminal, an illegal or on government assistance then you are a democrat.So what is your guess on the dumb socialists who rebuke your posts. Are they criminals, illegals or on government assistance. My guess is that the guys rebuking your accurate posts are on welfare or social security. Have always been a drain on the hard working republicans tax payers.
Massive right wing media conspiracy, haha! I don't know about cable service where you live, but all I have on the right is Fox. MSNBC on the left is more extreme than Fox, while CNN, also on the left, is in the same league with Fox in terms of level of partisanship. The networks, NBC, ABC and CBS, are somewhat left of center. I'll give you MSNBC, but the others are definitely, I think more right of center, more often than not.
At the party level, Democrats and Republicans raise about the same amount of money:
https://www.opensecrets.org/parties/index.php?cmte=&cycle=2022
At the candidate level I believe Democrats raise more, although I don't have a hallowed link to support that.
You conveniently fail to mention all those left wing billionaire campaign donors. Democrats now make greater use of dark money than Republicans:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/01/29/us/politics/democrats-dark-money-donors.html Right! Like the one year Dems exceeded Repubs, 2020 was were Trump was ousted. Understandable, this was a one-off and not the norm, as I think Repubs have been the bigger winner in more years, the Dems, IMO.
However, I will say that the more I look at the problem, the more I realize we may never know as long as Repubs keep blocking bills to identify donors with more than $10K in contributions.
But then ask yourself why would they (want a bill to identify donors), when thanks to a right-wing POTUS in 1972, they got exactly what they wanted, ...legalized bribery! Ergo, why Repubs have always benefitted more.
Republicans block bill requiring dark money groups to reveal donors
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3656002-republicans-block-bill-requiring-dark-money-groups-to-reveal-donors/
On China, here are more hallowed links, related to your belief that China is making great strides in renewable energy:
https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/china/
https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/usa/
In the last 15 years, USA emissions are down from about 7.4 billion tons per year to 6.3 billion tons in 2021. That's thanks largely to the substitution of natural gas, produced by American oil companies, for coal. The same oil companies that some constituencies of the Democratic Party want to put out of business for their "lies." Meanwhile, China's emissions of GHG's have risen from 8.5 billion tons per year to 13 billion tons per year. Throw out all the emission red herrings and strawman arguments you want. Knock yourself out, prattling on about emissions in China. That was never my argument.
China leads the world in clean renewable energy.
Which Country Is The World Leader In Renewable Energy In 2021
https://tfetimes.com/which-country-is-the-world-leader-in-renewable-energy-in-2021/
BTW Spidy, I have no idea what a BM is. Bowel movement? Please speak English. That's a very good guess, but I think we all already know you suffer from constipation. (....kkkk!)
But seriously, it stands for Board Member(s), as in other ISGer(s), or as in another person(s) who posts here, on the forums boards. Is that English clear enough for you?
The next thing you know, typically pro Repub Mainstream Media will try to float the hogwash that crashing the economy and grounding auto travel, shutting down factories and businesses due to horrible Repub economic stewardship is a fine way to reduce green house gas emissions by almost 10%!
MSNBC's Morning Joe echoes right-wing talking points ahead of the midterms
https://www.mediamatters.org/morning-joe/msnbcs-morning-joe-echoes-right-wing-talking-points-ahead-midterms
I agree with your first two paragraphs completely. Kudos for not taking Tooms' low road and blaming inflation in Thailand in October, 2022, entirely on Donald Trump. Like Michelle Obama and me, you took the high road.
Your third paragraph contains a few misconceptions and fallacies. The appropriate way to look at tourism as to its effect on the economy of Thailand versus the USA is as a percent of GDP. If your numbers are correct, tourism accounts for 17% of Thailand's GDP and 0.4% of the USA's GDP. For a long while it was much easier traveling to the USA than Thailand. You didn't have to quarantine if you came to the USA..You may not blame President Biden for inflation in the USA but the Moron Brigade does. But, then again, look at their name.
So what is your guess on the dumb socialists who rebuke your posts. Are they criminals, illegals or on government assistance. My guess is that the guys rebuking your accurate posts are on welfare or social security. Have always been a drain on the hard working republicans tax payers.I agree the socialists on this site trying to distract the attention away from Biden disastrous presidency are probably welfare cases or living out their miserable lives on fixed income social security. It is obvious that they are against small business and the American way of life and are bitter that the Republicans on this site are far more successful. The majority of these socialists can't make an evaluation on what us happening in the USA with the worst president in history. They are in denial and want links to prove that inflation is worst in 40 or 50 years. They want links to prove that the border is not secure and crime is up in all the shithole democrat states. They gather information on Liberal far left fake news. They are not smart enough to make their own decisions.
Elvis 2008
10-12-22, 19:56
You may not blame President Biden for inflation in the USA but the Moron Brigade does. But, then again, look at their name.So let me make sure of something. Do you agree with this? https://dailycaller.com/2022/03/11/simply-not-true-biden-inflation-government-spending/.
"The American people think the reason for inflation is government spending money. Simply not true. ".
Inflation can be caused by increased demand for a good or decreased supply.
However, it can also be caused by increasing the amount of money in relation to the number of goods. It is on this point I have blamed Biden, Trump, and the Fed for inflation but not equally. Biden gets more of the blame because he has actively suppressing American oil production. Even smart Dems know this. If you think cancelling the keystone pipeline his first day in office did not send a message to oil producers, think again. And then there is the incessant hassling of refiners. The Biden administration has been calling for more refining capacity today while in the same breath saying we will not need refiners in six years.
So IMO Trump gets 20% of the blame on inflation, the Fed gets 30%, and Biden gets 50%, and it sure as hell would help if Biden knew what fucking caused inflation to begin with.
And you Dems keep making this a partisan thing, and it is not. Clinton knew what caused inflation and so did Obama but not this clown. All Biden is about is enriching his perceived allies and bankrupting his opponents. Everything Biden does is for the benefit of Biden.
Elvis 2008
10-12-22, 20:07
So what is your guess on the dumb socialists who rebuke your posts. Are they criminals, illegals or on government assistance. My guess is that the guys rebuking your accurate posts are on welfare or social security. Have always been a drain on the hard working republicans tax payers.Yeah, when I saw people acting the most irrational, the core feelings were usually greed / fear of losing money or guilt.
The other day Spidy posted something that made my jaw dropped. He said that the reason electric cars were popular were because of consumer choice. The subsidies on electric cars are $7500 apiece and like I said it is $7200 more in the USA than Mexico to convert your car to run on natural gas. That $14,7000 can buy people a used car, and it certainly influences what people do when buying cars.
A buddy of mine went to some political event. He is a Republican and was called out for being one as he was like one of three Republicans there. He then told me that the big donors were harassing the crap out of the Dem pols for electric car subsidies. They were like we helped you win so now you got to help us.
So when Newsome said that California would only be selling EVs a few years from now, it was not for the environment or climate change or any of that. No, he was giving his big Democratic donors a big wet sloppy blowjob. And if you know about the economics of EVs, that is really the only thing that makes any sense.
So what is your guess on the dumb socialists who rebuke your posts. Are they criminals, illegals or on government assistance. My guess is that the guys rebuking your accurate posts are on welfare or social security. Have always been a drain on the hard working republicans tax payers.Then the top ten states that are the most dependent on Federal "handouts" all voted for Biden in 2020 right? Nope.
Rank State Federal Share ratio of Pct. Of.
Of state revenue Fed Fed Govt Workers.
Funding.
To Income.
Taxes paid.
1 West Virginia 45.16% 2. 36 4. 08%.
2 New Mexico 41.80% 1. 87 6. 06%.
3 Mississippi 47.31% 2. 53 3. 23%.
4 Alabama 41.20% 1. 25 3. 33%.
5 Alaska 50.83% 1. 62 6. 83%.
6 Idaho 41.08% 0. 91 2. 75%.
7 Louisiana (Tie) 52.27% 1. 60 2. 13%.
7 Maine (Tie) 43.27% 1. 19 2. 31%.
9 Wyoming 56.43% 1. 36 3. 37%.
10 Montana 46.58% 1. 04 3. 54%.
So much for the myth of the "hard working Repub tax payers". But I guarantee that you'll find some insane way to spin this.
The upshot is that the Moron Brigade has lied once again.
Throw out all the emission red herrings and strawman arguments you want. Knock yourself out, prattling on about emissions in China. That was never my argument.
China leads the world in clean renewable energy.
Which Country Is The World Leader In Renewable Energy In 2021
https://tfetimes.com/which-country-is-the-world-leader-in-renewable-energy-in-2021/
That's a very good guess, but I think we all already know you suffer from constipation. (....kkkk!)
But seriously, it stands for Board Member(s), as in other ISGer(s), or as in another person(s) who posts here, on the forums boards. Is that English clear enough for you?I feel foolish. I thought you were calling me and other right of center posters pieces of doo doo, when you were actually calling us Board Members! And that has a nice ring to it. Maybe "Esteemed Board Members" would be marginally better. Anyway apologies if I got a little nasty.
I really believe you have to look at the overall performance of China on greenhouse gas emissions. The bottom line is what are the green house gas emissions, and it doesn't make any difference if you get there from renewables, substituting natural gas for coal, or improving energy efficiency. If you take renewables from 5% of total power consumption to 10%, but continue to spew lots of CO2 from coal fired power plants, you haven't accomplished much.
China's coal consumption was flat from around 2014 to 2020 but up to an all time high in 2021,
https://www.statista.com/statistics/265491/chinese-coal-consumption-in-oil-equivalent/
Coal consumption in the USA has declined at a rate of 7.3% per year since 2014, from 852 million tons per annum to 501 million tons per annum,
https://www.statista.com/statistics/184333/coal-energy-consumption-in-the-us/
I don't believe the statement in your link that "China is the country that has been the fastest at trying to go green completely. " According to the link below, China generates 28.8% of its electricity from renewables," compared to 20.5% from the USA. Undoubtedly, if you included cement and steel (which require lots of coal to manufacture) in the mix along with electricity, China wouldn't look as good. Spain, Portugal, Germany and Italy clock in from 40% to 65%, and other countries, mostly with abundant hydroelectric power, are higher.
https://yearbook.enerdata.net/renewables/renewable-in-electricity-production-share.html
If China is going to spend more than the USA on renewables that's probably mostly because China generates so much more power than the USA. And it's adding a lot more capacity than the USA.
China can supply most or all of its coal needs internally. So from a national security perspective, they'll prefer coal over natural gas, even though generating electricity from natural gas emits considerably less CO2 per gigawatt hour than coal. The domestically produced coal in China BTW on average is dirtier and produces more CO2 per gigawatt hour than the higher BTU coal burned by European and Japanese power plants.
The next thing you know, typically pro Repub Mainstream Media will try to float the hogwash that crashing the economy and grounding auto travel, shutting down factories and businesses due to horrible Repub economic stewardship is a fine way to reduce green house gas emissions by almost 10%!
MSNBC's Morning Joe echoes right-wing talking points ahead of the midterms
https://www.mediamatters.org/morning-joe/msnbcs-morning-joe-echoes-right-wing-talking-points-ahead-midtermsDo you watch Morning Joe? I do. Your link is nit picking, misleading and inflammatory. Most people would accept a lot of what Joe, Mika and Willie said as fact.
While Scarborough occasionally says he's a conservative, he swings to the left as or more often than the right these days. He has to. He doesn't have a stable of hot, horny young vixens like you do. And his wife, a Democrat by breeding and inclination, would cut him off if he sounded too Republican. He left the Republican Party some time ago.
MSNBC's viewership is left wing. They don't want to watch shows with Republicans. MSNBC wants high ratings, to sell commercials, so it complies. Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and Joy Reid sound just as nutty from time to time as Tucker Carlson on COVID or Sean Hannity on Hunter Biden. And the daytime crew at Fox, after 9:00 AM, is definitely more "fair and balanced" then their equivalents at MSNBC.
Alex Jones ordered to pay $965 million for Sandy Hook lies
https://apnews.com/article/shootings-school-connecticut-conspiracy-alex-jones-3f579380515fdd6eb59f5bf0e3e1c08f?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_01
And the hits, just keep on coming for the bombastic, vile, sadistic, lying, hate spewing right-wing "shock-jock" media host Alex Jones. Proving lies have consequences, albeit right-wing media hosts, oil & gas, big pharma or big tobacco.
... MSNBC's viewership is left wing. They don't want to watch shows with Republicans. MSNBC wants high ratings, to sell commercials, so it complies. Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and Joy Reid sound just as nutty from time to time as Tucker Carlson on COVID or Sean Hannity on Hunter Biden. And the daytime crew at Fox, after 9:00 AM, is definitely more "fair and balanced" then their equivalents at MSNBC.
First, Foxy News is about as news worthy as "The Daily Show w/Trevor Noah", and at times just as funny, if not funnier.
Second, Foxy News, is money making machine for Fox Co. As if they also do not thrive on high ratings, to sell commercials and definitely are a paid branch of Repub right wing propaganda machine. And unlike REAL journalistic news programs, they use lies to garner their high ratings.
Third, MSNBC, Foxy News, aren't accredited news stations, but more news pundits. But in IMO, MSNBC is has more journalistic integrity. Just from the shear number of lawsuits against Foxy News, from the harassment suits from the women that worked there, to the $1.6bn suit over false election claims by Dominion Voting Systems, to the fraudulent on-air unfounded lies, are good indicators of said journalistic integrity.
Fourth, stop trying to equate them with actual reputable/real NEWS, where journalistic integrity is still honored and journalistic accountability is still upheld. Having said that, because cable news channels are run by private providers, the FCC has no authority to control the programming. So journalistic integrity, will always be in the "eye of the beholder".
Did Fox News Change Its Accreditation from News to Entertainment?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-entertainment-switch/
Fox News argues its hosts didn't need to fact-check election conspiracy theories from Trump's lawyers in response to Smartmatic defamation suit
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-hosts-dont-check-trump-election-conspiracies-legal-filing-2021-4?op=1
First, Foxy News is about as news worthy as "The Daily Show w/Trevor Noah", and at times just as funny, if not funnier.
Second, Foxy News, is money making machine for Fox Co. As if they also do not thrive on high ratings, to sell commercials and definitely are a paid branch of Repub right wing propaganda machine. And unlike REAL journalistic news programs, they use lies to garner their high ratings.
Third, MSNBC, Foxy News, aren't accredited news stations, but more news pundits. But in IMO, MSNBC is has more journalistic integrity. Just from the shear number of lawsuits against Foxy News, from the harassment suits from the women that worked there, to the $1.6bn suit over false election claims by Dominion Voting Systems, to the fraudulent on-air unfounded lies, are good indicators of said journalistic integrity.
Fourth, stop trying to equate them with actual reputable/real NEWS, where journalistic integrity is still honored and journalistic accountability is still upheld. Having said that, because cable news channels are run by private providers, the FCC has no authority to control the programming. So journalistic integrity, will always be in the "eye of the beholder".
Did Fox News Change Its Accreditation from News to Entertainment?
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-news-entertainment-switch/
Fox News argues its hosts didn't need to fact-check election conspiracy theories from Trump's lawyers in response to Smartmatic defamation suit
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-news-hosts-dont-check-trump-election-conspiracies-legal-filing-2021-4?op=1Except, of course, for the Moron Brigade. They will classify everything as "fake news" if it is further 'left' than shooting the homeless (or immigrants) for sport.
Alex Jones ordered to pay $965 million for Sandy Hook lies
https://apnews.com/article/shootings-school-connecticut-conspiracy-alex-jones-3f579380515fdd6eb59f5bf0e3e1c08f?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_01
And the hits, just keep on coming for the bombastic, vile, sadistic, lying, hate spewing right-wing "shock-jock" media host Alex Jones. Proving lies have consequences, albeit right-wing media hosts, oil & gas, big pharma or big tobacco.Maybe to the rest of the world Alex Jones is "shocking". But he was Trump's domestic mentor and inspiration (his foreign one was Putin) and therefore the mind (haha), heart and soul of the Republican Party.
Alex Jones and Donald Trump: How the Candidate Echoed the Conspiracy Theorist on the Campaign Trail
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/alex-jones-and-donald-trump-how-the-candidate-echoed-the-conspiracy-theorist-on-the-campaign-trail/
How Alex Jones was embraced by Trump, Rogan years after Sandy Hook lies
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/05/alex-jones-sandy-hook-trump-rogan/
China's coal consumption was flat from around 2014 to 2020 but up to an all time high in 2021,
Why does China use so much energy / coal / fuel etc? Answer. Partly bcos it has the world's largest population, but mostly bcos it is supplying to the Western demand for its products, most notably the USA. So in reality, much of that consumption is on the hands of the West.
Someone wrote earlier that they didnt believe the USA could influence world fuel consumption - but it most certainly can - stop buying products and go green.
Then the top ten states that are the most dependent on Federal "handouts" all voted for Biden in 2020 right? Nope.
Rank State Federal Share ratio of Pct. Of.
Of state revenue Fed Fed Govt Workers.
Funding.
To Income.
Taxes paid.
1 West Virginia 45.16% 2. 36 4. 08%.
2 New Mexico 41.80% 1. 87 6. 06%.
3 Mississippi 47.31% 2. 53 3. 23%.
4 Alabama 41.20% 1. 25 3. 33%.
5 Alaska 50.83% 1. 62 6. 83%.
6 Idaho 41.08% 0. 91 2. 75%.
7 Louisiana (Tie) 52.27% 1. 60 2. 13%.
7 Maine (Tie) 43.27% 1. 19 2. 31%.
9 Wyoming 56.43% 1. 36 3. 37%.
10 Montana 46.58% 1. 04 3. 54%.
So much for the myth of the "hard working Repub tax payers". But I guarantee that you'll find some insane way to spin this.
The upshot is that the Moron Brigade has lied once again.Did you know in Scotland, England and Israel, a higher percentage of people who were vaccinated for COVID were in the hospital with COVID than the unvaccinated? The antivaxxers delighted in pointing this out. They were wrong in their conclusion, that the vaccine was worse than the disease, of course. The explanation lies with Simpson's paradox, "a phenomenon in probability and statistics in which a trend appears in several groups of data but disappears or reverses when the groups are combined. " At the time, a much higher % of the older population in the UK and Israel was vaccinated, compared to the younger population. But because the incidence of death is orders of magnitude higher in older people than young people, overall a higher percentage of the vaccinated were in the hospital. When you segmented the data by age groups, within each age group, the incidence of hospitalization was much LOWER among the VACCINATED. See.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/08/31/covid-israel-hospitalization-rates-simpsons-paradox/
Something similar is happening with the red states and blue states on your list. I believe you've agreed that on average Republicans make more money and pay more taxes than Democrats. Therefore, it's almost certain Republicans get back less in monetary benefits from government. And that's what counts, right? Republicans, on average, pay more than their fair share.
Except, of course, for the Moron Brigade. They will classify everything as "fake news" if it is further 'left' than shooting the homeless (or immigrants) for sport.I'm a Republican, more or less, and Machete is one of my favorite movies. As I've mentioned before, the last three years running, my metropolitan area has had the highest personal income per person in the USA. We pay lots more in taxes to Washington D.C. than we get back. A plurality of the population is Hispanic, and the majority must be first, second or third generation immigrants. They don't want to ship their grannies back to Mexico. And they vote Republican. The county went for Trump by something like 55 percentage points. Why do they do this, after Trump said Mexicans are rapists and murderers? Because they vote based on their pocket books. And they don't like their money being taken from them by the Feds and shipped off to Democrats who don't work as hard as they do. And they don't like the effect that the Progressive Democrats would have on their livelihoods if they are able to implement their climate agenda.
Did you know in Scotland, England and Israel, a higher percentage of people who were vaccinated for COVID were in the hospital with COVID than the unvaccinated? The antivaxxers delighted in pointing this out. They were wrong in their conclusion, that the vaccine was worse than the disease, of course. The explanation lies with Simpson's paradox, "a phenomenon in probability and statistics in which a trend appears in several groups of data but disappears or reverses when the groups are combined. " At the time, a much higher % of the older population in the UK and Israel was vaccinated, compared to the younger population. But because the incidence of death is orders of magnitude higher in older people than young people, overall a higher percentage of the vaccinated were in the hospital. When you segmented the data by age groups, within each age group, the incidence of hospitalization was much LOWER among the VACCINATED. See..For some reason, you seem to think that "it's almost certain Republicans get back less in monetary benefits from government. ".
If that were true, then states that voted for Donnie the Dumbass would not make up the bulk of the states that depend the most upon the Feds like the list shows. Let's take the #1 state on the list: West Virginia.
"There are now about 448,900 registered Republicans, or 36.8% of all registered voters in West Virginia, according to figures released by the secretary of state's office. That compares to about 444,600 registered Democrats, or 36.5%. An additional 275,000 registered voters, or 22.6%, had no party affiliation. " https://apnews.com/article/voter-registration-west-virginia-political-parties-3acf5f5082fa975c7a09222f87265b04 Yet WV voted overwhelmingly for Donnie the Dumbass in 2020 by 545,382 to 235,984. https://edition.cnn.com/election/2020/results/state/west-virginia/president And the 2016 results were similar https://www.politico.com/2016-election/results/map/president/west-virginia/.
To use your logic, then, WV should not even be on the list because all of those Republicans pay lots in income tax.
As to your comment that "And they don't like their money being taken from them by the Feds and shipped off to Democrats who don't work as hard as they do. ", would they believe that their money is actually sent to states where the preponderance of voters voted for Donnie the Dumbass? See, that's the problem when ass-you-me things that aren't necessarily true.
