American Politics [Archive] - Page 51

Tiny 12

06-15-23, 19:27

If they did a fraction of what the OTTIASAFG is charged with, I would definitely consider them guilty.

See, that's the difference between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans consider the OTTIASAFG innocent but any Democrat charged with the same thing they would consider to be guilty. Democrats, on the other hand, would consider anybody who did even a fraction of what the OTTIASAFG is charged to be guilty.

Everybody in the US has an opinion on whether or not the OTTIASAFG is guilty or innocent of some or all of the charges. The problem, though, is that most Republicans say that the OTTIASAFG is innocent of the charges but if Obama or Biden had been accused of doing the same thing, they would be guilty. Most Democrats consider the OTTIASAFG to be guilty of some or all of the charges but if Biden or Obama or any other Democrat was accused of doing the same thing as the OTTIASAFG, Obama or Biden would also be guilty.First, apologies. I phrased the question poorly, partly because I don't know what OTTIASAFG means. I meant to ask if you'd jail all three if they did what Trump did at Mar a Lago, with the documents.

I don't believe Trump loving Republicans are any more or less hypocritical than Progressive Democrats. Both want two sets of rules, one for Democrats and one for Republicans.

I wouldn't throw Trump, Clinton or Biden in jail, but then I might not vote to convict Julian Assange either if I figured they were going to lock him up for 20 years. Yeah, what Trump did in hiding documents and making false statements was more problematic. But Elvis has an excellent point. Maybe you do convict them all. Pence and Biden get misdemeanors and several hundred dollar fines. Hillary gets a ninety day probated sentence, to serve as deterrence to others against hubris and stupidity. And Trump gets several months at Mar a Lago with an ankle bracelet. That might be fair.

Tiny 12

06-15-23, 19:38

You mean this classic Repub move to, among other things, step in front of a trend to take credit for what had already been done by the Dem before him?

FACT CHECK: Trump's Claims On NATO Spending
July 11, 2018

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/11/628137185/fact-check-trumps-claims-on-nato-spending

And this showy bit of phony, empty political theater that accomplished nothing on behalf of America or our allies but managed, mysteriously, to still embolden and strenthened Russia's leverage in Europe?

Trump Imposes Sanctions To Stop Nord Stream 2 But Its Too late

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davekeating/2019/12/21/trump-imposes-sanctions-to-stop-nord-stream-2--but-its-too-late/

That's irrelevant. The issue is whether Trump was taking actions contrary to the best interests of Putin, not whether they succeeded. I actually disagreed with Trump's sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and agreed with Biden's move to lift them.

That said, I can find just as many links, that tell a completely different story from yours.

Trump blocks Putins pipeline with US sanctions
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/us-sanctions-block-putins-pipeline/

The Atlantic Council article says the pipeline was weeks away from completion when the US imposed sanctions, on December 20, 2019. And it still hadn't been completed when Biden waived sanctions in May of 2021:

U.S. waives sanctions on Nord Stream 2 as Biden seeks to mend Europe ties
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-waive-sanctions-firm-ceo-behind-russias-nord-stream-2-pipeline-source-2021-05-19/

And as to NATO spending,

NATO Members Ramp Up Defense Spending After Pressure From Trump
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-16/nato-members-ramp-up-defense-spending-after-pressure-from-trump

NATO Allies Now Spend $50 Billion More on Defense Than in 2016
https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/nato-allies-now-spend-50-billion-more-defense-2016

In gesture to Trump, US allies close to deal to pay more for NATO running costs
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-summit-defence-budget/in-gesture-to-trump-us-allies-close-to-deal-to-pay-more-for-nato-running-costs-idUSKBN1Y01WY

Tiny 12

06-15-23, 19:56

I am not talking about the policies of Sanders, Tiny but his character. Yes, some of his policies are insane and would lead us off a cliff. Others of them are not as kooky as you might think, but my point was I do not believe Sanders is a narcissist unlike so many others.Point well taken Elvis. I recall Sanders telling people their health care would be worse under his socialized medicine plan, and their taxes would go up to pay for it. I don't think he's a narcissist, and he doesn't intentionally tell as many lies as your average politician.

PVMonger

06-15-23, 22:52

First, apologies. I phrased the question poorly, partly because I don't know what OTTIASAFG means. I meant to ask if you'd jail all three if they did what Trump did at Mar a Lago, with the documents.

I don't believe Trump loving Republicans are any more or less hypocritical than Progressive Democrats. Both want two sets of rules, one for Democrats and one for Republicans.

I wouldn't throw Trump, Clinton or Biden in jail, but then I might not vote to convict Julian Assange either if I figured they were going to lock him up for 20 years. Yeah, what Trump did in hiding documents and making false statements was more problematic. But Elvis has an excellent point. Maybe you do convict them all. Pence and Biden get misdemeanors and several hundred dollar fines. Hillary gets a ninety day probated sentence, to serve as deterrence to others against hubris and stupidity. And Trump gets several months at Mar a Lago with an ankle bracelet. That might be fair.FYI, I answered your question but the response hasn't shown up yet. But, to reiterate, if any one of them had done a fraction of what the OTTIASAFG has been charged with, I would consider them guilty. Since sentencing guidelines have an impact on the sentence, I can't control that phase. But it I were a prosecutor, I would push for whatever the maximum sentence is. Plus, I would request that the sentences run consecutively.

And, for the record, OTTIASAFG stands for one-term, twice-impeached, adjudicated-sexual-assaulter, former guy.

PVMonger

06-15-23, 23:03

Xpartan

06-15-23, 23:13

You didn't exactly answer the question I intended to pose, which was would you put them in jail for the confidential documents. You provided a much broader answer. I'm no lawyer, but would suspect the alternate sets of electors and pressure on people like Raffensperger, Pence and Rusty Bowers are much more problematic than the confidential documents at Mar a Lago.

Do I think Trump grabbed the documents to give to Russia? No. I believe it's some combination of the following,

1. He was too lazy to go through the boxes and pull out confidential documents, to turn over to the DOJ. And also documents of whatsoever nature that would reflect badly on him or provide evidence for a prosecution totally unrelated to his record keeping. If you read the indictment you'll see he gave a nonverbal cue to his attorney to pluck out any problematic documents instead of turning them over to the DOJ. He theoretically could have delegated the work. But what if there were potentially incriminating documents, for example related to his post election shenanigans, in the boxes?

2. He's a narcissist and doesn't believe the rules apply to him. Most likely he's gotten away with this kind of behavior during his business career and it hadn't previously come back to haunt him.

3. He thought it would be nice to have the mementos. Or to show them off.

4. He believes some of the documents have value, and would like to sell them someday or pass them onto his grandkids. Or put them in a Donald Trump theme park somewhere near Orlando. OK, so far so good.

As to your allegation, it's unlikely in my opinion that he was a Russian plant. He's actually a Democratic Party plant, the Democrat's best friend. He almost singlehandedly lost the last three elections for the Republicans, although they did manage to eke out a small majority in the House in 2022. He was a card carrying member of the Democratic Party, at which time he favored a Bernie Sanders wealth tax, had no problem with partial birth abortion, and contributed generously to some Democratic candidates' campaigns. I'm sure you don't really mean that. You can't possibly believe he was a Democratic Party plant. He left the Democrats because he knew they wouldn't let him run amok. Did he help the Democrats on his way out? Sure, but that's because he doesn't have an ideology. If the Republicans weren't complete and utter cowards, they would've moved heaven and earth to stop him.

Trump notoriously does not like having people take notes. He also doesn't write emails or send texts. So I'm not sure his behavior with Putin was that out of the ordinary. I do believe he was trying to build a rapport and trust with Putin and thought not having his interpreter around might help. He's not the best example, but Nixon was known to do this. And there are many instances when a USA president took a private walk in the rose garden or wherever with another foreign leader. I think this approach, relationship building, is a great idea. Obama, Hillary Clinton and Biden were too sanctimonious and morally arrogant to do the same thing with people like Putin, Ji and Kim.Um, no, Putin was the only non-English speaking world leader Trump talked to without an interpreter (at least, I've never heard about any other occasions). And to add insult to injury, he's our main adversary. All of this is very out of the ordinary, methinks.

And yes, if you believe scum sucking neocon John Bolton, Trump asked Ji to help him in his election. If you believe that, then you should also believe it's very possible Trump asked Putin for help in the 2020 election and so didn't want a U.S. interpreter around. I do believe Trump, like Biden, puts his own interests above the country's. Thank you.

Regardless, in my opinion Trump did not go easy on Russia, as evidenced by his pressure on NATO members to spend more on defense, and his sanctions on Nord Stream 2.By the time he imposed the sanctions on NS2 they were irrelevant. His pressure on NATO members amounted to nothing more than his attempts to destroy the alliance. That would've been Putin's wet dream. Four more years in office and he would've succeeded.

Trump Discussed Pulling USA From NATO, Aides Say Amid New Concerns Over Russia.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/14/us/politics/nato-president-trump.html

Of course, Trump had to keep some appearances. It's like his bombing a Syrian base -- after telling the Russians the coordinates, LOL.

When the former president Trump called Putin's invasion of Ukraine "genius" was he still trying to "build rapport"?

I think not.

Which brings us back to the classified documents and your pointers. Russia would probably pay good money for some of them, don't you think?

And do you know for sure they haven't?

I don't.

EihTooms

06-16-23, 02:10

That's irrelevant. The issue is whether Trump was taking actions contrary to the best interests of Putin, not whether they succeeded. I actually disagreed with Trump's sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, and agreed with Biden's move to lift them.