Did you know in Scotland, England and Israel, a higher percentage of people who were vaccinated for COVID were in the hospital with COVID than the unvaccinated? The antivaxxers delighted in pointing this out. They were wrong in their conclusion, that the vaccine was worse than the disease, of course. The explanation lies with Simpson's paradox, "a phenomenon in probability and statistics in which a trend appears in several groups of data but disappears or reverses when the groups are combined. " At the time, a much higher % of the older population in the UK and Israel was vaccinated, compared to the younger population. But because the incidence of death is orders of magnitude higher in older people than young people, overall a higher percentage of the vaccinated were in the hospital. When you segmented the data by age groups, within each age group, the incidence of hospitalization was much LOWER among the VACCINATED. See..PVMonger's list strongly supports the sad conclusion that your precious Republican tax dollars benefit more deadbeat Repubs than Dems. As do mine.
Tell your deadbeat fellow Repubs to start carrying their own weight and paying their own bills and maybe we can give you a tax cut.
Oh, while you're at it, try to convince the Repubs you vote for to stop crashing the USA economy, plunging the country into deep Recession and wiping out tens of millions of jobs whenever they get the chance as well.
The red state / blue state thing is a red herring.
According to this link from 2021, only 36% of people making over $200,000 per year supported Democrats, compared to 63% making less than $15,000 per year.
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-...ics-democrats/
And from this link, people making over $221,572 paid 59.4% of the income tax.
https://taxfoundation.org/publicatio...come-tax-data/
Tie the two together. Republicans on average undoubtedly pay more to the federal government than they get out of it in benefits. As to Democrats, I'm not sure. But our system at the federal level is so wasteful and inefficient I suspect they get a bum deal too.
First, neither article has a direct correlation to whether Dems or Repubs incomes earners pay more taxes. Second use different numbers for their bottom earners. Third, my example below will take the same articles and make more or less the same type correlated "leap of faith" and present my results.
Article #1:
Economic Demographics of Democrats
Ultra-Wealthy
While Democrats lose support as income increases, there seems to be a tipping point where the ultra-wealthy begin leaning Democratic. The most famous example would be the entertainment industry, where star-studded events have become a significant part of Democratic culture.
But this phenomenon is not limited to Hollywood. A review of the 20 richest Americans, as listed by Forbes Magazine, found that 60 percent affiliate with the Democratic Party, including the top three individuals: Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Larry Ellison. Among the riches families, the Democratic advantage rises even higher, to 75 percent.
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-democrats/ So note, this article ONLY breaks down, incomes under $15 K and over $200 K breakdown. What about those income earners (the middle class) that fall in between $15 K - $200 K? (Or income bands above $200 K). But then makes the generalization, that with every additional dollar earned, the individual is less likely to be a Democrat (inlay diagram). This is just utter nonsense, IMO.
Yet in the same article (as posted in quotes above) 60% of the top income earners are Democrats. Also note, there is NO correlation to taxes paid. NONE!
Article #2:
High-Income Taxpayers Paid the Majority of Federal Income Taxes
In 2019, the bottom 50 percent of taxpayers (taxpayers with AGI below $44,269) earned 11.5 percent of total AGI and paid 3.1 percent ($48.4 billion) of all federal individual income taxes.
The top 1 percent (taxpayers with AGI of $546,434 and above) earned 20.1 percent of total AGI in 2019 and paid 38.8 percent of all federal income taxes.
In 2019, the top 1 percent of taxpayers accounted for more income taxes paid than the bottom 90 percent combined. The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid $612 billion in income taxes while the bottom 90 percent paid $461 billion in income taxes.
https://taxfoundation.org/publications/latest-federal-income-tax-data/Note, the articles use different incomes levels as top and bottom and there is NO correlation to which political denominated pays more of these taxes. NONE!
Leap of faith:
However, if I were to make that very same leap of faith and cherry pick, as to which political party pays more taxes, from these two (2) articles you've presented, it would be the Democrats, but only by about 1%.
The Math:
So for Dems, that's (top earners, at) 60% of $612 B is $367.20 B and Dems (bottom earners, at) 38% of $461 B is $175.18 B. Which equals $542.38 of the total $1073 B paid by Dems and leaves $530.62 paid by Repubs. The difference is roughly $12 B (or 1% more), that Dems are paying more than Repubs.
Perhaps a more accurate depiction (since 1% is negligible), would be to say taxes are being paid equally, from your two (2) articles.
Additional Info for Repubs:
Economic Demographics of Republicans
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-republicans/
Elvis 2008
10-13-22, 23:46
Something similar is happening with the red states and blue states on your list. I believe you've agreed that on average Republicans make more money and pay more taxes than Democrats. Therefore, it's almost certain Republicans get back less in monetary benefits from government. And that's what counts, right? Republicans, on average, pay more than their fair share.Tiny, there is no point in arguing with the Dems on this point. , and I will tell you why. In 2008, I was sick of GW Bush's policies and hated McCain so I voted for Obama and was glad I did. I would vote the same way, but how do you follow my tax dollars? You cannot. So this entire red-blue issue is completely flawed. I will grant the Dems are good at using the same math as they use for climate change at justifying why they are better.
And they did the same with Covid. I do not how you get to a point that political party transcends age and individual health with a fucking virus but there was this incessant noise about how blue states were doing better with Covid than red ones. The funniest were Dems bragging about science and how smart they were with Covid while all their leaders came down with Covid including Fauci, Biden, and the CEO of Pfizer. Yeah, Trump got Covid but he was not saying Republicans were getting less Covid than Dems. And if he did, I would have thought he was an idiot for doing so.
Yeah, the market is now in bear territory and inflation is unabating and somehow it is not Biden's fault. Somehow even though he has been out of office for nearly 2 years, it is Trump's fault.
There are two ways that the Dems play the "math" game. Like I said, saying who pays more taxes, Republicans or Dems, is a completely futile exercise, but you know what they do with the climate change math? They project like ten different answers. And if you question that, then they ask, "Are you a scientist?
There was one Dem not Tooms who was long real estate using a REIT. I told him that going long real estate when the Fed was raising rates was a horrible idea, and he said I did not get his investment. I shook my head. Here we go again I thought, attack the man versus his argument. A few weeks ago the REIT index was at a 52 week low, but I think this asshole probably still thinks he was right, and I was just lucky in my projection. SMH.
You mentioned voting, and I think there is going to be a backlash in 2022 from the abortion issue but in 2024, the economy is going to be in the dumps (but unemployment will still not be that high) and we will be seeing numbers that last appeared in the Carter era. Besides abortion, what do they have? Peace? LOL. The economy? Tolerance for trans people? Republicans as racists? Censorship?
In 2022, I think Republicans will get the House but in 2024, there is going to be a Reaganesque type landslide. Because what you will see is what the Dems here try to do. Anything bad is Republican, and anything good is Democrat, and people see through that BS.
Do you watch Morning Joe? I do. Your link is nit picking, misleading and inflammatory. Most people would accept a lot of what Joe, Mika and Willie said as fact.
While Scarborough occasionally says he's a conservative, he swings to the left as or more often than the right these days. He has to. He doesn't have a stable of hot, horny young vixens like you do. And his wife, a Democrat by breeding and inclination, would cut him off if he sounded too Republican. He left the Republican Party some time ago.
MSNBC's viewership is left wing. They don't want to watch shows with Republicans. MSNBC wants high ratings, to sell commercials, so it complies. Rachel Maddow, Lawrence O'Donnell and Joy Reid sound just as nutty from time to time as Tucker Carlson on COVID or Sean Hannity on Hunter Biden. And the daytime crew at Fox, after 9:00 AM, is definitely more "fair and balanced" then their equivalents at MSNBC.Scarborough has taken over the job of helping Repubs win elections at crunch time that used to fall on MSNBC's Chris Matthews.
The pattern is the senior host in their programming line up, generally a trusted, seemingly non partisan or, much better, a somewhat "Dem leaning" host during non election times when it doesn't much matter, begins to spout and repeat totally unsubstantiated favorite Repub talking points and dismissing the value of voting for Dems as the election approaches:
Chris Matthews: 2005's Misinformer of the Year
https://www.mediamatters.org/chris-matthews/chris-matthews-2005s-misinformer-year
I watched Matthews doing it in real time just as I watched Scarborough doing it.
Check out the many fully documented (with links) examples in that link. Matthews was busier helping GW Bush win re-election in 2004 so his Office of Thrift Supervision in his Treasury Department could work its magic of not giving a shit about doing its job of monitoring and enforcing savings bank regulations and thereby invite and facilitate that particular Great Repub Crash, Great Recession and Massive Jobs Destruction than the previous Misinformer of the Year Award winner, FUX News' Bill O'Reilly.
And more effectively than anyone on FUX News could precisely because he was supposedly a trusted "pro Dem" host campaigning for a Repub to an audience of mostly Dem voters when it mattered.
Alex Jones ordered to pay $965 million for Sandy Hook lies
https://apnews.com/article/shootings-school-connecticut-conspiracy-alex-jones-3f579380515fdd6eb59f5bf0e3e1c08f?utm_source=homepage&utm_medium=TopNews&utm_campaign=position_01
And the hits, just keep on coming for the bombastic, vile, sadistic, lying, hate spewing right-wing "shock-jock" media host Alex Jones. Proving lies have consequences, albeit right-wing media hosts, oil & gas, big pharma or big tobacco.He's already said they won't get any money. The real battle is starting today, it seems.
Nancy Pelosi, said she wanted to punch out, Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf, during the on Jan 6th, riots.
"If he comes, I'm going to punch him out...I'm going to jail and I'm going to be happy"
https://news.yahoo.com/alexandra-pelosi-speaker-nancy-pelosis-223054031.html Give the old gal credit, she's got moxie! My money is on Nancy!
Tiny, there is no point in arguing with the Dems on this point. , and I will tell you why. In 2008, I was sick of GW Bush's policies and hated McCain so I voted for Obama and was glad I did. I would vote the same way, but how do you follow my tax dollars? You cannot. So this entire red-blue issue is completely flawed. I will grant the Dems are good at using the same math as they use for climate change at justifying why they are better.
And they did the same with Covid. I do not how you get to a point that political party transcends age and individual health with a fucking virus but there was this incessant noise about how blue states were doing better with Covid than red ones. The funniest were Dems bragging about science and how smart they were with Covid while all their leaders came down with Covid including Fauci, Biden, and the CEO of Pfizer. Yeah, Trump got Covid but he was not saying Republicans were getting less Covid than Dems. And if he did, I would have thought he was an idiot for doing so.
Yeah, the market is now in bear territory and inflation is unabating and somehow it is not Biden's fault. Somehow even though he has been out of office for nearly 2 years, it is Trump's fault.
There are two ways that the Dems play the "math" game. Like I said, saying who pays more taxes, Republicans or Dems, is a completely futile exercise, but you know what they do with the climate change math? They project like ten different answers. And if you question that, then they ask, "Are you a scientist?.in 2024, the economy is going to be in the dumps
Since you are so prescient, please let me know the winning numbers in the next Powerball drawing.
And what "policies" do Repubs have? National ban on abortions (fuck "states rights") with no exceptions for anything. No more condoms. Interracial marriage is OK as long as Repubs do it. Shoot all LGBTQ+ people on sight. Ditto with anybody who doesn't look white. Let's do away with Social Security. Let's do away with Medicare. Finish building Donnie the Dumbass' wall. Deport everybody who is in the US illegally, even if they've been here for 50 years. Revise the immigration system so that only northern Europeans immigrants are allowed.
Washington, the. See — In a recent interview with CNN's Jake Tapper, President Biden sat down to assure the nation that while a nuclear war is likely on the way, it will only be "very slight" and "mostly peaceful".
"Look folks, here's the deal. I don't think there will be a nuclear war with Russia. But if it is, it'll be very a very slight one," said President Joe Biden. "It'll be just a mild mostly peaceful armageddon, nothing more. ".
As the broadcast continued, Jake Tapper nodded calmly before staring blankly into the distance, trying to register that the world may or may not be on the brink of a thermonuclear war. "They look at these things 6 months out you know. Every 6 months they speculate!" said President Biden breaking the silence. "Just because they say in the next 6 months a couple million people MIGHT get nuked, everyone panics?
Biden continued, "Now look, even if a few nukes did start flying — and there's only a minuscule chance of this — this is not going to be some drawn-out thing. It will be over in a flash! A blink of the eye and it's all over! Come on, man!
At publishing time, Jake Taper tried to steer the question away from nuclear war to discuss the President's strong mental health. President Biden replied by stating that he doesn't think he has dementia, but if he does it's only a slight case. . .
Tiny, there is no point in arguing with the Dems on this point. , and I will tell you why. In 2008, I was sick of GW Bush's policies and hated McCain so I voted for Obama and was glad I did. I would vote the same way, but how do you follow my tax dollars? You cannot. So this entire red-blue issue is completely flawed. I will grant the Dems are good at using the same math as they use for climate change at justifying why they are better.
And they did the same with Covid. I do not how you get to a point that political party transcends age and individual health with a fucking virus but there was this incessant noise about how blue states were doing better with Covid than red ones. The funniest were Dems bragging about science and how smart they were with Covid while all their leaders came down with Covid including Fauci, Biden, and the CEO of Pfizer. Yeah, Trump got Covid but he was not saying Republicans were getting less Covid than Dems. And if he did, I would have thought he was an idiot for doing so.
Yeah, the market is now in bear territory and inflation is unabating and somehow it is not Biden's fault. Somehow even though he has been out of office for nearly 2 years, it is Trump's fault.
There are two ways that the Dems play the "math" game. Like I said, saying who pays more taxes, Republicans or Dems, is a completely futile exercise, but you know what they do with the climate change math? They project like ten different answers. And if you question that, then they ask, "Are you a scientist?
There was one Dem not Tooms who was long real estate using a REIT. I told him that going long real estate when the Fed was raising rates was a horrible idea, and he said I did not get his investment. I shook my head. Here we go again I thought, attack the man versus his argument. A few weeks ago the REIT index was at a 52 week low, but I think this asshole probably still thinks he was right, and I was just lucky in my projection. SMH.
You mentioned voting, and I think there is going to be a backlash in 2022 from the abortion issue but in 2024, the economy is going to be in the dumps (but unemployment will still not be that high) and we will be seeing numbers that last appeared in the Carter era. Besides abortion, what do they have? Peace? LOL. The economy? Tolerance for trans people? Republicans as racists? Censorship?
In 2022, I think Republicans will get the House but in 2024, there is going to be a Reaganesque type landslide. Because what you will see is what the Dems here try to do. Anything bad is Republican, and anything good is Democrat, and people see through that BS.Well, that's just silly. Of course the stock market turmoil and hyper-inflation are Trump's handiwork and not Biden's.
We have both because of Trump's Pandemic.
We have Trump's Pandemic because going back to at least 2018 and against all expert advice not to do something so dangerous and stupid Trump laid the foundation and then devoted major portions of his miserable so-called presidency converting a likely otherwise manageable viral spread in a region of China into the Trump's Pandemic it became and still is in all its variations around the world. Major global supply-chains are still crippled thanks to Trump's tireless efforts to destroy domestic and global economies like no other world leader ever.
You know, Obama had two opportunities in his successful presidency to make all the worst possible economic-related decisions and then compound those colossal mistakes by taking to the stage to lie to the world about virus spreads until he turned them into global economy-destroying "Obama's Pandemics. ".
But Obama didn't do that either time.
Trump did.
This current economic and stock market challenge was at least three years in the making by Trump, his supporters and, frankly, anyone who was dumb enough not to vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The health, jobs, business recovery, proper expansion and positive gains by Biden and his Dems vs the total shit storm Trump left behind just 21 months ago is nothing short of historic.
DramaFree11
10-16-22, 18:28
Tiny, there is no point in arguing with the Dems on this point. , and I will tell you why. In 2008, I was sick of GW Bush's policies and hated McCain so I voted for Obama and was glad I did. I would vote the same way, but how do you follow my tax dollars? You cannot. So this entire red-blue issue is completely flawed. I will grant the Dems are good at using the same math as they use for climate change at justifying why they are better.
And they did the same with Covid. I do not how you get to a point that political party transcends age and individual health with a fucking virus but there was this incessant noise about how blue states were doing better with Covid than red ones. The funniest were Dems bragging about science and how smart they were with Covid while all their leaders came down with Covid including Fauci, Biden, and the CEO of Pfizer. Yeah, Trump got Covid but he was not saying Republicans were getting less Covid than Dems. And if he did, I would have thought he was an idiot for doing so.
Yeah, the market is now in bear territory and inflation is unabating and somehow it is not Biden's fault. Somehow even though he has been out of office for nearly 2 years, it is Trump's fault.
There are two ways that the Dems play the "math" game. Like I said, saying who pays more taxes, Republicans or Dems, is a completely futile exercise, but you know what they do with the climate change math? They project like ten different answers. And if you question that, then they ask, "Are you a scientist?
There was one Dem not Tooms who was long real estate using a REIT. I told him that going long real estate when the Fed was raising rates was a horrible idea, and he said I did not get his investment. I shook my head. Here we go again I thought, attack the man versus his argument. A few weeks ago the REIT index was at a 52 week low, but I think this asshole probably still thinks he was right, and I was just lucky in my projection. SMH.
You mentioned voting, and I think there is going to be a backlash in 2022 from the abortion issue but in 2024, the economy is going to be in the dumps (but unemployment will still not be that high) and we will be seeing numbers that last appeared in the Carter era. Besides abortion, what do they have? Peace? LOL. The economy? Tolerance for trans people? Republicans as racists? Censorship?
In 2022, I think Republicans will get the House but in 2024, there is going to be a Reaganesque type landslide. Because what you will see is what the Dems here try to do. Anything bad is Republican, and anything good is Democrat, and people see through that BS.Elvis, Biden has done nothing to fix the Supply Chain issues. I need two work truck, and commercial lawn mower, all are still on back order. One of the trucks in specialized but the other is normal 3/4 pickup truck, they are still not available. We need a part for one of our truck, I find out they are on national back order, this ridiculous. There is no excuse for this. Everybody is having the same issues. Biden is not fault for all of the issues, but he has done very little to fix the issue.
High gas prices are on Biden and the clowns he has surrounded himself with.
Crime and Drugs are out control, they are doing nothing, not to mention the border.
There would still be inflation, but he has made everything much worse. He is killing the middle class, minorities and the poor.
Well, that's just silly. Of course the stock market turmoil and hyper-inflation are Trump's handiwork and not Biden's.
We have both because of Trump's Pandemic.
We have Trump's Pandemic because going back to at least 2018 and against all expert advice not to do something so dangerous and stupid Trump laid the foundation and then devoted major portions of his miserable so-called presidency converting a likely otherwise manageable viral spread in a region of China into the Trump's Pandemic it became and still is in all its variations around the world. Major global supply-chains are still crippled thanks to Trump's tireless efforts to destroy domestic and global economies like no other world leader ever.
You know, Obama had two opportunities in his successful presidency to make all the worst possible economic-related decisions and then compound those colossal mistakes by taking to the stage to lie to the world about virus spreads until he turned them into global economy-destroying "Obama's Pandemics. ".
But Obama didn't do that either time.
Trump did.
This current economic and stock market challenge was at least three years in the making by Trump, his supporters and, frankly, anyone who was dumb enough not to vote for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
The health, jobs, business recovery, proper expansion and positive gains by Biden and his Dems vs the total shit storm Trump left behind just 21 months ago is nothing short of historic.Haha. ROTFLMAO. You're smart. You're capable of so much more. Please post something that makes more sense than "the Democrats stole the election." Or "COVID isn't any worse than the flu."
Tiny, there is no point in arguing with the Dems on this point. , and I will tell you why. In 2008, I was sick of GW Bush's policies and hated McCain so I voted for Obama and was glad I did. I would vote the same way, but how do you follow my tax dollars? You cannot. So this entire red-blue issue is completely flawed. I will grant the Dems are good at using the same math as they use for climate change at justifying why they are better.
And they did the same with Covid. I do not how you get to a point that political party transcends age and individual health with a fucking virus but there was this incessant noise about how blue states were doing better with Covid than red ones. The funniest were Dems bragging about science and how smart they were with Covid while all their leaders came down with Covid including Fauci, Biden, and the CEO of Pfizer. Yeah, Trump got Covid but he was not saying Republicans were getting less Covid than Dems. And if he did, I would have thought he was an idiot for doing so.
Yeah, the market is now in bear territory and inflation is unabating and somehow it is not Biden's fault. Somehow even though he has been out of office for nearly 2 years, it is Trump's fault.
There are two ways that the Dems play the "math" game. Like I said, saying who pays more taxes, Republicans or Dems, is a completely futile exercise, but you know what they do with the climate change math? They project like ten different answers. And if you question that, then they ask, "Are you a scientist?
There was one Dem not Tooms who was long real estate using a REIT. I told him that going long real estate when the Fed was raising rates was a horrible idea, and he said I did not get his investment. I shook my head. Here we go again I thought, attack the man versus his argument. A few weeks ago the REIT index was at a 52 week low, but I think this asshole probably still thinks he was right, and I was just lucky in my projection. SMH.
You mentioned voting, and I think there is going to be a backlash in 2022 from the abortion issue but in 2024, the economy is going to be in the dumps (but unemployment will still not be that high) and we will be seeing numbers that last appeared in the Carter era. Besides abortion, what do they have? Peace? LOL. The economy? Tolerance for trans people? Republicans as racists? Censorship?
In 2022, I think Republicans will get the House but in 2024, there is going to be a Reaganesque type landslide. Because what you will see is what the Dems here try to do. Anything bad is Republican, and anything good is Democrat, and people see through that BS.I largely agree with your post Elvis. I did not vote for George W. Bush. I had more insight into his character than most. I did vote for McCain, even though he was a warmonger and I believed the invasion of Iraq and all out war on terror were huge mistakes. Why? Because I really disliked Obama. He was sanctimonious and self righteous. During the 2008 campaign, Obama's response to a question from Charlie Gibson during a 2008 debate indicated to me that he was out to f*ck people like me, and other Americans whose only sin was busting their asses to make something of themselves. Obama implied his primary goal was to make the tax system fair (i.e. reduce inequality), even if that resulted in lower revenues to the government. Make everyone worse off if it makes everyone more equal.