That said, I can find just as many links, that tell a completely different story from yours.

Trump blocks Putins pipeline with US sanctions
https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/ukrainealert/us-sanctions-block-putins-pipeline/

The Atlantic Council article says the pipeline was weeks away from completion when the US imposed sanctions, on December 20, 2019. And it still hadn't been completed when Biden waived sanctions in May of 2021:

U.S. waives sanctions on Nord Stream 2 as Biden seeks to mend Europe ties
https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/us-waive-sanctions-firm-ceo-behind-russias-nord-stream-2-pipeline-source-2021-05-19/

And as to NATO spending,

NATO Members Ramp Up Defense Spending After Pressure From Trump
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-03-16/nato-members-ramp-up-defense-spending-after-pressure-from-trump

NATO Allies Now Spend $50 Billion More on Defense Than in 2016
https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/nato-allies-now-spend-50-billion-more-defense-2016

In gesture to Trump, US allies close to deal to pay more for NATO running costs
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-nato-summit-defence-budget/in-gesture-to-trump-us-allies-close-to-deal-to-pay-more-for-nato-running-costs-idUSKBN1Y01WYYour Atlantic Council link repeats the same "Trump did too little too late, so the Russians will complete it anyway" point my links made. I would say delaying any response for months and only doing too little too late to change the outcome is pretty much the definition of an empty political show while serving Putin's interests.

And none of your NATO funding links refute the reality that the increase in their contribution was pushed for and began before Trump became so-called president. Nothing new happened after he made a speech about it. That trend had already been set in motion by Obama.

Elvis 2008

06-16-23, 03:25

You are reading far too much into my question and attributing to me things I did not say. I used the word consider in my question, which was "If Biden or Obama or Hillary had done the things that the OTTIASAFG is charged with, would you consider them to be guilty? A simple "yes" or "no" will be sufficient. "..No, you and Tooms are brain dead when it comes to the law. I do not know what Obama did but vote to indict Hilary and Biden? Fuck yeah! Find them guilty before a trial? No, I am not a douche. Unlike you and Tooms, I do not consider people guilty before a trial.

As far as all your other dumb ranting on what Trump may have done, that has NOTHING to do with an indictment. If he is found guilty and if what he does is worse than the others, then you sentence him more harshly.

But what else is new? The only thing you Democratic douches think is anyone who votes Republican should be locked up.

JustTK

06-16-23, 14:05

Superb discussion on why Ivermectin and natural immunity do not work.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=umLgGcmm7ac

Answer. Bcos they do work but they are not owned by Big Pharma.

EihTooms

06-16-23, 14:20

Tiny 12

06-16-23, 16:32

1. My political leaning is to vote for the member of the Party that legislated and produced every major economic expansion and historic job gains and none of the Great Depressions, Great Recessions and Massive Jobs Losses since at least the late 1920's and avoid voting in any way that might help a member of the party that has legislated and produced the exact opposite of those positive results during the same timeframe. Consequently, I have voted for Dems and NO Repubs in every election since I knew what the fuck I was doing with my vote, essentially since the middle of Reagan's 1st term as so-called potus.

All revenue bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The House has as much power over the economy as the President. While it's difficult to define periods of "major economic expansion and historic job gains", recessions are easy to spot. Here's a list of all recessions since the Great Depression and the party that controlled the House.

1937 Democratic Party
1945 Democratic Party
1949 Democratic Party
1953 Republican Party. The recession started in July, 1953, and Democrats controlled the House for the four years prior to January, 1953.
1958 Democrats
1960 Democrats
1969 Democrats
1973 Democrats
1980 Democrats
1981 Democrats
1990 Democrats
2001 Republican Party
2008 Democrats
2020 Democrats

This is a spurious relationship. If you do not stop continually presenting your spurious relationship between the party of the president and recessions and GDP growth, I'll trot out mine again showing the huge number of young Americans who died in foreign wars under the rule of bloodthirsty Democratic Presidents. Like the one with Russia that Trump tried to avert, and that you, Xpartan and Paulie want to start. (Sarcasm alert)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_Congresses

Tiny 12

06-16-23, 16:54

I do not consider people guilty before a trial.Agreed, 100%. There was an interesting article in the New York Times the other day. Reading it, you'd believe the reason all this happened is because Trump's a hoarder. He liked to keep "newspaper clippings, documents and other mementos, according to more than a half dozen people who have worked for him over the years. " More information about that will come out in a trial. Also perhaps whether any of the info in the documents was leaked. My suspicion is that it was not.

Like as many as 5% of American adults, Trump may suffer from a mental disorder, called Plyushkin's disorder, also known as compulsive hoarding. If that's the case and the info didn't get out to anyone who mattered, like Putin, then there's a strong argument he shouldn't go to jail.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/06/15/us/politics/trump-documents-boxes.html

John Clayton

06-16-23, 18:15

...My suspicion is that it was not...