Well, if you were Jewish, would you have voted for Hitler in the mid 1930's? If you were Tutsi would you have voted for Habyarimana in the early 1990's? Hell no. And Hitler and Habyarimana at least thought they were dealing with a zero sum game. You take away the possessions of a Jew or a Tutsi and give them to a gentile or a Hutu, and you still have the same amount of stuff. In Obama's world, if the Jew and the gentile and the Hutu and the Tutsi all end up with less, then that's great as long as they're more equal.
Ironically, Obama didn't turn out to be so bad. So I can see why you say you'd vote for him again. Biden's desired policies on taxation and energy, the two issues which matter to me, are so wrong headed, compared to what actually transpired during the Obama administration.
I don't think there will be a Reaganesque landslide in 2024, unless Trump, the Democrat's Best Friend, dies. He's been very successful at nuking Republicans' prospects since he was first elected.
I largely agree with your post Elvis. I did not vote for George W. Bush. I had more insight into his character than most. I did vote for McCain, even though he was a warmonger and I believed the invasion of Iraq and all out war on terror were huge mistakes. Why? Because I really disliked Obama. He was sanctimonious and self righteous. During the 2008 campaign, Obama's response to a question from Charlie Gibson during a 2008 debate indicated to me that he was out to f*ck people like me, and other Americans whose only sin was busting their asses to make something of themselves. Obama implied his primary goal was to make the tax system fair (i.e. reduce inequality), even if that resulted in lower revenues to the government. Make everyone worse off if it makes everyone more equal.
Well, if you were Jewish, would you have voted for Hitler in the mid 1930's? If you were Tutsi would you have voted for Habyarimana in the early 1990's? Hell no. And Hitler and Habyarimana at least thought they were dealing with a zero sum game. You take away the possessions of a Jew or a Tutsi and give them to a gentile or a Hutu, and you still have the same amount of stuff. In Obama's world, if the Jew and the gentile and the Hutu and the Tutsi all end up with less, then that's great as long as they're more equal.
Ironically, Obama didn't turn out to be so bad. So I can see why you say you'd vote for him again. Biden's desired policies on taxation and energy, the two issues which matter to me, are so wrong headed, compared to what actually transpired during the Obama administration.
I don't think there will be a Reaganesque landslide in 2024, unless Trump, the Democrat's Best Friend, dies. He's been very successful at nuking Republicans' prospects since he was first elected.Here's a transcript of the interview. Which question and answer was it? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=5985527&page=1.
Haha. ROTFLMAO. You're smart. You're capable of so much more. Please post something that makes more sense than "the Democrats stole the election." Or "COVID isn't any worse than the flu."You mean post more than that to prove your beloved Repub Party's most beloved and iconic leader, Trump, is an America-hating liar who worked harder and more successfully to create Trump's Pandemic and all of the global economic fallout from it than any other world leader did or could have?
Seriously? Good gawd, man. Snap out of it.
I realize you came to this forum very late in the game. But at least go back a few months and review the voluminous amount of fully documented and linked posts on those topics that go well beyond those two statements.
That is assuming you were in such a deep coma all through the Trump years that any of those dozens and dozens of fully documented posts by me and others here would genuinely come as a shocking surprise to you.
It's called "sedition". At the very least. It's what America-hating, anti-American democracy traitors would do. And Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal's Editorial Board has seen and heard enough even without his testifying under oath that the former defeated and twice Impeached so-called president, Donald J. Trump, commited it. By logical extenstion, his defenders, followers and supporters are still engaged in it.
That would include the vast majority of Repubs in Congress, those running for election, openly Repub voters and all the stealth Repub voters pretending to be "Bothsiders" or "Neithersiders. ".
I wonder if this WSJ conclusion will find its way to Murdoch's FUX News Editorial Staff pretending to be neutral reporters of the facts' audience. Probably not.
What the Jan. 6 Hearings Accomplished
A subpoena to Trump gets the headlines, but its work is mostly done.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 14, 2022
https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-the-jan-6-inquiry-accomplished-donald-trump-liz-cheney-subpoena-congress-11665699321
The House Jan. 6 committee voted 9-0 on Thursday to subpoena former President Trump, but the clock is ticking. If Republicans take the House, theyll shut down the inquiry posthaste in early January. If he wants to avoid the hot seat, Mr. Trump only needs to find a way to resist the subpoena until then.
Rep. Liz Cheney justified an extraordinary subpoena to a former President by saying that more than 30 witnesses in our investigation have invoked their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. They include John Eastman, who told Mr. Trump that Vice President Mike Pence could derail the Electoral College count, as well as Jeffrey Clark, who tried to get the Justice Department to legitimize dubious fraud claims.
White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows has refused to testify. Outside adviser Steve Bannon also refused and was convicted of contempt of Congress, for which hell soon be sentenced.
Getting direct evidence of Mr. Trumps actionand inactionwas always going to be a challenge. There is no evidence so far that Mr. Trump was communicating or coordinating with the Proud Boys or other nefarious elements in the runup to Jan. 6. On Thursday the committee played video of foolish talk by Roger Stone, another Trump flunkie who also took the Fifth. I say f the voting, lets get right to the violence, Mr. Stone said on Nov. 2, which was the day before the election.
What the committee has accomplished, however, is to cement the facts surrounding Mr. Trumps recklessness after Nov. 3 and his dereliction of duty on Jan. 6. The Justice Department and Mr. Trumps own campaign repeatedly told him that his fraud claims were without basis. Whether it was willful blindness or an intentional strategy, he kept repeating them.
In testimony played Thursday, former White House Communications Director Alyssa Farah Griffin said that about a week after Joe Biden was declared the winner, I popped into the Oval just to, like, give the President the headlines and see how he was doing, and he was looking at the TV, and he said, Can you believe I lost to this effing guy? Yet Mr. Trump still pressured Mr. Pence to stop the Electoral College count, while calling for a Jan. 6 rally that he tweeted will be wild!
That day he riled up the crowd and urged it to march on the Capitol. Mr. Trump allegedly intended to go there himself, if the Secret Service hadnt refused. Then he watched the riot on TV. Another striking video Thursday was a question the committee put to his White House counsel, Pat Cipollone: When you were in the dining room in these discussions, was the violence at the Capitol visible on the screen, on the television? His reply: Yes.
Committee members said Thursday they will write a report summarizing their findings. Transcripts of the testimony ought to be released at the same time, so that posterity can see what Mr. Cipollone and others said in full. Ditto for the documents gathered. The committees credibility has suffered without GOP cross-examination of the witnesses. And the way that the committee selectively leaked Ginni Thomass text messages was outrageous, and appeared to be an effort to discredit her husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
The Jan. 6 committee probably wont get Mr. Trump under oath, but the evidence of his bad behavior is now so convincing that political accountability hardly requires it.
Here's a transcript of the interview. Which question and answer was it? https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=5985527&page=1.
"So we are going to make sure that every young person in America can go to college. They have a right to be worried about social security and Medicare because those entitlement program are going to be running out of money unless we make some fundamental changes. And those are going to be tough choices. You know, I have offered what I think is the best approach on Social Security, for example, which is raising the cap on the payroll tax, keeping the tax rate the same, but saying, you know, somebody like myself or Warren Buffet can afford to pay a little more in payroll tax to make sure the system is solvent."I think we can all see how a fair and balanced Bothsider / Neithersider like Tiny12, who praised Great Repub Recession Ronald Reagan for "saving Social Security" by taxing it and taking much more money from many more people in order to do so, would recoil in horror at the very idea of simply raising the cap on the payroll tax, not the tax, in order to save it. Oh, and to help make a college education affordable to more Americans.
I mean, in terms of causing pain for his lofty income bracket, that's right up there with Hitler yanking the gold fillings out of Jewish people's teeth, starving and working them to death in the concentration camps and gassing the rest in the showers.
Of course, it is understandable why he couldn't vote for such a callous, murderous, thieving "lib" like that.
Elvis 2008
10-17-22, 07:03
Well, that's just silly. Of course the stock market turmoil and hyper-inflation are Trump's handiwork and not Biden's.
We have both because of Trump's Pandemic.
We have Trump's Pandemic because going back to at least 2018 and against all expert advice not to do something so dangerous and stupid Trump laid the foundation and then devoted major portions of his miserable so-called presidency converting a likely otherwise manageable viral spread in a region of China into the Trump's Pandemic it became and still is in all its variations around the world. Major global supply-chains are still crippled thanks to Trump's tireless efforts to destroy domestic and global economies like no other world leader ever.
I must have missed something. Why was Trump and Trump alone supposed to fix a virus that began in China? Did Trump had good information when the virus began or were the Chinese lying to him?
Do you have something that has been scientifically proven that would have stopped this pandemic in its tracks? And if Trump did not implement, why did Biden not do it?
If you are going to say Biden did not have the time, when specifically was Trump supposed to have implement whatever this master strategy was?
Of course, you have no answers.
Truth is that the entire time the pandemic was going on the Dems were hammering Trump over his incompetence, and there was all this partisan bullshit data the NYT put out. Truth is the federal response to the pandemic was pretty much the same under Biden as it was under Trump, and the results were pretty much the same.
Elvis 2008
10-17-22, 07:14
in 2024, the economy is going to be in the dumps
Since you are so prescient, please let me know the winning numbers in the next Powerball drawing.
LOL. You guys crack me up. Tiny posted congratulations to me for shorting the market and taking advantage of something "everyone knew was going to happen. " When the Fed raises rates, the full effects of it are not seen for 6 to 18 months. This is again something that "everyone knows is going to happen."
If you do not know that a contraction of the money supply is going to depress the economy, then I am curious as to what you think does.
Now I know why you guys hate Trump so much. You have no idea how much economic common sense he brought to the table and how little Biden has. Biden said government spending does not cause inflation, and Carter wanted to ration gasoline. Sigh. Well, wait until 2024. This is Carter 2.0.
Obviously, the Biden / Dem legislation, historic economic recovery, jobs creation, wage increases and stimulus measures are working beautifully to counter Trump's Pandemic Inflation and global supply-chain challenges.
Which must really rankle Mainstream Media's efforts to help Repubs win elections so they can get back to producing much more horrifying and attention-grabbing headlines than this:
Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan says the U.S. consumer is healthy
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/17/bank-of-america-ceo-brian-moynihan-says-the-us-consumer-is-healthy.html?__source=androidappshare
Bank of Americas customers continue to spend freely, using their credit cards and other payment methods for 10% more transaction volume in September and the first half of October than a year earlier, CEO Brian Moynihan said.
Customers account balances remain higher than before the coronavirus pandemic struck in early 2020, Moynihan said, indicating that they were in a good position to continue spending.
Finally, consumer credit remains pristine, with late-payment metrics still well below pre-2020 averages, indicating that so far, customers have had little difficulty keeping up with their debt.Clearly, the actual data and verifiable results will forever prove that, compared to any two of Eisenhower's three Recessions, his, Bush1's and Nixon / Ford's lackluster jobs creation, the Great Repub Recessions, skyrocketing Unemployment Rates or Massive Jobs Destruction under Hoover, Reagan, Bush2 and Trump, this is a Jobs Creation, Wage Increasing, Economic Boom Time under Biden!
I must have missed something. Why was Trump and Trump alone supposed to fix a virus that began in China? Did Trump had good information when the virus began or were the Chinese lying to him?
Do you have something that has been scientifically proven that would have stopped this pandemic in its tracks? And if Trump did not implement, why did Biden not do it?
If you are going to say Biden did not have the time, when specifically was Trump supposed to have implement whatever this master strategy was?
Of course, you have no answers.
Truth is that the entire time the pandemic was going on the Dems were hammering Trump over his incompetence, and there was all this partisan bullshit data the NYT put out. Truth is the federal response to the pandemic was pretty much the same under Biden as it was under Trump, and the results were pretty much the same.Timeline of Trumps Coronavirus Responses
https://doggett.house.gov/media/blog-post/timeline-trumps-coronavirus-responses
From May 2018:.
The Trump Administration disbands the White House pandemic response team.To January 2020:.
Each day in January, covid-19 killed an average of 3,100 people in the United States one every 28 seconds. You can catch up on it now.
Had Trump been blundering, blathering, lying and making one colossal Pandemic-producing mistake after another as the mere con man and business bankrupted he was instead of as the most listened to World Leader on the Planet maybe he wouldn't have done such a bang up job of mass murdering millions of people and destroying worldwide economies and supply-chains with those lies and mistakes.
Unfortunately, not enough Americans voted for Hillary Clinton in 2-3 critical states in 2016 to prevent him from doing that.
ScatManDoo
10-18-22, 15:22
[Deleted by Admin]
EDITOR'S NOTE: This report was deleted because it contributed nothing of value and in fact constituted a complete waste of bandwidth.
The purpose of this Forum is to provide for the exchange if information between men on the subject of finding women for sex. Let's stick to the subject.
LOL. You guys crack me up. Tiny posted congratulations to me for shorting the market and taking advantage of something "everyone knew was going to happen. " When the Fed raises rates, the full effects of it are not seen for 6 to 18 months. This is again something that "everyone knows is going to happen."
If you do not know that a contraction of the money supply is going to depress the economy, then I am curious as to what you think does.
Now I know why you guys hate Trump so much. You have no idea how much economic common sense he brought to the table and how little Biden has. Biden said government spending does not cause inflation, and Carter wanted to ration gasoline. Sigh. Well, wait until 2024. This is Carter 2.0.What is it exactly that "everyone knows will happen" 6-18 months after the Fed begins to raise rates?
A Bear Market?
https://www.investopedia.com/a-history-of-bear-markets-4582652#text=Between%20 April%201947%20 and%20 April, have%20 been%2025%20 such%20 events).
Nope.
The Fed famously began to raise rates in 1980, remember? 6-18 months later, no Bear Market.
The Fed began to raise rates in 2016. Made famous by Trump who whined and cried like an infant about it as soon as he took office. 6-18 months later, no Bear Market.
Did you short the market in 2017 too?
Truth is the federal response to the pandemic was pretty much the same under Biden as it was under Trump, and the results were pretty much the same.You're spot on Elvis. Truth be told, for the first 8 months of the pandemic, I was on EihTooms side in this debate. In hindsight, I was wrong. Human behavior, our health care system, the CDC and state and local governments had a lot more to do with our response to the pandemic than Trump or Biden. You have to give the Trump administration credit for Operation Warp Speed, and pushing the vaccines through the FDA quickly. I don't think a Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden administration would have done as well. Part of the reason we had the vaccines so quickly was because Trump wanted them in time for the election, come hell or high water. That didn't happen, but we still got them in record time.
You mean post more than that to prove your beloved Repub Party's most beloved and iconic leader, Trump, is an America-hating liar who worked harder and more successfully to create Trump's Pandemic and all of the global economic fallout from it than any other world leader did or could have?
Seriously? Good gawd, man. Snap out of it.
I realize you came to this forum very late in the game. But at least go back a few months and review the voluminous amount of fully documented and linked posts on those topics that go well beyond those two statements.
That is assuming you were in such a deep coma all through the Trump years that any of those dozens and dozens of fully documented posts by me and others here would genuinely come as a shocking surprise to you.That's a good idea Tooms. But there's a lot of reading material out there that's equally compelling. The Collective Works of L. Ron Hubbard and the Church of Scientology, for example.
Looking at the words you quoted, said by Barrack Obama -
"So we are going to make sure that every young person in America can go to college."
We all agree that the educational system should make sure that every young person has the skills to make it in America. As to making sure that every young person can go to college, and preferably get a liberal arts degree and become underemployed, that's Obama's wet dream. Not only do you indoctrinate the youth with leftist propaganda, but you potentially make them dependent on government if they don't subsequently end up with good jobs, like becoming an electrician or nurse.
They have a right to be worried about social security and Medicare because those entitlement program are going to be running out of money unless we make some fundamental changes. And those are going to be tough choices. You know, I have offered what I think is the best approach on Social Security, for example, which is raising the cap on the payroll tax, keeping the tax rate the same, but saying, you know, somebody like myself or Warren Buffet can afford to pay a little more in payroll tax to make sure the system is solvent."
America already has the most progressive tax system in the OECD. If you want to achieve your ideal of a European Social Democratic Welfare State, you're going to have to make everyone pay up, not just the better off, as explained by former OECD economist Peter Whiteford here:
http://gregmankiw.********.com/2011/03/what-nation-has-most-progressive-tax.html
(Replace *'s by b l o g s p o t . c o m if you want to read.)
I don't see why it's the place of me and those like me to bust our asses to pay for the retirement and medical care of seniors who do not want to work and who did not set enough aside for retirement. Furthermore, we don't have enough money to do that even if you take everything we've got. While I prefer a system like Singapore's Central Provident Fund, or Australia's Superannuation scheme for retirement, the solution of Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan and other politicians to increase payroll contributions was better than letting Medicare and Social Security go bankrupt without replacements.
Scarborough has taken over the job of helping Repubs win elections at crunch time that used to fall on MSNBC's Chris Matthews.
The pattern is the senior host in their programming line up, generally a trusted, seemingly non partisan or, much better, a somewhat "Dem leaning" host during non election times when it doesn't much matter, begins to spout and repeat totally unsubstantiated favorite Repub talking points and dismissing the value of voting for Dems as the election approaches....I watched an hour and a half of Morning Joe the other day and see why you don't like it. They devoted time to Ukraine, Iran, a stage adaptation of "Almost Famous", and a couple of other topics that weren't nonstop Democratic Party propaganda like what's mostly on MSNBC.
Scarborough played a bit part on the segments. Overall he said more favorable things about Democrats than Republicans. He slammed Oz for his mansion in New Jersey and speculated that Oz votes in Turkey. He gave credit to Fetterman's campaign for doing a great job countering arguments that his stroke would cause him to be less effective in the Senate. When the subject of the January 6 committee came up, he slammed Republicans who took Trump's side. Mika was absolutely beaming with pride during that part. That's my man! He did take up for the NBC reporter who's been slammed by the media for asking a couple of tough, but fair questions about Fetterman's stroke. That's the only part I saw that could be construed as helping Republicans.
It's called "sedition". At the very least. It's what America-hating, anti-American democracy traitors would do. And Rupert Murdoch's Wall Street Journal's Editorial Board has seen and heard enough even without his testifying under oath that the former defeated and twice Impeached so-called president, Donald J. Trump, commited it. By logical extenstion, his defenders, followers and supporters are still engaged in it.
That would include the vast majority of Repubs in Congress, those running for election, openly Repub voters and all the stealth Repub voters pretending to be "Bothsiders" or "Neithersiders. ".
I wonder if this WSJ conclusion will find its way to Murdoch's FUX News Editorial Staff pretending to be neutral reporters of the facts' audience. Probably not.
What the Jan. 6 Hearings Accomplished
A subpoena to Trump gets the headlines, but its work is mostly done.
By The Editorial Board
Oct. 14, 2022
https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-the-jan-6-inquiry-accomplished-donald-trump-liz-cheney-subpoena-congress-11665699321The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board has been slamming claims of a stolen election for a long while. You see the same thing from time to time on Fox. But I agree, the night time hosts on Fox either drank the Kool Aid or figure their ratings will be higher if they say they believe the election was stolen. They're no more ridiculous or partisan than their equivalents on MSNBC though.
You're spot on Elvis. Truth be told, for the first 8 months of the pandemic, I was on EihTooms side in this debate. In hindsight, I was wrong. Human behavior, our health care system, the CDC and state and local governments had a lot more to do with our response to the pandemic than Trump or Biden. You have to give the Trump administration credit for Operation Warp Speed, and pushing the vaccines through the FDA quickly. I don't think a Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden administration would have done as well. Part of the reason we had the vaccines so quickly was because Trump wanted them in time for the election, come hell or high water. That didn't happen, but we still got them in record time.Your first impressions were right:
Trump White House made 'deliberate efforts' to undermine Covid response, report says.
The White House repeatedly overruled public health and testing guidance from the nation's top infectious disease experts and silenced officials, the report found.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/trump-white-house-made-deliberate-efforts-undermine-covid-response-report-n1286211
Oh, and it was Obama who initiated the rapid vaccine response programs a decade earlier. That's how Obama immediately responded to a potential economy-destroying Pandemic viral spread instead of immediately doing and saying everything he could to create and exacerbate one. As near as anyone can tell, Trump just came up with a stupid brand name for it:
Obama's science advisors outline plan for faster pandemic vaccine.
August 19, 2010
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2010/08/obamas-science-advisors-outline-plan-faster-pandemic-vaccine
Looking at the words you quoted, said by Barrack Obama -
We all agree that the educational system should make sure that every young person has the skills to make it in America. As to making sure that every young person can go to college, and preferably get a liberal arts degree and become underemployed, that's Obama's wet dream. Not only do you indoctrinate the youth with leftist propaganda, but you potentially make them dependent on government if they don't subsequently end up with good jobs, like becoming an electrician or nurse..Do you honestly think it is cheaper and better for a national economy to have mom, dad, grandma, grandpa, spinster auntie and drunk uncle who didn't save enough on the side untouched for decades to fund an apartment and cover all medical costs in their old age to move in with the 30-40 something family members and leave it to them to provide 100% expenses for those things than the national insurance programs we have now?
And how will they manage to do that and afford to have kids of their own to keep that all-important Labor Force Participation Rate going into the next generation?
Or is the idea that they just quietly put them to death when they are no longer employable? You think the homeless population on the street is bad now. Wait until you get your plan to convert the USA into a Third World slum gets going.
We all agree that the educational system should make sure that every young person has the skills to make it in America. As to making sure that every young person can go to college, and preferably get a liberal arts degree and become underemployed, that's Obama's wet dream. Not only do you indoctrinate the youth with leftist propaganda, but you potentially make them dependent on government if they don't subsequently end up with good jobs, like becoming an electrician or nurse.
What neo libs always over look is this:
1. There are only a small number of well paid jobs. That means there are always guaranteed to be a majority of losers in a neo lib state. Whatdo you plan to do with them? Yeah, I see. Let them build tented homes under bridges.
2. Neo lib economics also creates a class of people dependent on the state. But in the case of neo liberalism, its bail outs for the rich, and austerity for the poor.
Sounds a really great solution, this right wing BS.
Do you honestly think it is cheaper and better for a national economy to have mom, dad, grandma, grandpa, spinster auntie and drunk uncle who didn't save enough on the side untouched for decades to fund an apartment and cover all medical costs in their old age to move in with the 30-40 something family members and leave it to them to provide 100% expenses for those things than the national insurance programs we have now?
And how will they manage to do that and afford to have kids of their own to keep that all-important Labor Force Participation Rate going into the next generation?
Or is the idea that they just quietly put them to death when they are no longer employable? You think the homeless population on the street is bad now. Wait until you get your plan to convert the USA into a Third World slum gets going.You conveniently omit the rest of my post, including this:
While I prefer a system like Singapore's Central Provident Fund, or Australia's Superannuation scheme for retirement, the solution of Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan and other politicians to increase payroll contributions was better than letting Medicare and Social Security go bankrupt without replacements.If the USA had a system like Singapore's, employees and employers would have to put aside 37% of wages, at least until the age of 55. That along with a safety net and major medical insurance provided by government pays for retirement, medical expenses, and if the beneficiary chooses, college and a downpayment on a home. Instead of a share of a semi-Ponzi scheme like social security or Medicare, people have personal accounts.
Undoubtedly you'd argue that Americans living paycheck to paycheck can't afford the payroll deductions for a proper retirement and medical care in their old age. That's bull shit, as I shall show in a minute when I lambast JustTK. Or agree with him, I'm not sure which. It's kind of hard to understand what he's getting at.
What neo libs always over look is this:
1. There are only a small number of well paid jobs. That means there are always guaranteed to be a majority of losers in a neo lib state. Whatdo you plan to do with them? Yeah, I see. Let them build tented homes under bridges.
2. Neo lib economics also creates a class of people dependent on the state. But in the case of neo liberalism, its bail outs for the rich, and austerity for the poor.
Sounds a really great solution, this right wing BS.Thanks for your homilies.
I don't know what a neoliberal is. I'm the opposite of a neoconservative so I guess that makes me a neoliberal.
I don't know where you live. But in the USA, the federal government, compared to governments of other developed countries, screws the rich and the poor and showers the middle class with more than its fair share. Why do the politicians favor the middle class? Well, to paraphrase Willie Sutton, that's where the votes are.
The MEDIAN American household, after taxes and transfers, is better than just about any in the world:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income
I agree more needs to be done for the poor in the USA. But that would cut into the middle class' take, so I'm not sure that will happen.
As to your other point, there are lots of well paid jobs in the USA. There are in fact a lot more jobs than there are people looking for jobs:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LMJVTTUVUSM647S
And https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS13100000.
BTW Tooms, there's an article in this week's Economist that makes mince meat of your argument that Republicans receive more campaign donations.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2022/10/17/with-their-wallets-americans-are-voting-for-democratic-senate-candidates
Democratic Senate candidates in closely contested elections are receiving LOTS more than the Republicans this year. Some of it is probably people not wanting to support 2020 election deniers. But I'm sure part of it is from green energy companies and the like looking for payback come 2023.
BTW Tooms, there's an article in this week's Economist that makes mince meat of your argument that Republicans receive more campaign donations.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2022/10/17/with-their-wallets-americans-are-voting-for-democratic-senate-candidates
Democratic Senate candidates in closely contested elections are receiving LOTS more than the Republicans this year. Some of it is probably people not wanting to support 2020 election deniers. But I'm sure part of it is from green energy companies and the like looking for payback come 2023.When did I make that argument? Was it a detail mentioned or buried somewhere in a link I provided?
I have said it is likely Trump's conning hillbilly suckers out of large portions their entitlement income checks in order to stay financially afloat is the most "honest" money he has ever made. Is that what you're talking about?
When did I make that argument? Was it a detail mentioned or buried somewhere in a link I provided?
I have said it is likely Trump's conning hillbilly suckers out of large portions their entitlement income checks in order to stay financially afloat is the most "honest" money he has ever made. Is that what you're talking about?Apologies, it must have been Spidy or PVMonger. I agree with you about Trump conning money out of gullible political contributors.
So, darn it, we have nothing to argue about here.
For those who don't think forcing workers to save 37% of every paycheck until age 55, as is apparently done in Singapore, would be a fine plan to replace Social Security and Medicare (yeah, let's wait for the vote count on that one), here comes more help from MSM for Repubs poised to gut Social Security and Medicare to win the midterm elections.
Including Morning Joe on MSNBC:
Republicans promise to sunset Social Security and Medicare and the mainstream media doesn't report that!
https://crooksandliars.com/2022/10/msm-ignores-gop-social-security-and
Corporate media outlets are mostly ignoring a Republican ploy to use the debt ceiling fight to gut Social Security and Medicare if the GOP regains control of Congressa plot that one leading watchdog on Friday called "perhaps the single most consequential story" of the midterm elections.Here is Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman's recommendation for how to deal with the Repub's inevitable attempt to blackmail Dems into helping them gut those programs and once again plunge the World into another Great Repub Crash by refusing to pay deadbeat Repubs' bills:
Preparing for Republican Debt Blackmail
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/17/opinion/republican-debt-federal-budget.html
Why would refusing to raise the debt limit blow up the economy? In the modern world, U.S. debt plays a crucial role: It is the ultimate safe asset, easily converted into cash, and there are no good alternatives. If investors lose confidence that the U.S. government will honor its obligations, the resulting financial storm will make the recent chaos in Britain look like a passing shower.
So what should be done to avert this threat? If Republicans do gain control of one or both houses in November, Democrats should use the lame-duck session to enact a very large rise in the debt limit, enough to put the issue on ice for years. Republicans and pundits who dont understand the stakes would furiously attack this move, but it would be far better than enabling extortion - and would probably be forgotten by the time of the 2024 election.
If for some reason Democrats dont take this obvious step, the Biden administration should be prepared to turn to legal strategies for bypassing the debt limit. There appear to be several loopholes the administration could exploit minting trillion-dollar platinum coins is the most famous, but there are others, like issuing bonds with no maturity date and hence no face value.
Thanks for your homilies.
I don't know what a neoliberal is. I'm the opposite of a neoconservative so I guess that makes me a neoliberal.
I don't know where you live. But in the USA, the federal government, compared to governments of other developed countries, screws the rich and the poor and showers the middle class with more than its fair share. What other developed countries? Please enlighten us. Of course, we'd need to define what the middle class really is. Can be anything from hand-to-mouth homeowners to the independently wealthy. The term has become as ambiguous as so-called "small business."
I personally don't feel that the middle class in America is "lavished" by the government. If anything, all governments are using the middle class as a milk cow. For one thing the middle class can't afford power lobbyists. It also doesn't have time for activism. A sitting duck for unfair taxation.
in the USA, the federal government, compared to governments of other developed countries, screws the rich and the poor and showers the middle class with more than its fair share. Why do the politicians favor the middle class? Well, to paraphrase Willie Sutton, that's where the votes are.
The MEDIAN American household, after taxes and transfers, is better than just about any in the world:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income
I agree more needs to be done for the poor in the USA. But that would cut into the middle class' take, so I'm not sure that will happen.
As to your other point, there are lots of well paid jobs in the USA. There are in fact a lot more jobs than there are people looking for jobs:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LMJVTTUVUSM647S
And https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS13100000.I don't agree with anything you wrote. In fact I would go as far to say it's absolute BS. Real wages have not increased in the USA since the 1970's. Yet productivity has increased massively. So where has this extra money gone? To the oligarchs and super-wealthy. The middle classes, just like in all neo-lib countries, are being squeezed out / strangled.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/19/heres-how-labor-dynamism-affects-wage-growth-in-america.html
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/
All the real assets of the country are being bought out by the wealthy and charged on to the lower and middle classes. USA is one of the most unequal societies in the world – it has the same profile as a developing country like Brazil, or Colombia.
https://inequality.stanford.edu/publications/20-facts-about-us-inequality-everyone-should-know
The politicians do not really care about the middle classes; they do not need to bcos neither of the corrupt options does. They just through them a bone and see who wins – the middle class can decide which bone they prefer. But the real winners are always the wealthy bcos the political system in the USA is totally corrupt – bought out by the wealthy.
The USA also has shocking public services – again, equal to a typical developing country. And that includes lack of support for the poor. Lack of public health, public transport, public utilities, continued education – all bankrupting the young, squeezing families, stopping young people from having children, causing health crises – and all to the benefit of the wealthy.
There are in fact a lot more jobs than there are people looking for jobs:
Yes, shlt-paid jobs, like pathetic labour jobs in McDonalds or Amazon warehouses, where you slave for cents so that the wealthy can get richer. That's why there is a record number of people searching for decent jobs – there aren't any. The industrial sector and its jobs has been moved offshore. Why? You guessed it, so the wealthy can get richer.
What other developed countries? Please enlighten us. Of course, we'd need to define what the middle class really is. Can be anything from hand-to-mouth homeowners to the independently wealthy. The term has become as ambiguous as so-called "small business."
I personally don't feel that the middle class in America is "lavished" by the government. If anything, all governments are using the middle class as a milk cow. For one thing the middle class can't afford power lobbyists. It also doesn't have time for activism. A sitting duck for unfair taxation.Xpartan, I'm going to try to address a couple of JustTK's points about inequality here too, so this is going to get a little off topic from your post. Also, I agree with you, the middle class isn't lavished by the government. Rather, in the U.S.A., it pays in less compared to what it gets out of the system compared to the rich, at the federal level in particular. And poor here don't receive the level of help they get in many European countries. To lavish the middle class with government benefits, you'd have to raise taxes a lot on the middle class, as explained by Peter Whiteford below.
We already have the most progressive tax system in the OECD. Again, see.
http://gregmankiw.********.com/2011/03/what-nation-has-most-progressive-tax.html
(Replace *'s by be l o g s p o t. See o m if you want to read.).
Look at the table. While it's from the mid 2000's, if anything our tax system has become more progressive, with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts. And, more importantly, read Peter Whiteford's comments. Whiteford is the OECD economist who did the seminal work on tax progressivity. Here's the relevant part, in bold text.
As others have pointed out this measure includes all direct taxes on individuals so it includes income taxes and employee social security contributions, but not employer payroll taxes. It also doesnt include sales taxes, but these are much heavier in most other OECD countries, and not as progressive as direct taxes, so if you added indirect taxes in through some sort of modelling it is almost certain that the USA would still have the most progressive overall tax system.
However, as the OECD report points out, progressivity is not the same as redistribution. Progressivity measures how the distribution of the tax burden is shared, while redistribution measures how much the tax system reduces inequality. Redistribution is influenced both by the progressivity of taxes and the level of taxes collected.
In fact, the US system of direct taxes actually reduces inequality more than any other country as well. But overall, the USA reduces inequality a lot less than most other countries, because the other thing that you need to take into account is what taxes get spent on.
Now the US system of social security and cash benefits reduces inequality by less than any other OECD country except Korea. The US social security system is marginally less progressive then the OECD average, but the level of spending is very low only Mexico and Korea spend less in the OECD.
So while the US tax system is progressive and reduces inequality, the US welfare state is much less effective at reducing inequality. And because the US has a very unequal distribution of income from capital and a much wider wage distribution than many other OECD countries, it ends up as a relatively unequal country after taxes and benefits.
If you look at Nordic countries, they all have much less progressive tax systems than the USA, but they collect a lot more in taxes (including in VAT). They then spend this much higher tax revenue on social security and services, and it is this side of the equation that is most important in reducing inequality.
So the implication is not that the USA either needs to increase or reduce the progressivity of the tax system. If you want to reduce inequality, you need to increase the level of taxes collected and spend it more effectively.
When you look at graphs of tax rate versus income for countries, you'll see the USA System is quite progressive. European welfare states actually have regressive tax systems, because of their large, regressive VAT taxes:
https://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/12/01/business/01economist--mulligan-dec/01economist--mulligan-dec-blog480.jpg
I will note that in a book I'm reading by Emmanuel Saez and Gabriel Zucman, advisors to Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, there's a graph that shows the poor and the rich paying much higher tax rates than the middle class, which is partly why I said the middle class gets a better deal than the poor too. I'll also note that even Saez and Zucman, who go out of their way to present data in a way favorable to the Progressive manifesto, show higher income Americans progressively paying higher and higher tax rates at higher income levels, until you get to the top 0. 01%. They attribute that, the lower rates for the top. 01% versus, say, the top 10%, to be the billionaires ravaging America. I'd attribute it to people making a lot of money when they, for example, sell a business that they've owned for a lifetime.
MarquisdeSade1
10-19-22, 17:14
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2022/10/18/nolte-far-left-npr-acknowledges-bidenflation-busting-budgets-killing-joy/
Elvis 2008
10-19-22, 18:36
[Deleted by Admin]
EDITOR'S NOTE: This report was redacted or deleted to remove sections of the report that were largely argumentative. Please read the Forum FAQ and the Forum's Posting Guidelines for more information. Thank You!
I don't agree with anything you wrote. In fact I would go as far to say it's absolute BS. Real wages have not increased in the USA since the 1970's. Yet productivity has increased massively. So where has this extra money gone? To the oligarchs and super-wealthy. The middle classes, just like in all neo-lib countries, are being squeezed out / strangled.
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/19/heres-how-labor-dynamism-affects-wage-growth-in-america.html
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/08/07/for-most-us-workers-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/
All the real assets of the country are being bought out by the wealthy and charged on to the lower and middle classes. USA is one of the most unequal societies in the world it has the same profile as a developing country like Brazil, or Colombia.
https://inequality.stanford.edu/publications/20-facts-about-us-inequality-everyone-should-know
The politicians do not really care about the middle classes; they do not need to bcos neither of the corrupt options does. They just through them a bone and see who wins the middle class can decide which bone they prefer. But the real winners are always the wealthy bcos the political system in the USA is totally corrupt bought out by the wealthy.
The USA also has shocking public services again, equal to a typical developing country. And that includes lack of support for the poor. Lack of public health, public transport, public utilities, continued education all bankrupting the young, squeezing families, stopping young people from having children, causing health crises and all to the benefit of the wealthy.
Yes, shlt-paid jobs, like pathetic labour jobs in McDonalds or Amazon warehouses, where you slave for cents so that the wealthy can get richer. That's why there is a record number of people searching for decent jobs there aren't any. The industrial sector and its jobs has been moved offshore. Why? You guessed it, so the wealthy can get richer.The only way you'd come up with the USA being as unequal as Colombia or Brazil is by ignoring taxes and transfer payments, a common trick of Progressives. See my wikipedia link in the post you're responding too. Median, by definition the middle of the middle class, per capita income in the USA after transfers and taxes is higher than just about any place. If you exclude small countries and petrostates, the only countries with per capita GDP comparable to the USA, are also countries like the USA where government expenditures as a % of GDP are low: Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Ireland. Smaller government produces better results. It's preferable IMO to leave more money in the hands of the people and businesses, instead of devoting larger and larger resources to our wasteful and inefficient federal government. The private sector is the engine of economic growth, not government.
As to public utilities and public transport and the rest, I believe New York City and California and all other progressive cities and states should be free to spend as much of THEIR money as they want on public services and public welfare. Have at it. As to shocking public services my ass. Maybe where you live. Where I live things work better than in Europe. We have efficient city, state and county government, and I don't begrudge paying taxes to support them one bit. The politicians in Washington D.C. though who want to enforce their priorities on us should go f*ck themselves.
The USA doesn't subsidize the rich per se. It's the opposite. See the reply to Xpartan below, where I partly address your points about inequality. The federal government does give away lots of corporate welfare, to farmers, agribusiness, green companies and the like. And that should stop. I agree with you about the poor and shit wages, and believe it makes sense for many cities and states to raise minimum wages. There should be additional support for poor single mothers and children. And better education.
You're right that real median wages and household income haven't increased enough since the late 1970's. But will point out that they really started to take off in 2019 before COVID hit. I'd attribute part of that to the CORPORATE tax cut and deregulation. You'd undoubtedly poo poo that. The stagnation of wages is a result mostly of improvements in technology and globalization though. There's not a lot you can do about that, unless you want to go back to horses and buggies, or paying lots more for goods. Which I guess does fit with the Progressive goal of making everyone more equal without giving a f*ck whether everyone becomes poorer in the process. Progressive Democrats should focus on improving the lot of the poor instead of dragging down the rich.
Median, by definition the middle of the middle class, per capita income in the USA after transfers and taxes is higher than just about any place. If you exclude small countries and petrostates, the only countries with per capita GDP comparable to the USA, are also countries like the USA where government expenditures as a % of GDP are low: Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Ireland. Smaller government produces better results. That is a shockingly poor take. Firstly, the stat is clearly based around the USA as its benchmark bcos everything is in USD. So other countiries's median income is exposed to whatever rate of excha is prevailing at the time. Plus it does not account properly for cost of living. For example, in the USA, bcos the government just pays out its tax receipts in helping the rich and buulding bombs, the USA people need to pay for their own health care, pay for continued education, pay for pizzas at USD 15+ a pop.
Furthermore it says nothing about WHERE the USA has come from. After World War 2 the USA owned half of the world's wealth. Now it is being overtaken by China. The USA middle class were much better off at all times during the past 70+ years than they are now.
You also say "If you exclude small countries and petrostates", and then you go on to use "Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Ireland" as examples to support your point. You can't have it both ways.
"Smaller government produces better results. ".
Not at all. All it does is lead to stats like this. Sure the US citizens need higher incomes. BCOS THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING (health / education etc) and at hihg prices due to neo -liberalism and lack of state support.
Maybe to the rest of the world Alex Jones is "shocking". But he was Trump's domestic mentor and inspiration (his foreign one was Putin) and therefore the mind (haha), heart and soul of the Republican Party.
Alex Jones and Donald Trump: How the Candidate Echoed the Conspiracy Theorist on the Campaign Trail
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/alex-jones-and-donald-trump-how-the-candidate-echoed-the-conspiracy-theorist-on-the-campaign-trail/
How Alex Jones was embraced by Trump, Rogan years after Sandy Hook lies
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/05/alex-jones-sandy-hook-trump-rogan/
So true, w/r to the Alex Jones and Donnie J. Dummkopf, in cahoots, as far back as 2015 on Info Wars, when Roger Stone, hitched the two into right-wing conspiracy bliss.
Funny how the usual suspects tend to show up on the lunatic fringe right-wing media outlets and are the purveyors of nutjob quackery conspiracy theories.
Donnie "the Devil" J. Dummkopf (the worst US president in history), Roger Stone (exiled Repub flunky, loser and lacky), Steve Bannon (fascist Viktor Orbn wanna be), Stuart Rhodes (Oath Keepers Founder, fmr Ron Paul staffer, white supremacist, militia strongman, Branch Davidian Church Waco) and Alex Jones (arch conspirator and right-wing nutter, Branch Davidian Church, Waco)
It started primarily with the Sandy Hook conspiracy and then from there to Pizzagate, to QAnon, to Charlottesville and the great replacement theory, to Corona Virus, to "stop the steal" lies and the Jan 6th "peaceful non-riot" and "patriots" exercising their political discourse.
Alex Jones has his fingerprints pretty much on all those crazy theories since Sandy Hook and to a large degree, at the center of the foundational front, for how disinformation and false narratives gain traction the right-wing media sphere.
Lately all the QAnon\Repubs\Bothsidesism political party does, is limp and larch from one conspiracy theory to the next, as soon as the Repub lunatic fringe, like Alex Jones, dreams up the next conspiracy, one after the other.
Naturally, as the gullible goose-stepping QAnon\Repubs\Bothsidesists, follow behind, parroting the same conspiracy drivel, lock, step and barrel.
That is a shockingly poor take. Firstly, the stat is clearly based around the USA as its benchmark bcos everything is in USD. So other countiries's median income is exposed to whatever rate of excha is prevailing at the time. Plus it does not account properly for cost of living. For example, in the USA, bcos the government just pays out its tax receipts in helping the rich and buulding bombs, the USA people need to pay for their own health care, pay for continued education, pay for pizzas at USD 15+ a pop.
Furthermore it says nothing about WHERE the USA has come from. After World War 2 the USA owned half of the world's wealth. Now it is being overtaken by China. The USA middle class were much better off at all times during the past 70+ years than they are now.
You also say "If you exclude small countries and petrostates", and then you go on to use "Switzerland, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Ireland" as examples to support your point. You can't have it both ways.
"Smaller government produces better results. ".
Not at all. All it does is lead to stats like this. Sure the US citizens need higher incomes. BCOS THEY HAVE TO PAY FOR EVERYTHING (health / education etc) and at hihg prices due to neo -liberalism and lack of state support.This is a link to the tables you're questioning.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disposable_household_and_per_capita_income
Please note that both tables include in kind transfers from government for health care costs and education costs. For example, if Germany provides free university education, that's included in German per capita disposable income. This makes your argument about health care and education costs mute.
The "PPP" means the numbers are adjusted on the basis of purchasing power. They've been adjusted for differences in costs between countries. The exchange rates are irrelevant. If the value of the Euro depreciates 50% against the dollar in a day, the disposable income based on PPP or purchasing power parity (after normalizing for the cost of comparable goods between countries) won't change.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity
"Small places" refers to Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, the Isle of Man, Bermuda, San Marino, the Cayman Islands and the Falkland Islands:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_(PPP) _per_capita.