I am waiting for Putin to leave / die and the FSB archives to be opened.

Elvis 2008

06-16-23, 18:34

I am waiting for Putin to leave / die and the FSB archives to be opened.Putin owned Trump. That is what the Steele Dossier said. Oops, that was all bullshit. Putin is a bad guy because he invaded Ukraine. Would the war end if Putin dropped dead of a heartache? No, the war has supported among a majority of Russians because they were feeling surrounded by NATO. The people feel this is a war for survival.

So what is all this Putin is evil BS really about? Let's just blow off the disgusting Steele Dossier because Putin is evil. And let's just blow off the alleged $5 million bribe Joe Biden was given by Burisma because Zelensky is a hero, Ukraine is pure as the driven snow, and Putin is evil. Hell, Ukraine is so damned good that even if they gave Biden a bribe it is no big deal. But even the hint that Trump took a payout from Putin, even if it is totally false and it was, is way worse because Putin is so evil.

Elvis 2008

06-16-23, 18:40

1. Consequently, I have voted for Dems and NO Repubs in every election since I knew what the fuck I was doing with my vote, essentially since the middle of Reagan's 1st term as so-called potus.

2. My opinion is Trump is quilty of what he has proudly and repeatedly admitted he did while lying about his having the "right" to do it. That would be most or all of every count of every crime for which he has been indicted.
Knew what the fuck you were doing? You Democratic douches believed Russiagate was all true. Hell, YOU probably still do. And let's be clear, Russiagate originated with Hiliary Clinton and her attempt to rig an election. And now even after Russiagate, you think Trump is guilty without a trial. I wish that was a surprise.

Tooms, why don't you move to China and become a citizen there? You would love it. One party rule. Government says you are guilty and you are despite whatever the facts may be. It is nirvana for you.

Tiny 12

06-16-23, 19:00

Here's a list of all recessions since the Great Depression and the party that controlled the House.

1937 Democratic Party
1945 Democratic Party
1949 Democratic Party
1953 Republican Party. The recession started in July, 1953, and Democrats controlled the House for the four years prior to January, 1953.
1958 Democrats
1960 Democrats
1969 Democrats
1973 Democrats
1980 Democrats
1981 Democrats
1990 Democrats
2001 Republican Party
2008 Democrats
2020 Democrats

Sorry, I should have written "after the great depression" of 1929. The Republican Party controlled the House then.

Xpartan

06-16-23, 19:23

Elvis 2008

06-16-23, 23:19

Since everybody has an opinion on the recent indictment of the former guy, let's take a vote.

The vote has three parts. The first part is for you to state your political leanings. The second part is your opinion of the former guy's guilt or innocence of the charges against him The third part is actually in three parts also. If Hilary, Obama or Biden had been indicted with the same charges that the Feds indicted the former guy with, would your opinion be that they were guilty or innocent.

Yes, I realize that "guilt" or "innocence" is what is decided during a trial. This is about your opinion.

Ill go first. 1. I am a Democrat; 2. My opinion is that the former guy is guilty of some or all of the charges; 3 a. Hilary: She would be guilty; 3 b. Obama: he would be guilty; 3 c. Biden: he would be guilty.Wow PVM! Sometimes you post stuff like this and I am speechless. Maybe there is hope for you yet. Since I voted in 2008 for Obama and actually like the concept of "free" junior colleges and the public option for health care, I am an independent with Republican leanings but vehemently anti deep state.

I would vote to indict all of them or none of them especially given the timing. If you indict, there are negotiations. At this point, prosecutors can cut a deal and maybe you can get the accused to pay a fine if the law was broken and no one was hurt. That actually is probably what SHOULD happen if no one was hurt by the mishandling of classified documents.

Now when it comes to innocence or guilt it gets tricky. "A trial jury is supposed to serve only as a "fact finder": that is, to evaluate the veracity of witnesses and the strength of evidence presented at trial, then apply the law to that evidence in order to reach a verdict. The jury isn't supposed to decide what the law isor what it should be. ".

That is what lawyers want us to do. They make all the judgment calls and want us to follow them like sheep and expect us to be okay with it. That is bullshit.

There is a reality lawyers do not want us to know: "In its strictest sense, jury nullification occurs when a jury returns a Not Guilty verdict even though jurors believe beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant has broken the law. Because the Not Guilty verdict cannot be overturned, and because the jurors cannot be punished for their verdict, the law is said to be nullified in that particular case. ".

I am guided by morals not laws, and I am not putting someone in jail for breaking the law when the average American breaks like three laws a day. Jail should be for people who harmed others. So I do not give a fuck how the law reads. What I want to know is if there was actual harm done.