Luxembourg has a population of 632,000 and by some standards, including median disposable income per person and household disposable income (see Wikipedia table you're complaining about), the USA ranks higher. The other places I'd suspect all have populations of less than 100,000.
The five countries I referred to, the USA, Switzerland, Ireland, Singapore and Hong Kong, all have populations of 5 million or more. Please note that Denmark, Finland, Norway, and New Zealand all have populations in the 5 million to 6 million range. I don't think you'd question whether they're real countries.
Also if you limit GDP per capita to large countries, the difference between them and the USA will be more stark. Germany, with a population of 84 million, has the highest GDP per capita adjusted for PPP of any country of size except the USA. Its GDP per capita adjusted for PPP is about 15% less than the USA. The next highest after Germany, France, is lower by about 25%. And I'll point out that government expenditures and revenues as a % of GDP in France are a lot higher than Germany. Maybe that's why France is poorer.
I finally figured out what neoliberalism is. I googled it in Wikipedia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism, that is free market capitalism, has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. Thank goodness it predominated over socialism and communism!
...While I prefer a system like Singapore's Central Provident Fund, or Australia's Superannuation scheme for retirement, the solution of Tip O'Neill and Ronald Reagan and other politicians to increase payroll contributions was better than letting Medicare and Social Security go bankrupt without replacements. Medicare works just fine for many Americans. I think the ONLY problem with Medicare, is the right-wing Trojan horse that is Medicare Advantage, meant to eventually privatize Medicare.
Medicare Advantage Is a For-Profit Scam. Time to End It.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2021/09/08/medicare-advantage-profit-scam-time-end-it
Medicare Advantage, pawns itself off as being better than Medicare, when in fact it is just a multi-trillion dollar scam. It deceives and uses deceptive practices to fools current users of Medicare (especially the elder) into there "Advantage" program, to relieve and Americans of their premiums, while denying medical care, by using fancy policy loopholes designed to minimize and rebuff Americans, of the necessary medical care needed.
Medicare Advantage Money Grab
https://publicintegrity.org/topics/health/medicare-advantage-money-grab/
Just get rid of Medicare Advantage, problem solved. Or at the very least forbid / copyright them from using the Medicare name.
Speaking of Social Security and Medicare. For those who don't think forcing workers to save 37% of every paycheck until age 55, as is apparently done in Singapore, would be a fine plan to replace Social Security and Medicare (yeah, let's wait for the vote count on that one), here comes more help from MSM for Repubs poised to gut Social Security and Medicare to win the midterm elections.
Including Morning Joe on MSNBC:
Republicans promise to sunset Social Security and Medicare and the mainstream media doesn't report that!
https://crooksandliars.com/2022/10/msm-ignores-gop-social-security-and Just like democracy, Repubs, just want to kill off everything that democracy stands for and represents.
So while, Social Security and Medicare, have always been long standing pillars of democracy, they stand in the way of an eventual Repub neoliberal privatization of America.
Much like Medicare and Medicare Advantage, just wait for Repubs, to introduce the Trojan horse that is "Social Security Advantage", to insidiously negate the last bastions of social safety nets, Americans have worked for.
This is a link to the tables you're questioning.
Sorry, but I dno nt accept that at all. The metrics have been heavily criticised and are biased to the USA. They don't equalise differences across countires properly. It's similar to how some people try to use IQ tests to demonstrate that black people are more genetically stupid. It doesn't work bcos you cannot apply the same metric across different countries.
And even if they did, it would have nothing to do with my points that middle classes are being squeezed. To confron that claim you would have to demonstrate that the middle class is no worse off now in real terms than it was in previous years. And it has nothing to do with the inequality.
Medicare works just fine for many Americans. I think the ONLY problem with Medicare, is the right-wing Trojan horse that is Medicare Advantage, meant to eventually privatize Medicare.
Medicare Advantage Is a For-Profit Scam. Time to End It.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2021/09/08/medicare-advantage-profit-scam-time-end-it
Medicare Advantage, pawns itself off as being better than Medicare, when in fact it is just a multi-trillion dollar scam. It deceives and uses deceptive practices to fools current users of Medicare (especially the elder) into there "Advantage" program, to relieve and Americans of their premiums, while denying medical care, by using fancy policy loopholes designed to minimize and rebuff Americans, of the necessary medical care needed.
Medicare Advantage Money Grab
https://publicintegrity.org/topics/health/medicare-advantage-money-grab/
Just get rid of Medicare Advantage, problem solved. Or at the very least forbid / copyright them from using the Medicare name.Yep, enacting Medicare Advantage was the most egregious and wasteful money scam of the 20th century. They relentlessly spam and confuse seniors getting them to sign up for inferior medical plans by offering a few bucks in return. What they do is criminal, and it's not a figure of speech.
Freddie Sayers coming good again. Super interviewer. Great guests.... COVID stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fr0-TMdjQ0
I finally figured out what neoliberalism is. I googled it in Wikipedia.
Neoliberalism, that is free market capitalism, has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty.I don't agree with everything George Monbiot writes, but this is the best I have ever read from him. Neo-lieralism is: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot
"freedom for the pike, not for the minnows. Freedom from trade unions and collective bargaining means the freedom to suppress wages. Freedom from regulation means the freedom to poison rivers, endanger workers, charge iniquitous rates of interest and design exotic financial instruments. Freedom from tax means freedom from the distribution of wealth that lifts people out of poverty. The greater the failure, the more extreme the ideology becomes. Governments use neoliberal crises as both excuse and opportunity to cut taxes, privatise remaining public services, rip holes in the social safety net, deregulate corporations and re-regulate citizens. The self-hating state now sinks its teeth into every organ of the public sector. ".
Hope you enjoy the read. I know you hold the Bible close to your heart, but we atheists hold the truth close close to ours. Neo-liberalism can never fix our problems, bcos it doesn't have our needs at heart.
In classic Repub Party fashion, deabeat Repubs shoulder none of the heavy lifting, assume none of the political risk, leave all of the work to the Dems, do nothing but slam and snipe at the Dems for their hard work and effective legislation and then swoop in afterwards and try to con their constituents and the American voter into giving them credit for it. LOL.
Biden Calls Out Socialist Republicans Now Begging for Money From Program They Voted Down
https://news.yahoo.com/biden-calls-socialist-republicans-now-191450315.html
It is beyond all debate and will now and forever be proven in the data and actual record of results that, in just the past 21 months, POTUS Joe Biden's Administration and his Dems in Congress have accomplished more to materially improve the lives of more Americans, especially Repubs in Red States, as well as to strengthen and spread democracy and Western democratic alliances around the world than all of the Repub Administrations and all of the Repub members of Congress of the past century or more combined.
By stark contrast, no administration, now the holy template for all future Repub administrations and slavishly aped by virtually every Repub in Congress and running for election, inflicted more damage to the health, well-being and the economy of America as well as the cause for democracy around the world than the immediate previous one that still refuses to simply apologize for his total disaster, admit defeat and go away.
Snap out of it.
Wake up.
Pay attention.
Vote accordingly.
Sorry, but I dno nt accept that at all. The metrics have been heavily criticised and are biased to the USA. They don't equalise differences across countires properly. It's similar to how some people try to use IQ tests to demonstrate that black people are more genetically stupid. It doesn't work bcos you cannot apply the same metric across different countries.
And even if they did, it would have nothing to do with my points that middle classes are being squeezed. To confron that claim you would have to demonstrate that the middle class is no worse off now in real terms than it was in previous years. And it has nothing to do with the inequality.Why would the OECD, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, which generated the metrics, be USA biased? It's headquartered in France and the majority of its funding comes from Europe. You could create the same tables in Euros or pounds and they would show the same thing.
After a quick look, I can't find data by year for real wages in European countries. But I'd dare say you see the same trend towards lower growth rates and real middle class wages across Western Europe and Japan, as a result of globalization and technology, as you see in the USA.
Still the middle class has made strides forward. Here's an interview with Bruce Meyer, an economist who focuses on poverty, inequality and social safety net programs at the University of Chicago. No doubt you'll poo poo this, since the University of Chicago was once a hotbed of supply side economics (Hayek and Friedman, both mentioned in your Mobiot piece, taught there). Also, like the Guardian, the AEI reputedly is biased. But I read your Monbiot piece and hope you'll read this. While Meyer doesn't say this, his thoughts agree with my observations of middle class living conditions in the USA versus Europe and Japan. We have more cars, larger living spaces, more appliances, air conditioning, and things usually cost less (not necessarily right now) and are more available in the USA.
https://www.aei.org/economics/inequality-and-poverty-in-the-us-a-long-read-qa-with-bruce-meyer/
A couple of quotes,
There are very tangible things that you can look at to see that people in the middle of the distribution are better off than they were 20, 30 years ago. For example, if you look at the share of people in the middle of the income distribution that have central air conditioning, or maybe only a couple of room air conditioners, or have a dishwasher, or a washer and a dryer in their house or apartment those numbers for the middle look like the numbers for the top 20% as of 20 or 30 years ago. So theres been quite dramatic improvements if you look at tangible things like what kinds of appliances have in the house. You can also look at the size of peoples houses or apartments square footage, number of rooms those things have gone up quite sharply for people in the middle of the distribution....
....Well, when you talk about the broader income distribution, particularly those at the bottom, its very important to pay attention to taxes, and in-kind transfers, and to the fact that our income data sources tend to undercount a lot of key transfers from the government. Much of what we have done over the past 20 or 30 years to help those at the bottom of the income distribution has been in the form of tax credits, like the Earned Income Tax Credit, or transfers that are in-kind like food stamps, which we now call SNAP, or housing benefits, or Medicaid. And those benefits are not counted in our official income or poverty statistics. Omitting those leads to a huge understatement of the resources available to those at the bottom of the distribution....
I don't agree with everything George Monbiot writes, but this is the best I have ever read from him. Neo-lieralism is: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/apr/15/neoliberalism-ideology-problem-george-monbiot
"freedom for the pike, not for the minnows. Freedom from trade unions and collective bargaining means the freedom to suppress wages. Freedom from regulation means the freedom to poison rivers, endanger workers, charge iniquitous rates of interest and design exotic financial instruments. Freedom from tax means freedom from the distribution of wealth that lifts people out of poverty. The greater the failure, the more extreme the ideology becomes. Governments use neoliberal crises as both excuse and opportunity to cut taxes, privatise remaining public services, rip holes in the social safety net, deregulate corporations and re-regulate citizens. The self-hating state now sinks its teeth into every organ of the public sector. ".
Hope you enjoy the read. I know you hold the Bible close to your heart, but we atheists hold the truth close close to ours. Neo-liberalism can never fix our problems, bcos it doesn't have our needs at heart.Your religion is anti-neoliberalism. I and most others who view ourselves as fans of free markets believe in rights for labor, including the right to unionize, and reasonable regulation of business by government.
Thanks. I did enjoy the read, in the same way I enjoy watching Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O'Donell. If you exclude their "reporting" on Trump, they're wrong in about 90% of what they say. But it's a window into how the other side thinks.
For those who don't think forcing workers to save 37% of every paycheck until age 55, as is apparently done in Singapore, would be a fine plan to replace Social Security and Medicare (yeah, let's wait for the vote count on that one), here comes more help from MSM for Repubs poised to gut Social Security and Medicare to win the midterm elections.You and I have been thrifty and wise enough to save and invest. We could stop working and be fine. But many Americans spend all their money just as fast as it comes in. What I'm proposing is like a huge combination IRA and HSA, with the ability to take out money without penalty for a downpayment on a house or education. And restrictions so the money must be logically invested by reputable mangers, like the Australian super funds. You'd have to transition to this over time to avoid having it induce a recession. And yes, you're right, the majority of Americans, more so Republicans, wouldn't go for something like this.
For those who don't think forcing workers to save 37% of every paycheck until age 55,And BTW, 20% is paid by the employer, 17% by the employee. Your big into minimum wage increases. Twenty percent would result in the employer forking over 13.8% more than the current 6. 2% contribution.
Medicare works just fine for many Americans. I think the ONLY problem with Medicare, is the right-wing Trojan horse that is Medicare Advantage, meant to eventually privatize Medicare.
Medicare Advantage Is a For-Profit Scam. Time to End It.
https://www.commondreams.org/views/2021/09/08/medicare-advantage-profit-scam-time-end-it
Medicare Advantage, pawns itself off as being better than Medicare, when in fact it is just a multi-trillion dollar scam. It deceives and uses deceptive practices to fools current users of Medicare (especially the elder) into there "Advantage" program, to relieve and Americans of their premiums, while denying medical care, by using fancy policy loopholes designed to minimize and rebuff Americans, of the necessary medical care needed.
Medicare Advantage Money Grab
https://publicintegrity.org/topics/health/medicare-advantage-money-grab/
Just get rid of Medicare Advantage, problem solved. Or at the very least forbid / copyright them from using the Medicare name.You were replying to me Spidy. I don't even know what Medicare Advantage is, so don't have an opinion. I do believe that our health system is really f*cked up, and both parties share part of the blame for that. So does that make me a Bothsider? No! That makes me a Bestsider!
Your religion is anti-neoliberalism. I and most others who view ourselves as fans of free markets believe in rights for labor, including the right to unionize, and reasonable regulation of business by government.
Thanks. I did enjoy the read, in the same way I enjoy watching Rachel Maddow or Lawrence O'Donell. If you exclude their "reporting" on Trump, they're wrong in about 90% of what they say. But it's a window into how the other side thinks.I will have a read of what you posted in your other comment. Don't have time this moment to focus. I accept that you urself beleive in labour rights etc, but you cannot speak for others. And the issue is that 'free markets' naturally tend to oligopoly. They are like a radioactive atom on the element table. They immediately decay in to a different state. They cannot exist in nature. Why? Bcos they are based on competition. With competitions there is always a winner and a loser. With that comes wealth, with wealth comes power, with power comes influence, comes corruption of the market, comes dominance, comes anhilation of the competition. We all end up as lowers, apart from the oligarchs, who oend up with everything, but even that state is transient, as with their greed they eventually consume themselves.
I didn't mean the OECD is biased, I mean the stats are biased. Bcos they use USA as the benchmark. Its all in USD, its all based on US norms. So the 'baskets' they use are US consumer baskets. They fairly represent the USA, not the other countries. Also adjustments for things like education costs, health costs. These are made to the other countries. They are not made to the USA. So the high USA health cost is not reflected. Nor reflected is the quality of life. For a USA household to attain that salary, they need to work 2 or 3 jobs each person, work longer hours and have less holidays. Avge USAn works 20% more hours than a German, just to get by.
But as I keep saying, that is really irrelevant. What is relevena t is that we are seeing an erosion of the poor, of the middle classes, across all neo-lib states, and greater levels of inequality. This is the natural / predicted course of events in neo-liberalism. The concentrations of wealth / power first consume the weak, then they need to seek out new victims to exploit and consume. The middle class.
"middle class living conditions in the USA versus Europe and Japan. We have more cars, larger living spaces, more appliances, air conditioning, and things usually cost less (not necessarily right now) and are more available in the USA. ".
Correct, but irrelevant to my point. Also longer working hours. USA WAS the NEW WORLD. Europe was totally developed and on the verge of collapse. North America was the great godsend that allowed UK and rest of Europe to continue in its capitalist ways. Allowed them to continue on their destructive paths to produce and expand. For this reason, and bcos the USA only fought in half a world war, and was the only large economy not totally destroyed, it became world leader. It was the Golden Age for the USA, for the USA middle class. But since then, those luxuries and advanatges have been eroded away. And now the USA middlel class needs to work 20% more to stay afloat. From those heady days, the USA has fallen a long way. Surely, you can see trend?
Freddie Sayers coming good again. Super interviewer. Great guests.... COVID stuff.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Fr0-TMdjQ0For old farts like many of us, it's not a hard decision. You get the vaccines and stay boosted. But if you're an eighteen year old male, it's not as easy.
Either way, thanks to American Big Pharma (Pfizer and Moderna) and the Trump Administration's Operation Warp Speed, we have great vaccines and the freedom to choose!
In classic Repub Party fashion, deabeat Repubs shoulder none of the heavy lifting, assume none of the political risk, leave all of the work to the Dems, do nothing but slam and snipe at the Dems for their hard work and effective legislation and then swoop in afterwards and try to con their constituents and the American voter into giving them credit for it. LOL.
Biden Calls Out Socialist Republicans Now Begging for Money From Program They Voted Down
https://news.yahoo.com/biden-calls-socialist-republicans-now-191450315.html
It is beyond all debate and will now and forever be proven in the data and actual record of results that, in just the past 21 months, POTUS Joe Biden's Administration and his Dems in Congress have accomplished more to materially improve the lives of more Americans, especially Repubs in Red States, as well as to strengthen and spread democracy and Western democratic alliances around the world than all of the Repub Administrations and all of the Repub members of Congress of the past century or more combined.
By stark contrast, no administration, now the holy template for all future Repub administrations and slavishly aped by virtually every Repub in Congress and running for election, inflicted more damage to the health, well-being and the economy of America as well as the cause for democracy around the world than the immediate previous one that still refuses to simply apologize for his total disaster, admit defeat and go away.
Snap out of it.
Wake up.
Pay attention.
Vote accordingly.Biden et al are just recycling money to the states through an inefficient federal government, which often values its priorities over the priorities of the people and their communities. I've provided the example of the public transport system where I live. The federal government paid for the buses, which we accepted because they were "free. " And now you have buses running around town with no or one or two passengers. So should the mayor and city council, all but one Republicans, have rejected the buses because they're a waste of federal taxpayer money? Tough call. It's hard turning away free stuff.
I don't agree with your and PVMonger's belief, expressed here more than once, that Democrats should take money from all Americans and just spend it on blue districts and states.
And that's quite a claim about the Biden administration doing more to spread democracy around the world than all the Republican administrations and members of Congress in the past century or more. Biden hasn't done squat to spread Democracy. The Reagan administration played a big part in bringing democracy to Eastern Europe and part of the FSU.
Biden et al are just recycling money to the states through an inefficient federal government, which often values its priorities over the priorities of the people and their communities. I've provided the example of the public transport system where I live. The federal government paid for the buses, which we accepted because they were "free. " And now you have buses running around town with no or one or two passengers. So should the mayor and city council, all but one Republicans, have rejected the buses because they're a waste of federal taxpayer money? Tough call. It's hard turning away free stuff.
I don't agree with your and PVMonger's belief, expressed here more than once, that Democrats should take money from all Americans and just spend it on blue districts and states.
And that's quite a claim about the Biden administration doing more to spread democracy around the world than all the Republican administrations and members of Congress in the past century or more. Biden hasn't done squat to spread Democracy. The Reagan administration played a big part in bringing democracy to Eastern Europe and part of the FSU.Although the point I highlighted would very likely produce some of the best economic results and investment gains of all time for America, I don't remember asserting such a thing.
Was it in the same post where I didn't assert that thing about Dem campaign donations?
For old farts like many of us, it's not a hard decision. You get the vaccines and stay boosted. But if you're an eighteen year old male, it's not as easy.
Either way, thanks to American Big Pharma (Pfizer and Moderna) and the Trump Administration's Operation Warp Speed, we have great vaccines and the freedom to choose!Thanks to Obama's decisions ten years earlier, we had vaccines produced and ready to go at warp speed:
Obama's science advisors outline plan for faster pandemic vaccine.
Aug. 19, 2010
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2010/08/obamas-science-advisors-outline-plan-faster-pandemic-vaccine
Foster Highlights President Obamas Contribution to Rapid Vaccine Development in Hearing with Dr. Fauci
https://foster.house.gov/media/press-releases/foster-highlights-president-obama-s-contribution-to-rapid-vaccine-development
However, thanks to Trump's decisions the world needed vaccines produced and ready to go at warp speed:
Timeline of Trumps Coronavirus Response
https://doggett.house.gov/media/blog-post/timeline-trumps-coronavirus-responses
Also, thanks to Trump, most Americans and many millions of others around the world harbored the deadly and mistaken notion that it wasn't necessary for anyone to bother inventing a vaccine at either warp speed or at their leisure much less ever bother or risk taking one for practically the entire critical Trump's Pandemic year of 2020:
'It's going to disappear':
A timeline of Trump's claims that Covid-19 will vanish
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/politics/covid-disappearing-trump-comment-tracker/
Trump Baselessly Claims Coronavirus Will Go Away Without Vaccine
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trump-baselessly-claims-coronavirus-will-go-away-without-vaccine/
I finally figured out what neoliberalism is. I googled it in Wikipedia.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
Neoliberalism, that is free market capitalism, has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty. Thank goodness it predominated over socialism and communism!
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Neoliberalism, is capitalism on steroids, gone awry. Neoliberalism, is a right-wing/Repub economic/political construct (more like a rabbit hole, that unfortunately, the Dems fell into and are currently, partially digging themselves out). And as I like to say (and IMHO), while it was lifting "hundreds of millions out of poverty", it simultaneously "placed billions into poverty".
It is designed to reduce the middle and working class democratic governments to mere hollow shells of power, to the point were the predominate balance of power is given over/transferred to the economic elites (also known as "the free markets"), to consolidate and entrench societal and economical power at the top, for the wealthy 1% (or is it the 0.1% ???).
Nothing could be further from the truth.
Neoliberalism, is capitalism on steroids, gone awry. Neoliberalism, is a right-wing/Repub economic/political construct (more like a rabbit hole, that unfortunately, the Dems fell into and are currently, partially digging themselves out). And as I like to say (and IMHO), while it was lifting "hundreds of millions out of poverty", it simultaneously "placed billions into poverty".