As of now, there is no evidence of any harm so I am not going to find ANY of them guilty even though as of now, I think they all broke the law. If there is evidence that says there was harm, I would change my mind and found those who caused actual harm guilty.

And if you ever want to not sit on a jury, you just say, "I know what jury nullification is, and I believe in it. " LOL.

Elvis 2008

06-16-23, 23:44

I'm a Libertarian Elvis. I don't like prosecuting or putting people in jail unless they really deserve it.

Trump is guilty of stupidity. Like I said, you don't fuck with the deep state even if you are an ex president. In our system, when you hide documents from and make false statements to the Feds, and they find out about it, they will fuck you over. That's what Trump did, that Hillary, Pence and Biden did not.
Tiny, the Feds are restricting the release of a non-classified document horribly detrimental to Biden. Watch this video of Cruz crucifying the Deputy Director of the FBI about this issue.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ted-cruz-accuses-fbi-deputy-director-covering-up-details-alleged-5m-biden-bribery-scheme

After this and Russiagate, I do not give a fuck what the FBI thinks about anything. They may as well be a wing of the Democratic party.

And as bad as it is for Biden, it gets worse and worse. This is what came out today. It is horribly bad. Watch the video here too: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/house-oversight-chairman-says-there-evidence-20-30-million-illegal-payments-bidens.

The Democratic douches will make fun of the sources as they always do but that is not going to work here. There is audio of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. There are bank records. If they are what the Republicans say they are, and they may not be, Biden is fucked.

And that is why you indict all or none. It is looking to me like indicting Trump was just a stunt to distract.

If you look at the New York Times website, it is what you expect. There are four stories on the cover about Trump. There is nothing on the Biden bribe story. But then there is this one little op ed piece about how Democrats do not want Biden to run in 2024. That is what the NY Times does when something stinks with a Democrat. Give themselves an out for not totally being on Team Biden.

That is why you indict everyone. The justice system should be apolitical. When you only indict Trump, the question is, "Was Trump really that bad or do you guys just not want the Biden bribe scandal on the front page?

Paulie97

06-17-23, 02:35

Like the one with Russia that Trump tried to avert, and that you, Xpartan and Paulie want to start. Little Vlad started it by invading Ukraine. In fact he'd been arguing for ages through various spurious historical arguments that Ukraine has no right to exist. He wanted to rebuild empire and made his move. Trump is irrelevant as he's a career criminal and traitor that likewise was a tool of Russia. The American people wisely removed him from office. The same and even most Republican lawmakers support Ukraine's right to defend itself while favoring weapon's support. But like I told you, you need to get out of your computer chair, give up chasing your tail in repetitive, and all too predictable competing talking points and get some fresh air and sunlight. The ancient Greeks ages ago had the recipe for good health.

I myself am on track for retirement in October. Thanks in advance for any congratulations. For the first five years I'll be seeing many different countries, and they'll be no bickering in online forums. Zero.

EihTooms

06-17-23, 05:06

Sorry, I should have written "after the great depression" of 1929. The Republican Party controlled the House then.What, no list of which party controlled the House during all the Great Recoveries from the Great Repub Depressions and Great Repyb Recessions?

The Party of the POTUS is the common denominator of all of the Great Depressions, Great Recessions and Massive Job Losses vs all of the Great Recoveries, Great Expansions and Historic Jobs Creation since the late 1920's.

Yes, the House holds the purse strings but the POTUS proposes the budget, guides and directs it, proposes and guides significant economic legislation, runs for office on those issues, lobbies for the proposals he or she wants them to loosen or tighten the purse strings on and can veto whatever has not gotten the minimum required veto-proof majority support in the Senate. The POTUS has immeasurably more input and control over the direction of the economy than either the House or the Senate. And it is most certainly in the POTUS' hands to respond to gathering clouds of looming potential economic disaster. Or not. Nobody looks to or waits for the House to see and act on it first without the POTUS recognizing and directing the need for it. Sure, a House or Senate move can improve or lessen the results the POTUS' proposals intended. But not so much as to totally reverse them.

BTW, you do recall I am talking about Great Depressions, Great Recessions, Massive Job Losses, Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates and the like, right? Not just every piddling -1 or -2 percent in GDP Growth for a couple of quarters and a momentary uptick in the unemployment rate to oh, 7% or so, right? Those latter are the ones than can reasonably be written off as business cycle results. But not every Great Recession vs every Great Expansion for almost the past 100 years.

John Clayton

06-17-23, 05:16

...There is audio of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. There are bank records...Okay, where?

EihTooms

06-17-23, 05:30

EihTooms

06-17-23, 05:32

Okay, where?In Loony Rudy Giuliani's hair dye dripping head.

EihTooms

06-17-23, 06:02

All revenue bills must originate in the House of Representatives. The House has as much power over the economy as the President. While it's difficult to define periods of "major economic expansion and historic job gains", recessions are easy to spot. Here's a list of all recessions since the Great Depression and the party that controlled the House.