It is designed to reduce the middle and working class democratic governments to mere hollow shells of power, to the point were the predominate balance of power is given over/transferred to the economic elites (also known as "the free markets"), to consolidate and entrench societal and economical power at the top, for the wealthy 1% (or is it the 0.1% ???).Over a billion people in Eastern Europe, the FSU, China, Vietnam and Cambodia, who lived under both systems, would disagree. Look at the places where free market capitalism doesn't exist -- Cuba, North Korea, to a large degree Venezuela -- they're basket cases.
And I present a way to economically empower the Workingman, who would beneficially own more of American industry than he now does through pension plans, IRA's, 401-K's and direct investments if the Tiny Savings and Medical Plan were adopted. And EihTooms poo poo's it. Again, the Democrat politicians need to work on lifting people up instead of f*cking the top 1%. They can f*ck the 1% to the maximum extent possible. They still wouldn't have enough money for universal health care or a decent social security system, and in the long run that would only make the rest of the country poorer. You don't knee cap your most successful innovators, businessmen and investors and get off Scot free.
Look at the places where free market capitalism doesn't exist -- Cuba, North Korea, to a large degree Venezuela -- they're basket cases.You mean look at all the places that are blocked from participating in normal world trade by the USA, simply bcos they dare try a different economic system and refuse to suck the USA dick?
Of course they are likely to fail. Show me a socialist country that has not had to try to succeeed AS WELL as compete against the oppressive weiight of sanctions / coups / ostracism by the USA and other leading puppy-dog powers.
Listen to Bill Burr spoke out candidly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ScLu3BX1AY
You were replying to me Spidy. I don't even know what Medicare Advantage is, so don't have an opinion. I do believe that our health system is really f*cked up, and both parties share part of the blame for that. So does that make me a Bothsider? No! That makes me a Bestsider! Medicare Advantage is a major part of the problem.
But, what's f*cked up is the QAnon/Repubs, wanting to keep the status quo, while Dems are at least trying to remedy past healthcare sins and provide a more equitable healthcare, outta the clutches of the insurance companies and big data firms. It helps to recognize, at the very least, which side is trying to do right by the Americans voted them into office, that want to see a better healthcare system.
Yep, enacting Medicare Advantage was the most egregious and wasteful money scam of the 20th century. They relentlessly spam and confuse seniors getting them to sign up for inferior medical plans by offering a few bucks in return. What they do is criminal, and it's not a figure of speech. Spot On!
"middle class living conditions in the USA versus Europe and Japan. We have more cars, larger living spaces, more appliances, air conditioning, and things usually cost less (not necessarily right now) and are more available in the USA. ".
Correct, but irrelevant to my point. Also longer working hours. USA WAS the NEW WORLD. Europe was totally developed and on the verge of collapse. North America was the great godsend that allowed UK and rest of Europe to continue in its capitalist ways. Allowed them to continue on their destructive paths to produce and expand. For this reason, and bcos the USA only fought in half a world war, and was the only large economy not totally destroyed, it became world leader. It was the Golden Age for the USA, for the USA middle class. But since then, those luxuries and advanatges have been eroded away. And now the USA middlel class needs to work 20% more to stay afloat. From those heady days, the USA has fallen a long way. Surely, you can see trend?You've got a point about hours worked. That would be part of the reason why per capita disposable income in the USA is so much higher. It sounds like Europe is a great place for slackers. Asians would probably say the same thing about the USA.
I don't see any series that would enable me to compare real median income growth across European countries and the USA. The best I can do is per capita GDP. I'm going back to 1980 because that's when the IMF data series start, and going through 2019 to avoid funky effects of COVID. Here's annual growth over the period for several countries.
USA 1.68%/year
Germany 1.45%/year
France 1.13%/year
Please note that, as measured by government revenues and government expenditures as a % of GDP, the USA has smallest government, France has the largest, and Germany is in between.
The differences may seem small, but over the 40 year period, USA Per capita GDP grew by 95%, compared to 66% for France. That's substantial.
Also, growth should be higher for a country starting from a lower base. You have noted that the USA emerged from the second world war in better shape than Europe. That's correct. I'll note growth should be higher for a country starting from a lower base. But that hasn't been the case. Rather the country with the highest growth is the one with smallest government. And that's what you'd expect. You leave more money with the people and the private sector, the engine of growth, and the economy grows faster.
BTW, thanks, you have modified my world economic view, A LITTLE, by reminding me of the differences in working hours between countries. And also your link impressed on me how comparatively mild the symptoms of myocarditis associated with COVID vaccines are. I learned something from you today.
You mean look at all the places that are blocked from participating in normal world trade by the USA, simply bcos they dare try a different economic system and refuse to suck the USA dick?
Of course they are likely to fail. Show me a socialist country that has not had to try to succeeed AS WELL as compete against the oppressive weiight of sanctions / coups / ostracism by the USA and other leading puppy-dog powers.
Listen to Bill Burr spoke out candidly:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ScLu3BX1AYI haven't watched the link yet, but you've got a good point. The bigger factor though is those countries' departure from neoliberalism, the system that's raised hundreds of millions from abject poverty.
Medicare Advantage is a major part of the problem.
But, what's f*cked up is the QAnon/Repubs, wanting to keep the status quo, while Dems are at least trying to remedy past healthcare sins and provide a more equitable healthcare, outta the clutches of the insurance companies and big data firms. It helps to recognize, at the very least, which side is trying to do right by the Americans voted them into office, that want to see a better healthcare system. On!I give the Democrats credit for finally aggressively negotiating drug prices for Medicare. Otherwise they're part of the problem. Health care costs are over 18% of GDP and neither party is doing or has done diddly squat about it, with the exception I mentioned.
You were replying to me Spidy. I don't even know what Medicare Advantage is, so don't have an opinion.LOL, all due respect, you don't strike me as someone who can't find out what Medicare Advantage is on your own. But if you insist (in just a few words) Medicare Advantage was enacted by forcing Medicare to contract with private insurance companies (and paying dearly for their "assistance" They normally cover things not covered by traditional Medicare, like 20% outpatient copayments, drugs and other services. To be able to offer these "savings" they create private, HMO-like networks, and cut off seniors' access to better hospitals and other medical services.
Plus they routinely scam Medicare, overcharging taxpayers to the tune of tens of billions year after year, but that's a given.
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/08/upshot/medicare-advantage-fraud-allegations.html
To be fair, while this monstrous scam was originally created by the Republicans, its enormous expansion lately has sadly and shamefully attracted a lot of Democratic support.
And why are Medicare Advantage plans so successful? Because MA marketers relentlessly spam and lie to the most vulnerable group of people, the seniors.
Even well-meaning people say Medicare-for-all is not realistic because there isn't enough money to pay for it. How about taking billions back from the crooks? That would be a start.
I do believe that our health system is really f*cked up, and both parties share part of the blame for that. So does that make me a Bothsider? No! That makes me a Bestsider!Well, so you are aware that despite being the only developed country in the world without the Universal health care system, we still spend (or rather waste) on health care more than any other nation in the world?
USA Health Care from a Global Perspective, 2019: Higher Spending, Worse Outcomes?
https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2020/jan/us-health-care-global-perspective-2019
The question is then, what part of the blame you think they share. Like a 50-50 part or 5-95 part? I don't think you can blame both parties equally (at least with a straight face) after the Reps have been blocking all and every attempt on developing a fair Universal health care system for decades. Every step of the way! Because that would be socialism!
So if you do assign the blame equally to both sides, I must say yes, you are being somewhat a Bothsider here.
I give the Democrats credit for finally aggressively negotiating drug prices for Medicare. Otherwise they're part of the problem. Health care costs are over 18% of GDP and neither party is doing or has done diddly squat about it, with the exception I mentioned.Like I said, it helps to know which party is doing more. Democrats, have been continually making more strides towards more affordable and equitable healthcare, like the aforementioned affordable drugs. Dems have also put forth strong proposals for single-payer healthcare.
I'm sure this has been covered here before, but I'll reiterate:
Medicare For All? Shock Poll Discovers That 70 Percent Of Americans Want Single-Payer Healthcare To Happen
https://investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/medicare-for-all-shock-poll-discovers-that-70-percent-of-americans-want-single-payer-healthcare-to-happen/
Single-payer healthcare (also known as "Medicare For All"), is something 70% of Americans want and support. Surprisingly enough, 54% of Repubs, also want to see single-payer healthcare system.
But true to the pettiness that is Repubs politicians (and would rather bite off their noses to spite their faces), they don't want to pass healthcare bill/act that the Dems, have put forth, and would benefit most Americans, just because it was the Dems.
Democrats, proposals of a single-payer system, are at least trying to make healthcare closer to a right and not a privilege and join every other industrialized country in the world, w/r to healthcare.
Like I said, it helps to know which party is doing more. Democrats, have been continually making more strides towards more affordable and equitable healthcare, like the aforementioned affordable drugs. Dems have also put forth strong proposals for single-payer healthcare.
I'm sure this has been covered here before, but I'll reiterate:
Medicare For All? Shock Poll Discovers That 70 Percent Of Americans Want Single-Payer Healthcare To Happen
https://investortimes.com/freedomoutpost/medicare-for-all-shock-poll-discovers-that-70-percent-of-americans-want-single-payer-healthcare-to-happen/
Single-payer healthcare (also known as "Medicare For All"), is something 70% of Americans want and support. Surprisingly enough, 54% of Repubs, also want to see single-payer healthcare system.
But true to the pettiness that is Repubs politicians (and would rather bite off their noses to spite their faces), they don't want to pass healthcare bill/act that the Dems, have put forth, and would benefit most Americans, just because it was the Dems.
Democrats, proposals of a single-payer system, are at least trying to make healthcare closer to a right and not a privilege and join every other industrialized country in the world, w/r to healthcare.I don't have a problem with single payer. In fact it's part of the Tiny Savings and Medical Plan. If there's massive support for single payer in the Democratic Party, why wasn't it passed when Democrats controlled the House, Senate and Presidency? Like in 2009, 2010, 2021 or 2022? Like I said, neither party has done diddly squat, outside of lowering prices that will be paid for drugs for Medicare patients, which I give your side credit for.
Thanks to Obama's decisions ten years earlier, we had vaccines produced and ready to go at warp speed:
Obama's science advisors outline plan for faster pandemic vaccine.
Aug. 19, 2010
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2010/08/obamas-science-advisors-outline-plan-faster-pandemic-vaccine
Foster Highlights President Obamas Contribution to Rapid Vaccine Development in Hearing with Dr. Fauci
https://foster.house.gov/media/press-releases/foster-highlights-president-obama-s-contribution-to-rapid-vaccine-development
However, thanks to Trump's decisions the world needed vaccines produced and ready to go at warp speed:
Timeline of Trumps Coronavirus Response
https://doggett.house.gov/media/blog-post/timeline-trumps-coronavirus-responses
Also, thanks to Trump, most Americans and many millions of others around the world harbored the deadly and mistaken notion that it wasn't necessary for anyone to bother inventing a vaccine at either warp speed or at their leisure much less ever bother or risk taking one for practically the entire critical Trump's Pandemic year of 2020:
'It's going to disappear':
A timeline of Trump's claims that Covid-19 will vanish
https://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2020/10/politics/covid-disappearing-trump-comment-tracker/
Trump Baselessly Claims Coronavirus Will Go Away Without Vaccine
https://www.factcheck.org/2020/05/trump-baselessly-claims-coronavirus-will-go-away-without-vaccine/Your first post is a report by Obama's science committee. It doesn't mention any steps that were necessarily taken, only recommendations. Your next two are partisan propaganda. As to Trump, yes, he's a liar and he'll say anything, no matter how ridiculous, that he thinks promotes his prospects. What's new.
The pioneering research for mRNA vaccines was done with grants provided in part by the federal government during the Bush Administration. Bush took the risk of pandemics in general and coronavirus pandemics in particular seriously, because of the SARS scare.
Otherwise, the heroes in government are not the politicians. They're great Americans like Anthony Fauci, who were steering grants to vaccine research, among other areas. Still, the amount spent on mRNA vaccines prior to COVID was a pittance, in comparison to the tens of billions dumped into them by Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, and Operation Warp Speed.
I've heard American Hero Anthony Fauci give credit to the Trump Administration at least three times for Operation Warp Speed. Something like $18 billion was dumped into Operation Warp Speed, and it was worth every penny.
Furthermore, I give credit to Trump for pushing approval for the vaccines through the FDA. He was trying to get them through before the election but didn't quite manage that. You see Biden doing something similar with releases of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The difference is that what Trump did made a lot of sense, for the country. What Biden is doing may make sense for his party's prospects in the Mid Terms (i.e. lowering gasoline prices), but he's depleting our strategic oil stockpiles. Almost all the sour crude preferred by our refineries is now gone from the reserve.
I don't have a problem with single payer. In fact it's part of the Tiny Savings and Medical Plan. If there's massive support for single payer in the Democratic Party, why wasn't it passed when Democrats controlled the House, Senate and Presidency? Like in 2009, 2010, 2021 or 2022? Like I said, neither party has done diddly squat, outside of lowering prices that will be paid for drugs for Medicare patients, which I give your side credit for.You would have to go back and look at the politics of day to really get your answer. But I'm not sure if single-payer healthcare (SPHC), was so widely adopted in 2009,2010 as it is today.
As you also well know, in the "game of politics", bills being written going in, often don't look anything like they do, when coming out. Whether its the Repubs or DINOs and their big-money lobbyists / insurance / pharma donors, blocking or changing the bill, enough bipartisan support wasn't available, to pass both houses. But I suspect you already knew this!
Not too mention (in 2021 or 2022), Democrats don't have enough seats to overcome the senate filibuster and therefore would require Repub bipartisan support. Ego, Dems have no such control w/r to passing this type of a bill.
Hence when I said:
But true to the pettiness that is Repubs politicians (and would rather bite off their noses to spite their faces), they don't want to pass healthcare bill/act that the Dems, have put forth, and would benefit most Americans, just because it was the Dems. ... Again, given the politics of the day, public opinion, sentiment and appetite, there maybe more pressing issues and unfortunately get shoved to the back-burner.
Your first post is a report by Obama's science committee. It doesn't mention any steps that were necessarily taken, only recommendations. Your next two are partisan propaganda. As to Trump, yes, he's a liar and he'll say anything, no matter how ridiculous, that he thinks promotes his prospects. What's new.
The pioneering research for mRNA vaccines was done with grants provided in part by the federal government during the Bush Administration. Bush took the risk of pandemics in general and coronavirus pandemics in particular seriously, because of the SARS scare.
Otherwise, the heroes in government are not the politicians. They're great Americans like Anthony Fauci, who were steering grants to vaccine research, among other areas. Still, the amount spent on mRNA vaccines prior to COVID was a pittance, in comparison to the tens of billions dumped into them by Pfizer, Moderna, BioNTech, and Operation Warp Speed.
I've heard American Hero Anthony Fauci give credit to the Trump Administration at least three times for Operation Warp Speed. Something like $18 billion was dumped into Operation Warp Speed, and it was worth every penny.
Furthermore, I give credit to Trump for pushing approval for the vaccines through the FDA. He was trying to get them through before the election but didn't quite manage that. You see Biden doing something similar with releases of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The difference is that what Trump did made a lot of sense, for the country. What Biden is doing may make sense for his party's prospects in the Mid Terms (i.e. lowering gasoline prices), but he's depleting our strategic oil stockpiles. Almost all the sour crude preferred by our refineries is now gone from the reserve.So now you're crediting GW Bush for warp speed and totally ignoring my links for the timely strides made by the Obama administration and how Trump created Trump's Pandemic as far back as 2018 from the one golden opportunity available for him to do so. And all with no substantiation report links at all.
Duly noted.
You would have to go back and look at the politics of day to really get your answer. But I'm not sure if single-payer healthcare (SPHC), was so widely adopted in 2009,2010 as it is today.
As you also well know, in the "game of politics", bills being written going in, often don't look anything like they do, when coming out. Whether its the Repubs or DINOs and their big-money lobbyists / insurance / pharma donors, blocking or changing the bill, enough bipartisan support wasn't available, to pass both houses. But I suspect you already knew this!
Not too mention (in 2021 or 2022), Democrats don't have enough seats to overcome the senate filibuster and therefore would require Repub bipartisan support. Ego, Dems have no such control w/r to passing this type of a bill.
Hence when I said:
Again, given the politics of the day, public opinion, sentiment and appetite, there maybe more pressing issues and unfortunately get shoved to the back-burner.You may be right. I thought the Affordable Care Act passed with a simple majority, but it took 60 votes. In any event I believe budgetary matters affecting health care could be legislated with a majority.
As to your title, most Republicans blocking a single payer system, I'd bet a majority of Democratic Congressmen and Senators are against that too. But I don't know. If you do please enlighten us. Sincerely, I'm not being flippant.
The question is then, what part of the blame you think they share. Like a 50-50 part or 5-95 part? I don't think you can blame both parties equally (at least with a straight face) after the Reps have been blocking all and every attempt on developing a fair Universal health care system for decades. Every step of the way! Because that would be socialism!
So if you do assign the blame equally to both sides, I must say yes, you are being somewhat a Bothsider here.50-50. Bestsider, not bothsider.
Both sides are reluctant to stand up to the hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, drug companies, and the lawyers who sue them. The Republicans are better at going after the lawyers, while recent developments show the Democrats are better at standing up to the drug companies. None of them wants to give Medicare or private insurance an out so it doesn't have to pay $200,000 for health care for your grannie when she's probably going to die in about 2 months anyway.
The only exception I recall is Bernie Sanders, for a while. I believe he said you're going to have to pay higher taxes and your medical care is going to suck when we do what we've got to do. Or something like that. Actually maybe EihTooms said that. Anyway Sanders must have backtracked on the idea by the time 2021 came around, when, as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, he was championing a $6 trillion Build Back Better bill, with a big chunk of that devoted to expanding Medicare. And without measures that would come close to funding all of the cost.
And yeah, a majority of Democrats may support universal health care. Maybe, I don't know. But to make it happen they'd have to either raise taxes and payroll contributions massively on the middle class, or rationalize health care so it doesn't cost so much. And they're not willing to do either.
50-50. Bestsider, not bothsider.
Both sides are reluctant to stand up to the hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, drug companies, and the lawyers who sue them. The Republicans are better at going after the lawyers, while recent developments show the Democrats are better at standing up to the drug companies. None of them wants to give Medicare or private insurance an out so it doesn't have to pay $200,000 for health care for your grannie when she's probably going to die in about 2 months anyway.
The only exception I recall is Bernie Sanders, for a while. I believe he said you're going to have to pay higher taxes and your medical care is going to suck when we do what we've got to do. Or something like that. Actually maybe EihTooms said that. Anyway Sanders must have backtracked on the idea by the time 2021 came around, when, as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, he was championing a $6 trillion Build Back Better bill, with a big chunk of that devoted to expanding Medicare. And without measures that would come close to funding all of the cost.
And yeah, a majority of Democrats may support universal health care. Maybe, I don't know. But to make it happen they'd have to either raise taxes and payroll contributions massively on the middle class, or rationalize health care so it doesn't cost so much. And they're not willing to do either.50 - 50? Really?
Medicare.
Medicaid.
The Affordable Care Act.
The Inflation Reduction Act.
Those are just some of the legislation proposed, fought for, signed and passed when Dems held the White House and the Majority in both Houses of Congress that have made healthcare more accessible and affordable for more Americans. At least small steps toward Universal Healthcare, as many steps as they can realistically accomplish each time.
Many, many, many days ago I posed a challenge to you and anyone else here, then repeated it many days later and as of this writing not one single poster has cited one single item.
I will repeat it again and this time I will even simplify it to include only healthcare-related legislation:
Please cite an important legislation and now revered fact of American life that was proposed, fought for, signed and passed when Repubs held the White House and the Majority in both Houses of Congress.
Remember, this time it is only about healthcare-related legislation. With a claim of 50 -50 good / bad contribution throughout history, this ought to be an exceedingly easy challenge to meet.
After all, that would therefore not include the Repubs producing the worst economic downturns and massive jobs destruction and none of the historic jobs creation and economic boom times in the past 100 years. Something that is abundantly clear from all verifiable data and evidence was definitely NOT shared 50 - 50 by the two major Parties.
So go ahead and enlighten us with this exceedingly easy one.
If only that had been the case for Great Repub Recession Reagan, Great Repub Recession Bush2 and Great Repub Recession Trump.
No way were Brits stupid enough to fall for that economy-destroying and job-destroying Reaganomics (actually Coolidge / Hoovernomics) con again. Unlike Repub voters and wiggly stealth Repub Bothsiders / Neithersiders in the USA. No, they have shown themselves to be that stupid over and over again.
With every vote for a Repub, they're going to show the world how stupid they are again next month:
That Time Fox Business Larry Kudlow Touted Liz Truss Terrific Economic Plan, Compared It to Kevin McCarthys (Video)
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/time-fox-business-larry-kudlow-204414777.html
Larry Kudlow, the Fox Business host and former Director of the National Economic Council under Trump, touted former British Prime Minister Liz Truss economic plan less than a month ago, on a clip that has resurfaced, hilariously, thanks to Twitter. (You can watch it below.)
"The U.S. midterm elections cavalry arrived early in London. What do I mean by that? Kudlow says in the Fox Business clip. Well, the new British prime minister, Liz Truss, has laid out a terrific supply-side economic growth plan which looks a lot like the basic thrust of Kevin McCarthys Commitment to America plan.
LOL, all due respect, you don't strike me as someone who can't find out what Medicare Advantage is on your own. But if you insist....And thanks for the explanation, I know what it is now.
50-50. Bestsider, not bothsider.
Both sides are reluctant to stand up to the hospitals, doctors, insurance companies, drug companies, and the lawyers who sue them. The Republicans are better at going after the lawyers, while recent developments show the Democrats are better at standing up to the drug companies. None of them wants to give Medicare or private insurance an out so it doesn't have to pay $200,000 for health care for your grannie when she's probably going to die in about 2 months anyway.
The only exception I recall is Bernie Sanders, for a while. I believe he said you're going to have to pay higher taxes and your medical care is going to suck when we do what we've got to do. Or something like that. Actually maybe EihTooms said that. Anyway Sanders must have backtracked on the idea by the time 2021 came around, when, as chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, he was championing a $6 trillion Build Back Better bill, with a big chunk of that devoted to expanding Medicare. And without measures that would come close to funding all of the cost..Actually, earlier in 2022, Sen. Sanders introduced a "Medicare for All 2022" bill, so he hasn't put it on the back burner. https://pnhp.org/what-is-single-payer/senate-bill/.
And the "raising taxes" thing is, well, BS. See, the US spends NOW about $12 k per capita on healthcare. Since the US has about 330 million people, that is a total of almost $4 trillion per year. https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries-2/#Health%20 consumption%20 expenditures%20 per%20 capita,%20 USA %20 dollars,%20 PPP%20 adjusted,%202020%20 or%20 nearest%20 year.
Granted, single-payer healthcare is expensive BUT over 10 years, the total cost should not exceed $36 trillion. So the total cost for single-payer is less. https://khn.org/news/does-medicare-for-all-cost-more-than-the-entire-budget-biden-says-so-but-numbers-say-no/.
The folks who really are against single-payer (other than every Repub member of congress) are the insurance companies. Instead of raking in huge dollars every year by "insuring" people then fighting tooth-and-nail to deny their claims, insurance companies would be relegated to selling low-dollar supplemental policies like they do in Canada.
Roger Waters, the most informed rock star. Hate his music, love his politcis. Hehe.
Here he is ripping the CNN guy a new one. Fantastic stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svhXSjo5oPk
Biden is a war criminal.
As clearly shown in a previous similar report, Biden's strong economy of historic jobs creation and wage growth is working beautifully to counter the worst effects of Trump's Pandemic's Supply-Chain Collapse Inflation.
Also, now that we know at least 7 of the 10 States with the highest crime rates are Red States, that Biden has reduced the deficit by $1. 2 Trillion this year after Trump increased it by Hundreds of Billions every year even before he produced Trump's Pandemic and gas prices are still declining, typically pro Repub Mainstream Media really has their work cut out for them to help Repubs win these midterm elections.
U.S. consumer is soldiering on despite soaring inflation, credit card giants say
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/21/us-consumer-is-soldiering-on-despite-soaring-inflation-and-recession-risk-credit-card-giants-say.html?__source=androidappshare
U.S. consumers have demonstrated a willingness to continue to pay higher prices in the face of a sluggish economy that could be tipped into a recession, according to credit card giants American Express and Bank of America.
American Express on Friday reported stronger-than-expected third-quarter earnings and revenue, while raising its full-year forecast. The company said overall customer spending jumped 21% year over year, driven by growth in goods and services as well as travel and entertainment.
The demand for travel is particularly resilient as Americans make up for postponed trips due to the pandemic. Consumers are also splurging on food and entertainment after pandemic lockdowns eased.
American Express said its travel and entertainment segment saw spending climb 57% from a year ago with volumes in its international markets surpassing pre-pandemic levels for the first time in the third quarter.
"Card member spending remained at near-record levels in the quarter", American Express CEO Stephen Squeri said Friday on an earnings call. "We expected the recovery in travel spending to be a tailwind for us, but the strength of the rebound has exceeded our expectations throughout the year."
Bank of America isnt experiencing any slower growth in spending either, despite inflation having reached historic highs. CEO Brian Moynihan said earlier this week that the banks customers continue to spend freely, using their credit cards and other payment methods for 10% more transaction volume in September and the first half of October than a year earlier.
"Analysts might wonder whether the talk of inflation, recession and other factors could result in a slower spending growth", Moynihan said Monday during a conference call. "We just dont see that here at Bank of America."
CLAIM: Former President Donald Trump signed an order to deploy 20,000 National Guard troops before his supporters stormed the USA Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, but was stopped by the House sergeant at arms, at the behest of Speaker Nancy Pelosi.
THE FACTS: While Trump was involved in discussions in the days prior to Jan. 6 about the National Guard response, he issued no such order before or during the rioting. New footage released last week of House lawmakers on Jan. 6 has sparked a resurgence of false claims and conspiracy theories about the insurrection. The videos, recorded by Pelosi's daughter, showed the congresswoman negotiating with governors and defense officials in an effort to get Guard troops to the Capitol. Some on social media used the occasion to revive baseless claims that Pelosi had stopped a Trump order for tens of thousands of National Guard troops before the event. "Trump signed an order to deploy 20,000 Guardsmen on J6. It was refused by the House sergeant at arms, who reports to Nancy Pelosi," said one post that spread on Gettr, Instagram and Twitter. As the AP has previously reported, Trump was not involved in decision-making related to the National Guard on Jan. 6, and Pelosi did not stand in their way. Trump did say during a 30-second call on Jan. 5 with then Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller that "they" were going to need 10,000 troops on Jan. 6, according to a statement Miller provided to a House committee in May 2021. But Miller added that there was "no elaboration," and he took the comment to mean "a large force would be required to maintain order the following day. " There is no evidence that Trump actually signed any order requesting 10,000 Guard troops, let alone 20,000, for Jan. 6. Reached for comment, a spokesperson for the Department of Defense provided a timeline of the agency's involvement in preparing for and responding to the attack on the Capitol. The timeline shows no such order, and notes only that on Jan. 3, the president concurred with activating the the. See. National Guard to support law enforcement at the behest of Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser. When the rioting started, Bowser requested more Guard help, on behalf of the Capitol Police. That request was made to Army Secretary Ryan McCarthy, who then went to Miller, who approved it. Neither Pelosi nor the House sergeant at arms could have stopped an ordered deployment of National Guard troops because Congress doesn't control the National Guard, legal experts say. Guard troops are generally controlled by governors, though they can be federalized, said William see. Banks, a law professor at Syracuse University. The online claims "make no sense at all," Banks said, adding, "The House sergeant at arms, he or she is not in the chain of command. Nor is Nancy Pelosi. " As the newly released footage showed, she and Mitch McConnell, then Senate majority leader, called for military assistance, including the National Guard. The House sergeant at arms does sit on the Capitol Police Board, which also includes the Senate sergeant at arms and the architect of the Capitol. That board opted not to request the Guard ahead of the insurrection, but did eventually request assistance after the rioting had already begun. There is no evidence that either Pelosi or McConnell directed the security officials not to call the guard beforehand, and Drew Hammill, Pelosi's deputy chief of staff, said after the insurrection that Pelosi was never informed of such a request.
CLAIM: A new Massachusetts law providing driver's licenses for immigrants in the country illegally will also automatically register them to vote in elections.
THE FACTS: The law passed by Massachusetts state lawmakers this summer prohibits immigrants without legal permission to reside in the USA From being automatically registered to vote. Social media users have been reviving fears that the new Massachusetts law would give those living in the country illegally the right to vote since the state has automatic voter registration. The concerns come as residents weigh a ballot referendum on the law in next month's election. The law, which takes effect July 1, 2023, would allow Massachusetts residents who cannot provide proof of lawful presence in the USA To obtain a driver's license or permit if they meet all other requirements, such as passing a road test and providing proof of identity. "Giving Driver's licenses to illegals gives them the right to vote," the Massachusetts Republican Party said in a Facebook post. Republican gubernatorial candidate Geoff Diehl repeated the claim during a televised debate against Democratic rival Maura Healey. He noted that Republican Governor Charlie Baker vetoed the legislation in part over election concerns. Massachusetts' Democratic-led legislature ultimately overrode the veto. But state Sen. Brendan Crighton, a Democrat who was a lead sponsor of the bill, told the AP that the voting concerns have "long been debunked. " he argued that green card holders, student visa holders and other types of noncitizens can already seek Massachusetts driver's licenses, and there's a system in place to ensure they're not automatically registered to vote. The state in 2020 enacted an automatic voter registration law in which every eligible citizen who interacts with state agencies like the RMV is automatically registered to vote, unless they specifically opt out. The state's current driver's license form asks if the applicant is a USA Citizen and a Massachusetts resident under a section for voter registration. If the applicant can't answer "yes" to all the questions, they are then instructed to check a box that says, "Do not use my information for voter registration. " "The term 'automatic voter registration' is a misnomer in the sense that the individual is not registered to vote unless they are a citizen and over 18 years old," Crighton said. "It is not actually automatic. " Amanda Orlando, Diehl's campaign manager, didn't dispute that Massachusetts' new law specifically prohibits automatic voter registration for those seeking driver's licenses. But she maintained the law, as constructed, "places the burden" of reviewing voting eligibility on the already overburdened and understaffed RMV. "What is written in the law, and what will happen in reality are different," Orlando wrote in an email. "As noted by Governor Baker, they are not able to handle the volume they currently have, let alone increase it substantially with giving driver's licenses to illegal immigrants. " The RMV declined to comment, but Secretary of State William Galvin's office, which oversees Massachusetts elections, said the two agencies have been in communication ahead of the law taking effect next year. Under the current process, the RMV provides the secretary of state's office with all the relevant information for voter registration — such as an applicant's name, date of birth and address — and can provide additional information to further verify voting eligibility, said Debra O'Malley, Galvin's spokesperson. "The RMV has a record of what evidence of lawful presence has been provided and removes from those batches anyone who hasn't provided them with a USA Birth certificate, USA Passport, or USA.
Naturalization papers," she said by email.
Source: Associated Press https://news.yahoo.com/not-real-news-look-didnt-152649832.html.
You may be right. I thought the Affordable Care Act passed with a simple majority, but it took 60 votes. In any event I believe budgetary matters affecting health care could be legislated with a majority. Affordable Care Act, passed with bipartisan support of slightly more than 3/5 required in the Senate.
As to your title, most Republicans blocking a single payer system, I'd bet a majority of Democratic Congressmen and Senators are against that too. But I don't know. If you do please enlighten us. Sincerely, I'm not being flippant. I don't think there would be a majority, but maybe a few. I covered this in my post when I said, "Whether its the Repubs or DINOs ...".
50-50. Bestsider, not bothsider. ... 50 - 50? Really? ...
Many, many, many days ago I posed a challenge to you and anyone else here, then repeated it many days later and as of this writing not one single poster has cited one single item.
I will repeat it again and this time I will even simplify it to include only healthcare-related legislation:
Please cite an important legislation and now revered fact of American life that was proposed, fought for, signed and passed when Repubs held the White House and the Majority in both Houses of Congress.
Remember, this time it is only about healthcare-related legislation. With a claim of 50 -50 good / bad contribution throughout history, this ought to be an exceedingly easy challenge to meet. ... Great challenge! I'd like to see it too.
50 - 50? Really?
Medicare.
Medicaid.
The Affordable Care Act.
The Inflation Reduction Act.
Those are just some of the legislation proposed, fought for, signed and passed when Dems held the White House and the Majority in both Houses of Congress that have made healthcare more accessible and affordable for more Americans. At least small steps toward Universal Healthcare, as many steps as they can realistically accomplish each time.
Many, many, many days ago I posed a challenge to you and anyone else here, then repeated it many days later and as of this writing not one single poster has cited one single item.
I will repeat it again and this time I will even simplify it to include only healthcare-related legislation:
Please cite an important legislation and now revered fact of American life that was proposed, fought for, signed and passed when Repubs held the White House and the Majority in both Houses of Congress.
Remember, this time it is only about healthcare-related legislation. With a claim of 50 -50 good / bad contribution throughout history, this ought to be an exceedingly easy challenge to meet.
After all, that would therefore not include the Repubs producing the worst economic downturns and massive jobs destruction and none of the historic jobs creation and economic boom times in the past 100 years. Something that is abundantly clear from all verifiable data and evidence was definitely NOT shared 50 - 50 by the two major Parties.
So go ahead and enlighten us with this exceedingly easy one.What are the things you like the most about gay sex? That's assuming you're heterosexual.
That's like what you're asking me. I'm a small government libertarian who would prefer that, to the extent it makes sense, my local and state governments run government and exercise the power of the purse. And leave our inefficient and wasteful federal government to deal with what's left. And presumably you're asking me to research and highlight big government programs, budget busters, Ponzi schemes, and ticking time bombs. Or at least that's what you've chosen to bring to our attention. Except for the Civil Rights Act, which was passed with more Republican than Democrat votes.
A FULLY FUNDED, efficient health care and retirement program run by the federal government could make sense. It would be transportable when someone changes jobs or moves to another state. It would greatly lower health care costs, from the current, ridiculous level of 18% of GDP, while providing better outcomes, comparable to other developed countries. It would make it where people were setting side enough while they're working so that they have a livable income after they retire. That's not what we have now. The programs you're so enamored with fall into the "Ponzi scheme and ticking time bomb" categories.
BTW, This is like the movie Ground Hog Day or 50 First Dates. You're posting the same thing over and over again. Please see posts 10312 and 10346, where I already replied.
Actually, earlier in 2022, Sen. Sanders introduced a "Medicare for All 2022" bill, so he hasn't put it on the back burner. https://pnhp.org/what-is-single-payer/senate-bill/.
And the "raising taxes" thing is, well, BS. See, the US spends NOW about $12 k per capita on healthcare. Since the US has about 330 million people, that is a total of almost $4 trillion per year. https://www.healthsystemtracker.org/chart-collection/health-spending-u-s-compare-countries-2/#Health%20 consumption%20 expenditures%20 per%20 capita,%20 USA %20 dollars,%20 PPP%20 adjusted,%202020%20 or%20 nearest%20 year.
Granted, single-payer healthcare is expensive BUT over 10 years, the total cost should not exceed $36 trillion. So the total cost for single-payer is less. https://khn.org/news/does-medicare-for-all-cost-more-than-the-entire-budget-biden-says-so-but-numbers-say-no/.
The folks who really are against single-payer (other than every Repub member of congress) are the insurance companies. Instead of raking in huge dollars every year by "insuring" people then fighting tooth-and-nail to deny their claims, insurance companies would be relegated to selling low-dollar supplemental policies like they do in Canada.
I agree with you about single payer and the wisdom of cutting the role of the insurance companies.
Universal health care run through the government is a whole different ball of wax. I'm not saying it's not worth doing. If we could reduce costs and raise quality so we're anywhere close to the same league as, say Singapore (the best out there IMHO), we'd be crazy not to.
I totally disagree with you about raising taxes being B.S. I don't think Democratic politicians would be willing to raise taxes or payroll contributions on the middle class enough to make government run universal health care happen. Democrats seem intent on getting the top 1% to pay for all this, and the top 1%, or even individuals and couples making over $200,000 a year, don't have enough money.
What makes the problem worse, as you touch on above ($12,000 per capita cost), is that we spend a ridiculous amount of money on health care compared to everywhere else. And outcomes are worse than most developed countries.
Here are some numbers from 2019, the latest year for which IRS statistics are available.
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-individual-statistical-tables-by-size-of-adjusted-gross-income
Total adjusted gross income of the top 1.1%, less federal taxes already paid by the top 1.1%: $1. 9 trillion.
Total adjusted gross income of all taxpayers (individuals and couples) who make over $200,000 per year, less federal taxes already paid: $3. 6 trillion.
Compare to your cost estimates above. If you take ALL the income currently realized by people and couples making over $200,000 a year, you're less than the $4 trillion a year. Admittedly you should take off what we're already paying for Medicare, Medicaid, etc. from the $4 trillion. Still, obviously, you're going to have to take most of the money from the middle class to make this work. And I don't think Democrats, or certainly Republicans, have the stomach for it.
BTW, in the same year, 2019, federal government revenues were $3.5 trillion and outlays were $4.4 trillion. It's worth thinking about those amounts as well, as compared to the $4 trillion cost of health care.
Roger Waters, the most informed rock star. Hate his music, love his politcis. Hehe.
Here he is ripping the CNN guy a new one. Fantastic stuff:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svhXSjo5oPk
Biden is a war criminal.I wish we were working harder to end this conflict instead of encouraging Ukraine to keep fighting, to the last Ukrainian. And yeah, NATO made some bad moves. I think it should have asked Russia to join back when that was being discussed.
That said, claiming Biden is a war criminal is overboard, as is giving the Soviet Union all the credit for winning World War II. And there aren't a lot of people in Taiwan who would agree with his views on the future of their country.
"USA bad, China and Russia good," is pretty simplistic. It's not that easy.
Supply-Side / Trickle-Down Truss gone faster than a head of lettuce.
If only that had been the case for Great Repub Recession Reagan, Great Repub Recession Bush2 and Great Repub Recession Trump.
No way were Brits stupid enough to fall for that economy-destroying and job-destroying Reaganomics (actually Coolidge / Hoovernomics) con again. Unlike Repub voters and wiggly stealth Repub Bothsiders / Neithersiders in the USA. No, they have shown themselves to be that stupid over and over again.
With every vote for a Repub, they're going to show the world how stupid they are again next month:
That Time Fox Business Larry Kudlow Touted Liz Truss Terrific Economic Plan, Compared It to Kevin McCarthys (Video)
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/time-fox-business-larry-kudlow-204414777.html
Could it actual be, that the Brits have finally wised-up? Perhaps the situation they now see themselves in, after a conservative right-wing Brexit, has given them a sense of perspective, when it comes to the socio-eco neoliberal lies, misinformation and misconceptions put forth on the right.
Round of applause for the Brits! Next up, Repubs!
For all you football fans, out there keeping score:
Head of Lettuce 1, Liz Truss (right-wing tickle-down economics) 0 (....kkkk!)
Head of Lettuce 1, Liz Truss (right-wing tickle-down economics) 0 (....kkkk!)Truss? Hahahaha!
Could it actual be, that the Brits have finally wised-up? Perhaps the situation they now see themselves in, after a conservative right-wing Brexit, has given them a sense of perspective, when it comes to the socio-eco neoliberal lies, misinformation and misconceptions put forth on the right.
Round of applause for the Brits! Next up, Repubs!
For all you football fans, out there keeping score:
Head of Lettuce 1, Liz Truss (right-wing tickle-down economics) 0 (....kkkk!)Or could it be the Brits are stupid. Perhaps she shouldn't have proposed cutting taxes while inflation was out of control. But Liz Truss had the makings of the greatest British Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher. Unfortunately Truss, a classical and social liberal like Gary Johnson, only had the support of a small % of the population. Truss was too smart for her own good, and didn't play the game.
Verbal intelligence is correlated with socially and economically liberal beliefs
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0160289614000373
What are the things you like the most about gay sex? That's assuming you're heterosexual.
That's like what you're asking me. I'm a small government libertarian who would prefer that, to the extent it makes sense, my local and state governments run government and exercise the power of the purse. And leave our inefficient and wasteful federal government to deal with what's left. And presumably you're asking me to research and highlight big government programs, budget busters, Ponzi schemes, and ticking time bombs. Or at least that's what you've chosen to bring to our attention. Except for the Civil Rights Act, which was passed with more Republican than Democrat votes.
A FULLY FUNDED, efficient health care and retirement program run by the federal government could make sense. It would be transportable when someone changes jobs or moves to another state. It would greatly lower health care costs, from the current, ridiculous level of 18% of GDP, while providing better outcomes, comparable to other developed countries. It would make it where people were setting side enough while they're working so that they have a livable income after they retire..And just like Ground Hog Day, you make a ridiculous Bothsider claim that dismisses multiple great Dem achievements and elevates Repub nothingness and have got absolutely nothing to back it up or meet my simple challenge.
I cited just 4 important pieces of healthcare-related legislation passed when Dems held the White House and a Majority in both Houses of Congress. To be fair to your ridiculous "50 - 50" claim I should have asked you and anybody else here to cite four such legislations passed when Repubs were in the same position. Instead, I made it exceedingly easy by just asking for one.
But you can't even cite one, right?
Then why not just admit that instead of giving us a short list of some of your favorite movies?
I agree with you about single payer and the wisdom of cutting the role of the insurance companies.
Universal health care run through the government is a whole different ball of wax. I'm not saying it's not worth doing. If we could reduce costs and raise quality so we're anywhere close to the same league as, say Singapore (the best out there IMHO), we'd be crazy not to.
I totally disagree with you about raising taxes being B.S. I don't think Democratic politicians would be willing to raise taxes or payroll contributions on the middle class enough to make government run universal health care happen. Democrats seem intent on getting the top 1% to pay for all this, and the top 1%, or even individuals and couples making over $200,000 a year, don't have enough money.
What makes the problem worse, as you touch on above ($12,000 per capita cost), is that we spend a ridiculous amount of money on health care compared to everywhere else. And outcomes are worse than most developed countries.
Here are some numbers from 2019, the latest year for which IRS statistics are available.
https://www.irs.gov/statistics/soi-tax-stats-individual-statistical-tables-by-size-of-adjusted-gross-income..We currently spend $4 T per year on healthcare. That's an "all in" cost and covers everything that Medicare and Medicaid pay, everything every insurance company pays, everybody's out-of-pocket costs (meds, co-pays, etc.), everything that's donated, etc. So if single-payer costs less, then it is simply a matter of reallocating what we, as citizens, already pay.
FDR got us into this healthcare mess with his WWII policy which was probably OK for the time but it should have been scrapped as soon as the war was over.
BY the way, the US did just fine under Ike when the top income tax rate was 91%.
And this is after the phony "deficit hawks" Repub Party Icon Donald J. Trump increased the deficit by Hundreds of Billions of Dollars every single year of his failed so-called presidency with virtually nothing to show for it.
That was every year even before his historically disastrous economic decisions going back to at least 2018 contributed more to producing Trump's Pandemic and all of its horrific death, economic, global supply-chain and inflation results than any other person on the Planet.