1937 Democratic Party
1945 Democratic Party
1949 Democratic Party
1953 Republican Party. The recession started in July, 1953, and Democrats controlled the House for the four years prior to January, 1953.
1958 Democrats
1960 Democrats
1969 Democrats
1973 Democrats
1980 Democrats
1981 Democrats
1990 Democrats
2001 Republican Party
2008 Democrats
2020 Democrats

This is a spurious relationship. If you do not stop continually presenting your spurious relationship between the party of the president and recessions and GDP growth, I'll trot out mine again showing the huge number of young Americans who died in foreign wars under the rule of bloodthirsty Democratic Presidents. Like the one with Russia that Trump tried to avert, and that you, Xpartan and Paulie want to start. (Sarcasm alert)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Party_divisions_of_United_States_CongressesNeither any Great Depression, Great Recession or Massive Jobs Destruction nor any Great Recovery, Great Expansion or Historic Jobs Gain occurred because the House made some quirky or meaningful move contrary to what the POTUS ran on, proposed, lobbied for, directed, guided or could have vetoed. The House waits for guidance from the POTUS. The direction of the economy is in the hands of the POTUS as the direction of a ship is in the hands of the Captain. And no major historical result came about, good or bad, because of the ship's crew mutiny and insistence we reverse course.

Paulie97

06-17-23, 17:10

Trump is guilty of stupidity. Like I said, you don't fuck with the deep state...Okay so I see you have this whole "deep state" conspiracy theory going. You aren't a "Libertarian" but are cut from the same cloth as the MAGA cult. Your bromance with Chris makes perfect sense. With that I rest my case where you're concerned, while I still recommend the fresh air and sunshine.

PVMonger

06-17-23, 20:06

John Clayton

06-17-23, 20:21

Okay so I see you have this whole "deep state" conspiracy theory going. You aren't a "Libertarian" but are cut from the same cloth as the MAGA cult. Your bromance with Chris makes perfect sense. With that I rest my case where you're concerned, while I still recommend the fresh air and sunshine.Just today, I was explaining to my foreign born wife about the derivation of "tinfoil hat".

Xpartan

06-17-23, 20:53

Putin owned Trump. That is what the Steele Dossier said. Oops, that was all bullshit. No it was not. You know what IS bullshit? Past tense. Putin still owns Trump.

Putin is a bad guy because he invaded Ukraine. Would the war end if Putin dropped dead of a heartache? No, the war has supported among a majority of Russians because they were feeling surrounded by NATO. The people feel this is a war for survival.What the hell do you know what Russians feel, LOL?

So what is all this Putin is evil BS really about? Oh, that's easy. Not BS.

Let's just blow off the disgusting Steele Dossier because Putin is evil. LOL, are you aware, that he was hired by the Republicans, right?

And let's just blow off the alleged $5 million bribe Joe Biden was given by Burisma Just 5? Couldn't get more impressive number out of your ass?

Hell, Ukraine is so damned good that even if they gave Biden a bribe it is no big deal. But even the hint that Trump took a payout from Putin, even if it is totally false and it was, is way worse because Putin is so evil.Not surprising. Like I've said before, every MAGA winger is a putin lover under a thin layer of exterior paint.

Elvis 2008

06-18-23, 02:07

First there is the false equivalence about guilty. If the tapes are what the Republicans say they are is a declaration of guilt? You are back in douche mode.

If Repubs actually had "audio" of Joe and Hunter Biden, they'd release it. If they had video of a whistleblower repeating his claims under oath, they'd release it.And this is double douche mode. It figures though. When you only read and listen to your left wing propaganda you do not get the facts and make a statement like this, but it does not matter. You have made an accusation and John Clayton, Mr. Covid boosted x infinity has said the same thing. Well, where are the recordings? LOL.

Elvis 2008

06-18-23, 02:18

Of course, like Team Trump's indisputable extraordinary collusion with RussiaLOL. More about Putin? You still do not get the whole Russiagate thing was a complete lie fabricated by Hiliary Clinton and law enforcement, and I doubt you ever will.

Now you do not see the irony of your other bullshit impeachment, Ukrainegate. I cannot say I am surprised.

Tiny 12

06-18-23, 05:42

Tiny, the Feds are restricting the release of a non-classified document horribly detrimental to Biden. Watch this video of Cruz crucifying the Deputy Director of the FBI about this issue.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ted-cruz-accuses-fbi-deputy-director-covering-up-details-alleged-5m-biden-bribery-scheme

After this and Russiagate, I do not give a fuck what the FBI thinks about anything. They may as well be a wing of the Democratic party.

And as bad as it is for Biden, it gets worse and worse. This is what came out today. It is horribly bad. Watch the video here too: https://www.zerohedge.com/political/house-oversight-chairman-says-there-evidence-20-30-million-illegal-payments-bidens.