Budget deficit cut in half for biggest drop ever amid Covid spending declines
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/21/us-budget-deficit-cut-in-half-for-biggest-decrease-ever-amid-covid-spending-declines.html?__source=androidappshare
The U.S. budget deficit was sliced in half for fiscal 2022, the biggest drop in history following two years of huge Covid-related spending.
The shortfall declined to $1.375 trillion, compared to the 2021 deficit of $2.776 trillion. Revenue posted easily the highest one-year total on record.
The deficit decline would have been steeper had it not been for the Biden administrations student loan forgiveness program.LOL. Don't you just love that typically pro Repub Mainstream Media final comment there?
How about "The deficit would not have been jacked up by Trillions in the first place had the Repub former guy not worked so hard and lied so much to make sure he produced Trump's Pandemic and all of its death and economic destruction" instead?
Just to be more accurate and less pro Repub during this election time, I mean.
... But Liz Truss had the makings of the greatest British Prime Minister since Margaret Thatcher. ... Truss was too smart for her own good, and didn't play the game.
Liz Truss, give her credit, she knows when to quit, like good sport. She was a "lame duck" prime minister and knew when to step down, and NOT double-down (unlike some of her US Repub counterparts). Good poker players are smart enough to know "when to fold-em", know "when to run". Oh, she played the game, better than you think.
She tried to put a brave face on a bad situation, but based upon such poor economic decision making, in face of UK inflation 10% year over year. The outlook for any such greatest, was most definitely projected in the downward direction, relegated to the basement of British politics. So best cut bait, which she did.
The silver lining is, while not "projected greatness" or even a good or decent PM for that matter, she will be remembered and go-down-in infamy, as an epic unprecedented failure in British PM history. Just 44-days, in office.
Boris Johnson reveals he will seek return to Number 10, saying: 'I'm going to do it'
https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-reveals-he-will-seek-return-to-number-10-saying-im-going-to-do-it-12725941
But hold on just a minute, maybe I spoke too soon. Apparently, the desperate and pathetic political party that is the UK Conservatives, are looking to have Boris Johnson, return to office.
So maybe there's hope for Liz Truss, after all? Perhaps when Boris Johnson, makes one of his stellar gaffes, they'll drag her out of the basement, to "revive" those all-inspiring, economic saving, tax-cuts for the rich policies.
Liz Truss, give her credit, she knows when to quit, like good sport. She was a "lame duck" prime minister and knew when to step down, and NOT double-down (unlike some of her US Repub counterparts). Good poker players are smart enough to know "when to fold-em", know "when to run". Oh, she played the game, better than you think.
She tried to put a brave face on a bad situation, but based upon such poor economic decision making, in face of UK inflation 10% year over year. The outlook for any such greatest, was most definitely projected in the downward direction, relegated to the basement of British politics. So best cut bait, which she did.
The silver lining is, while not "projected greatness" or even a good or decent PM for that matter, she will be remembered and go-down-in infamy, as an epic unprecedented failure in British PM history. Just 44-days, in office.
Boris Johnson reveals he will seek return to Number 10, saying: 'I'm going to do it'
https://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnson-reveals-he-will-seek-return-to-number-10-saying-im-going-to-do-it-12725941
But hold on just a minute, maybe I spoke too soon. Apparently, the desperate and pathetic political party that is the UK Conservatives, are looking to have Boris Johnson, return to office.
So maybe there's hope for Liz Truss, after all? Perhaps when Boris Johnson, makes one of his stellar gaffes, they'll drag her out of the basement, to "revive" those all-inspiring, economic saving, tax-cuts for the rich policies.Yes, from a political perspective, it was the tax cut that nuked her. But from the perspective of the effect on the markets, the energy subsidies Truss proposed, 100 billion pounds over 2 years, were as important. The combined fiscal stimulus gave markets a scare, as it would have been likely to exacerbate inflation. And UK YoY CPI was already 10.1%. As a result, British interest rates went up and the value of the pound went down.
Biden etal got away with a much larger stimulus in 2021, the 1. 9 trillion American Rescue Plan. I believe this represented a much large stimulus as a % of GDP than what any other decent sized country did in 2021. But at the time the bill was passed, CPI inflation was only 1. 7%. And the dollar is the world's reserve currency. So you didn't see much of an effect on the dollar or interest rates. It did however supercharge inflation, well before other developed countries were suffering from higher prices, and the CPI YoY rate was up to 5. 4% by June, 2021.
We currently spend $4 T per year on healthcare. That's an "all in" cost and covers everything that Medicare and Medicaid pay, everything every insurance company pays, everybody's out-of-pocket costs (meds, co-pays, etc.), everything that's donated, etc. So if single-payer costs less, then it is simply a matter of reallocating what we, as citizens, already pay.
FDR got us into this healthcare mess with his WWII policy which was probably OK for the time but it should have been scrapped as soon as the war was over.
BY the way, the US did just fine under Ike when the top income tax rate was 91%.Please note I agreed with you about single payer. I was addressing universal health care provided by government. If you look at the IRS tables I linked to, and consider the revenue maximizing tax rate, you shouldn't want to argue with me.
The revenue maximizing income tax rate is way below 91%, and the optimum rate for efficiency is lower still. This is a good review.
https://www.cato.org/cato-journal/fall-2019/optimal-top-tax-rates-review-critique
And this is after the phony "deficit hawks" Repub Party Icon Donald J. Trump increased the deficit by Hundreds of Billions of Dollars every single year of his failed so-called presidency with virtually nothing to show for it.
That was every year even before his historically disastrous economic decisions going back to at least 2018 contributed more to producing Trump's Pandemic and all of its horrific death, economic, global supply-chain and inflation results than any other person on the Planet.
Budget deficit cut in half for biggest drop ever amid Covid spending declines
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/10/21/us-budget-deficit-cut-in-half-for-biggest-decrease-ever-amid-covid-spending-declines.html?__source=androidappshare
LOL. Don't you just love that typically pro Repub Mainstream Media final comment there?
How about "The deficit would not have been jacked up by Trillions in the first place had the Repub former guy not worked so hard and lied so much to make sure he produced Trump's Pandemic and all of its death and economic destruction" instead?
Just to be more accurate and less pro Repub during this election time, I mean.Let's say you start eating like a pig and gain 100 pounds. Then you go on a diet and lose 50. Well then, by damn, you've lost 50 pounds! Even though you ended up 50 pounds heavier.
This is what Biden et al are bragging about. The deficit in fiscal 2021 according to your source was $2.776 trillion. That's 14% of GDP! Incredibly high considering the economy was on the mend from COVID. Why was it so high? Well, you can chalk a lot of it up to the $1. 9 trillion American Rescue Plan, passed in March, 2021 without a single Republican vote. And then there was the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Plan, which a minority of Republicans voted for.
So this year the deficit is down about $1.4 trillion, to $1.375 trillion. Amazing! The $1.375 trillion is still 6.5% of GDP. Except for periods around recessions and World War II, that's the worst we've had in at least the last 100 years. Thank you Democrats for your wise stewardship of our economy in 2022!
Biden and a Democratic Congress have been providing tons of fiscal stimulus during the highest inflationary period in the last 40 years. How much sense does that make?
And you can't blame it on the Republican tax cuts. Federal revenues are running around 19.6% of GDP, which is close to the highest ever.
This $1. 4 trillion deficit reduction is almost as laughable as Biden taking credit for lower gasoline prices, when his administration's policies have if anything pushed gas prices up. With one exception. Running down our Strategic Petroleum Reserve helped. But at what cost to our energy security?
Let's say you start eating like a pig and gain 100 pounds. Then you go on a diet and lose 50. Well then, by damn, you've lost 50 pounds! Even though you ended up 50 pounds heavier.
This is what Biden et al are bragging about. The deficit in fiscal 2021 according to your source was $2.776 trillion. That's 14% of GDP! Incredibly high considering the economy was on the mend from COVID. Why was it so high? Well, you can chalk a lot of it up to the $1. 9 trillion American Rescue Plan, passed in March, 2021 without a single Republican vote. And then there was the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Plan, which a minority of Republicans voted for.
So this year the deficit is down about $1.4 trillion, to $1.375 trillion. Amazing! The $1.375 trillion is still 6.5% of GDP. Except for periods around recessions and World War II, that's the worst we've had in at least the last 100 years. Thank you Democrats for your wise stewardship of our economy in 2022!
Biden and a Democratic Congress have been providing tons of fiscal stimulus during the highest inflationary period in the last 40 years. How much sense does that make?
And you can't blame it on the Republican tax cuts. Federal revenues are running around 19.6% of GDP, which is close to the highest ever.
This $1. 4 trillion deficit reduction is almost as laughable as Biden taking credit for lower gasoline prices, when his administration's policies have if anything pushed gas prices up. With one exception. Running down our Strategic Petroleum Reserve helped. But at what cost to our energy security?Let's say a pack of Repub lies and classic Repub horrific economic decisions and stewardship nails your feet to the floor, straps your hands behind your back, shoves a funnel down your gullet and force feeds you 100 pounds of crap.
Yeah, I appreciate any way Biden and the Dems were able to put a stop to that and pull 50 pounds of that Repub crap out of the system. Especially since there is no historic evidence that Repubs would not have increased it to 200 - 300 pounds of crap by now had Biden and his Dems not come to the American Rescue.
Thanks again Joe, Nancy, et al.
It isn't bad enough that Mainstream Media help Repubs win elections by spinning attention away from the facts that Repubs have produced all of the major economic downturns of the past 100 years, none of the economic boom times, have likely by now wiped out more American private sector jobs than they created since the Repub Party was invented in 1858, always produce conditions that skyrocket the debt and deficit with virtually nothing of material value to show for it, have not produced one single meaningful and now revered legislation whenever they had total control of the White House and Both Houses of Congress to do so, are so Pro Crime almost all of the highest Crime rate states are Repub Red, now see their primary if not only goal is to overthrow American democracy by any means necessary, might as well defund, attack and kill as many cops as they can along the way and weaken democracies and Western Democratic Alliances around the world.
Now Mainsteam Media are trying to help Repubs win elections by trying to spin that the ultimate Big Government Repub goal of outlawing sex for pleasure and restricting sex for the purpose of procreation only is "mainstream" and what most Americans want:
Right-wing media call Democrats extreme on abortion while mainstream media suggest their positions are out of touch
https://www.mediamatters.org/
Mainstream outlets suggest that Democrats are out of step with the publics views on abortion
- MSNBC host Joe Scarborough attempted to frame Sen. Lindsey Grahams (R-SC) proposed 15-week national abortion ban as a compromise. During his Morning Joe program, Scarborough asserted that such a ban was middle ground of the abortion debate and falsely claimed that 15 weeks is where most Americans are. In reality, just 39% of Americans expressed support for a 15-week national ban.
- Morning Joe co-host Willie Geist suggested polling shows that Democrats who support abortion without limits have an extreme position. According to Gallup, 35% of Americans support legal abortion under any circumstances. Geist also repeatedly asked White House senior adviser Keisha Lance Bottoms what abortion limits, if any, Biden supports.
- CNN contributor and former adviser to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) Scott Jennings dismissed claims that Georgia Republican Senate nominee Herschel Walker paid for an abortion, averting attention to Sen. Raphael Warnocks abortion position. Jennings said, There are a lot of Republicans out there saying in a worst case scenario it is true, and Herschel Walker did pay for an abortion. You know what, Raphael Warnock wants to pay for all of them and up to the moment of birth. He accused Warnock of voting for unlimited abortion access and falsely claimed the Womens Health Protection Act absolutely had no limits on access to abortion, even though the act allows for post-viability restrictions except in cases of detrimental health risks to the pregnant person.
- During an interview with Manchin, Scarborough implied that Democrats couldnt pass a bill codifying Roe because they went far beyond simple protections. Scarborough asked Manchin, Why couldn't they (Democrats) just pass a simple bill that would codify Roe and keep it at that instead of going so far beyond that? Scarborough also asserted that more expansive abortion protections arent where America is.
- (and more)
Let's say a pack of Repub lies and classic Repub horrific economic decisions and stewardship nails your feet to the floor, straps your hands behind your back, shoves a funnel down your gullet and force feeds you 100 pounds of crap.
Yeah, I appreciate any way Biden and the Dems were able to put a stop to that and pull 50 pounds of that Repub crap out of the system. Especially since there is no historic evidence that Repubs would not have increased it to 200 - 300 pounds of crap by now had Biden and his Dems not come to the American Rescue.
Thanks again Joe, Nancy, et al.Let's say a pack of Dem lies and classic Dem horrific economic decisions and stewardship nails your feet to the floor, straps your hands behind your back, shoves a funnel down your gullet and force feeds you 100 pounds of crap.
Yeah, I appreciate any way Sinema and Manchin and the Repubs were able to put a stop to that and pull 50 pounds of that Dem crap out of the system. Especially since there is no historic evidence that Dems would not have increased it to 200 - 300 pounds of crap by now had Manchin, Sinema, McConnell and his Repubs not come to the American Rescue.
Thanks again Mitch, Kyrsten, Joe M. , et al.
It isn't bad enough that Mainstream Media help Repubs win elections by spinning attention away from the facts that Repubs have produced all of the major economic downturns of the past 100 years, none of the economic boom times, have likely by now wiped out more American private sector jobs than they created since the Repub Party was invented in 1858, always produce conditions that skyrocket the debt and deficit with virtually nothing of material value to show for it, have not produced one single meaningful and now revered legislation whenever they had total control of the White House and Both Houses of Congress to do so, are so Pro Crime almost all of the highest Crime rate states are Repub Red, now see their primary if not only goal is to overthrow American democracy by any means necessary, might as well defund, attack and kill as many cops as they can along the way and weaken democracies and Western Democratic Alliances around the world.
Now Mainsteam Media are trying to help Repubs win elections by trying to spin that the ultimate Big Government Repub goal of outlawing sex for pleasure and restricting sex for the purpose of procreation only is "mainstream" and what most Americans want:
Right-wing media call Democrats extreme on abortion while mainstream media suggest their positions are out of touch
https://www.mediamatters.org/The Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade. The majority of Americans didn't want that to happen. For many pro choice voters, this is THE most important political issue.
Donald Trump is still heavily involved in the political process, and incredibly he still has the wool pulled over the eyes of the majority of Republican voters.
Big corporate mainstream and social media have a bias in favor of the Democratic Party. The only notable exceptions are Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post, all controlled by Rupert Murdoch.
Given the preceding I would have thought the Republicans would get blown out big time this November. But it's not turning out that way. The Republicans probably will win the House. The punters on predictit.org are giving the Republicans a 65% probability of controlling the Senate, and Real Clear Politics, based on adjusted polling data, is giving the Republicans the edge too.
The rest of America apparently is upset with the Democratic Party, and doesn't idolize its politicians as much as you do.
We currently spend $4 T per year on healthcare. That's an "all in" cost and covers everything that Medicare and Medicaid pay, everything every insurance company pays, everybody's out-of-pocket costs (meds, co-pays, etc.), everything that's donated, etc. So if single-payer costs less, then it is simply a matter of reallocating what we, as citizens, already pay.
FDR got us into this healthcare mess with his WWII policy which was probably OK for the time but it should have been scrapped as soon as the war was over.
BY the way, the US did just fine under Ike when the top income tax rate was 91%.One other comment. I ran across this piece.
https://www.crfb.org/papers/choices-financing-medicare-all
The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget is left of center, and a go to source for Democratic politicians and staff. They've looked at options for financing Medicare for All. They came up with these options.
1. Impose a 32% payroll tax.
2. Establish a 25% income surtax on adjusted gross income.
3. Enact a 42% value added tax (VAT).
4. Require a mandatory public premium of $20,000 per household, or $32,000 if we fold Medicare, Medicaid and CHIP into the new system.
5. More than double all individual and corporate income tax rates.
6. Reduce non-health federal spending by 80%.
7. More than double the national debt to 203 percent of the economy.
8. Impose impossibly high taxes on high earners, corporations and the financial sector. ("Impossibly" is their word, not mine).
9. Enact a combination of approaches.
I think that "8", the tax on high earners, corporations and the financial sector, is the only solution that would be palatable to a majority of Democrat Senators and Congressmen. The CRFB piece estimates that raising the top two individual and pass-through rates to 70% would raise about $2 trillion out of the $30 trillion total ten year cost of Medicare for All. So that's a drop in the bucket. And even that is debatable. The piece by Reynolds that I linked to in my last post directed to you says that 20 out of 28 economists asked whether they thought "raising the top federal marginal rate on earned personal income to 70% would raise substantially more revenue without lowering economic activity" said "no".
To make this work, we've somehow got to get health care costs down, ideally while improving outcomes produced by the system. See this chart, which ranks health care costs as a % of GDP by country.
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/rankings/health_spending_as_percent_of_gdp/
The USA Figure actually went up to 20% of GDP in 2020, and now is around 18%. In the table, the next highest developed country is Germany, at 11.7%.
The goals should be universal coverage at reasonable cost and with better outcomes than we have now. If we could go down to the Singapore level, 4.08% of GDP, or the Irish level of 6.7%, that would be very doable. Life expectancy is 84 years in Singapore and 83 years in Ireland, compared to 79 years in the USA. Unfortunately, like I said before, I don't believe the politicians in either party are going to make this happen. You've GOT to get the cost down, a lot, to fix the system.
The Supreme Court overturned Roe versus Wade. The majority of Americans didn't want that to happen. For many pro choice voters, this is THE most important political issue.
Donald Trump is still heavily involved in the political process, and incredibly he still has the wool pulled over the eyes of the majority of Republican voters.
Big corporate mainstream and social media have a bias in favor of the Democratic Party. The only notable exceptions are Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post, all controlled by Rupert Murdoch.
Given the preceding I would have thought the Republicans would get blown out big time this November. But it's not turning out that way. The Republicans probably will win the House. The punters on predictit.org are giving the Republicans a 65% probability of controlling the Senate, and Real Clear Politics, based on adjusted polling data, is giving the Republicans the edge too.
The rest of America apparently is upset with the Democratic Party, and doesn't idolize its politicians as much as you do.What would be the reason and evidence for your above highlighted opinion?
I don't idolize any politicians. I merely appreciate any pols who don't promote and produce the crap results we get whenever Repubs are in control and get their way. My god. Based on their repeated record of results for almost 100 years, who wouldn't other than fierce enemies of America?
Let's say a pack of Dem lies and classic Dem horrific economic decisions and stewardship nails your feet to the floor, straps your hands behind your back, shoves a funnel down your gullet and force feeds you 100 pounds of crap.
Yeah, I appreciate any way Sinema and Manchin and the Repubs were able to put a stop to that and pull 50 pounds of that Dem crap out of the system. Especially since there is no historic evidence that Dems would not have increased it to 200 - 300 pounds of crap by now had Manchin, Sinema, McConnell and his Repubs not come to the American Rescue.
Thanks again Mitch, Kyrsten, Joe M. , et al.Yeah, but that didn't happen.
Biden was handed that 100 pounds of stuffed crap heading for 200 - 300 pounds of it if not more ASAP that had to be dealt with.
As did FDR, Clinton and Obama.
But not as Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush2 or Trump did.
See the difference there?
Big corporate mainstream and social media have a bias in favor of the Democratic Party. The only notable exceptions are Fox News, the Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post, all controlled by Rupert Murdoch.Exhibit #1.
Sinclair Broadcast Group, Inc. (SBG) is . . . the second-largest television station operator in the United States by number of stations (after Nexstar Media Group), owning or operating a total of 193 stations across the country in over 100 markets (covering 40% of American households) . . . and is the largest owner of stations affiliated with Fox, NBC, CBS, ABC, MyNetworkTV, and The CW. Sinclair also owns four digital multicast networks (Comet, Charge!, Stadium, and ***), sports-oriented cable networks (Tennis Channel and Bally Sports Regional Networks), and a streaming service (Stirr). On June 2, 2021, it was announced that Sinclair is a Fortune 500 company, having annual revenues of $5.9 billion in 2020.
A 2019 study in the American Political Science Review found that "stations bought by Sinclair reduce coverage of local politics, increase national coverage and move the ideological tone of coverage in a conservative direction relative to other stations operating in the same market." The company has been criticized by journalists and media analysts for requiring its stations to broadcast packaged video segments and its news anchors to read prepared scripts that contain pro-Trump editorial content, including warnings about purported "fake news" in mainstream media, while Trump has tweeted support for watching Sinclair over CNN and NBC.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinclair_Broadcast_Group#text=Headquartered%20 in%20 the%20 Baltimore%20 suburb,40%25%20 of%20 American%20 households)%2 see.
Exhibit #2.
At least 15 million Americans every week tune into one of the top 15 talk radio programs. They are not monolithically conservative, but they are overwhelmingly so. A dozen of the top 15 shows feature conservative or libertarian hosts with devoted followings like Rush Limbaughs Dittoheads or Michael Savages Savage Nation and only one leans left.Talk Radio Is Turning Millions of Americans Into Conservatives.
The medium is at the heart of Trumpism.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/opinion/talk-radio-conservatives-trumpism.html
So -- I don't know -- please?
Yeah, but that didn't happen.
Biden was handed that 100 pounds of stuffed crap heading for 200 - 300 pounds of it if not more ASAP that had to be dealt with.
As did FDR, Clinton and Obama.
But not as Eisenhower, Nixon, Bush2 or Trump did.
See the difference there?Still crowing daily with the same ole false dichotomy from your budget retirement haven (Thailand) I see. The 50's was a golden age for the working man and expansion of middle America, in spite of a few mild recessions, much of which related to the end of the Korean War. It was also an era of very high presidential approval ratings, balanced budgets, and new civil rights legislation. And you've never provided any satisfactory rebuttals to the historical facts and analysis from this historian.
https://millercenter.org/president/eisenhower/domestic-affairs
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.4 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.