The Democratic douches will make fun of the sources as they always do but that is not going to work here. There is audio of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. There are bank records. If they are what the Republicans say they are, and they may not be, Biden is fucked.

And that is why you indict all or none. It is looking to me like indicting Trump was just a stunt to distract.

If you look at the New York Times website, it is what you expect. There are four stories on the cover about Trump. There is nothing on the Biden bribe story. But then there is this one little op ed piece about how Democrats do not want Biden to run in 2024. That is what the NY Times does when something stinks with a Democrat. Give themselves an out for not totally being on Team Biden.

That is why you indict everyone. The justice system should be apolitical. When you only indict Trump, the question is, "Was Trump really that bad or do you guys just not want the Biden bribe scandal on the front page?

Elvis, Please bear with me. It's going to sound like I'm off topic, but I'm not.

Democratic politicians are crafty, and self serving. John Kerry is married to Teresa Heinz Kerry. They're worth about a billion dollars. But in some years they probably didn't pay as much tax as you and I did. Why? They had the overwhelming part of their fortune invested in tax free municipal bonds.

If you look at the wealth tax proposals of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren back in 2016, when they were running for president, they didn't kick in until a persons net worth was about 3 times what each of theirs was. Why? Well, I figure they wanted to leave a margin of safety. Both must have figured their net worth would grow through the years, especially if he or she became president. You can make a mint on book deals and speaking engagements. So they wouldn't end up ever having to pay the tax.

Now look at Biden and the estate tax. Biden proposed dropping the lifetime estate and gift tax exemption to $3.5 million, and increasing the death tax to 45%. If he gets his way, he and Jill could "only" shelter $7 million together ($3.5 million each) from death tax, down from $24 million now. After that, they or their estate pay 45% of whatever's left to the government. Biden has also proposed an additional capital gains tax on the value of assets in an estate in excess of cost basis. I imagine a person could see over 60% of what he's worked for and saved over a lifetime evaporate as a result. And even if Biden doesn't get his way, the lifetime exemption is scheduled to drop from $12 million per person to $5 million on December 31, 2025.

Democrats love to talk about soaking the rich, but have conveniently allowed people to avoid the estate tax with good planning. They're pulling the wool over peoples eyes.

So, anyway, why would the Bidens want to end up with $10 million or $20 million or $30 million in their estate? Answer, they wouldn't. Undoubtedly, like John and Teresa Heinz Kerry, they would prefer that the little people and Republicans pay tax, not them or their estates. Joe and Jill have plenty of money, and they'll make plenty more before they die. Even if they didn't they'll be coddled by the Secret Service and taxpayer money. They may be looking for ways to get money out of their estates before they die. They don't need that $10 or $20 or $30 million. It's much better if that goes to their children, grandchildren and nieces and nephews.

I watched the Cruz video, also the Comer one in your post. Notwithstanding, I don't believe they'll tie the money back to Joe Biden, except perhaps for trivial items like what Hunter paid for some maintenance and improvements on Joe's house. I suspect the tapes and FD-1023 are nothing burgers. Why? One of two things happened.

1. Hunter and Jim Biden (Joe's brother) traded on Joe's name, making millions. Joe was either powerless or too stupid to stop them.

2. Joe did play a part in the family business. He helped out people who forked money over to Hunter and Jim, or gave people the impression he would. For reasons I set out above, and also because a person with presidential aspirations doesn't want to control foreign bank accounts in tax havens, Joe preferred the money go to his son and his brother and their companies.

Now I have no idea which happened. But strongly doubt that Joe Biden would be stupid enough to leave a paper trail or video recordings that would incriminate him, if it was "2" that happened.

I think the whole Burisima thing is a dead end. You may recall that Trump never paid Giuliani for his investigations into Ukraine and Burisma. Instead, Giuliani was paid by two Trump campaign contributors, Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman, immigrants from the former Soviet Union. Parnas, Fruman and maybe Giuliani were looking for a way to get the Trump Administration and the State Department to pressure the Ukrainian government to do a sweetheart deal, selling U.S. LNG (liquefied natural gas) to Naftogaz, the Ukrainian national oil and gas company. They were going to make a bundle in commission off the deal.

So what could they provide as payback, to Trump? They came up with the Burisma conspiracy theory. (Aside: This is what Trump gets for not paying his attorneys. You get what you pay for. Giuliani became a free agent, and ended up getting Trump impeached twice.)

I don't believe for a minute that Biden really had anything to do with getting Viktor Shokin fired. Shokin was the equivalent of our attorney general, and the conspiracy theory Giuliani, Parnas and Fruman cooked up had Joe Biden getting rid of Shokin so he wouldn't investigate Burisma. This was because Hunter was being paid directors fees of $50,000 per month for years by Burisma. The truth is that Shokin was slow-walking investigations of many companies, including Burisma. He most likely was crooked and being paid off. That's why the Obama Administration, the State Department, and Europeans who were providing aid to Ukraine insisted he get axed. Biden was just delivering the message, nothing more and nothing less. He had nothing to do with the decision to give Ukraine the ultimatum, that either Shokin goes or $1 billion in aid would be withheld.

China's where people probably should be looking, not Burisma. WTF was Joe Biden doing taking Hunter with him on an official Vice Presidential visit to China, on a government jet? Hunter was doing business on the trip, setting up a Chinese private equity fund that I believe got investments from Chinese government owned enterprises. That's telegraphing to people that if you help out Hunter, you might just get some help from Joe down the line. Or at least get Joe's ear if you need to. That fits in a lot better with the "Biden Family Crime Syndicate" theory than Burisma. Now I don't see any evidence that Biden has caved to China as a result of all this. Actually the opposite. Tensions have ratcheted up. Well, I guess when you do business with a mafia family though, it doesn't always do what it says it will. It's kind of similar to what we saw with Trump and the Russians. Many Democrats believe that the Russians hacked the Clinton campaigns emails and then leaked results just before the election, to help out Trump. (Another aside, if that happened it was probably more to screw Hillary Clinton. Putin hated her ever since as Secretary of State she interfered, in his view, in the Russian election in 2011.) Anyway, if Putin did Trump a favor, then, contrary to the views of our Democratic friends here, he didn't get anything in return.

As to the FBI director, I figure he's super sensitive about grandstanding, after Comey's fuckups in 2016 and 2017, so he's going to keep his mouth shut. Yeah, he probably should say something.

I'm not sure that Ted Cruz is onto anything. But I don't know. I haven't been following this that closely. Apparently some Republicans are starting to backtrack on the recordings and FD-1023,

https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/15/politics/republican-reaction-alleged-audio-recordings-biden-bribery-scheme/index.html

Tiny 12

06-18-23, 06:38

Actually Elvis I may be wrong, about the importance of China vs Burisma. I see that Burisma was involved in rampant tax evasion. And the founder, who was in charge of Ukrainian natural resources in a strongly pro Russian administration, had a number of oil and gas licenses issued to Burisma while he was Minister. Yet they've gotten off with only paying $7. 44 million in fines. I guess it's possible Zlovchevsky, the founder, would be penniless and in a Ukrainian prison if he hadn't had Hunter on his board. Perhaps the Ukrainian government figured it better go lightly on Zlovchevsky, if it wanted to stay in Joe Bidens good graces.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burisma

Cali Guy

06-18-23, 20:13

You said "The Democratic douches will make fun of the sources as they always do but that is not going to work here. There is audio of Joe Biden and Hunter Biden. There are bank records. If they are what the Republicans say they are, and they may not be, Biden is fucked. ".

This is an interesting thought, considering that you have personally said that "guilty" needs to be something a trial decides. Evidently you believe that "guilty" is only reserved for Democrats and the one-term, twice-impeached, adjudicated-sexual-assaulter, former-guy is "innocent". But we all knew that anyway.

Your rants about the FBI and the DOJ are getting old. Almost as old as "Chinese thermostats changed votes in the 2020 election" or "Jewish space lasers cause forest fires" or "There's a pedophile ring operating out of the basement of a basementless pizza parlor building in DC" or any of the other thousands of ridiculous conspiracytheories that most Repubs believe.

If Repubs actually had "audio" of Joe and Hunter Biden, they'd release it. If they had video of a whistleblower repeating his claims under oath, they'd release it. And you know they would. What they have is nothing. Comer even said that he had no direct evidence linking Joe Biden to any crime. What he said was, basically, "Hey, we've got theories but no evidence and what you need to do is trust us that we're going to come up with evidence before Hell freezes over. " Sounds sorta like Guiliani when he was asked about the 2020 election being stolen..It looks like they are finally filing impeachment documents for Biden. It will be interesting to see what happens when a president who is actually guilty gets impeached. The democrats will try to block the impeachment but it will definitely happen if he is found guilty for treason. It may not happen if he is just guilty of of the border fiasco. Biden has murdered thousands by his neglect of the border and allowing cartels to bring tons of drugs into USA.

Spidy

06-18-23, 22:55

There are interesting comparisons and similarities to another DOJ case, when talking about Trump's "beautiful mind" boxes affliction and the illegal retention of classified/top secret national defense information/docs. As this is not the first time, and there is a unfamiliar case where Trump's very own administration and DOJ, did prosecute a man for this very crime.

The prosecuted man, Harold Thomas Martin, (a fmr. gov't contractor and worked for multiple different intelligent agencies), sighted in the Trump DOJ prosecuted case (USA v. Harold T. Martin III), as weird and bizarre as it appears, it also seems, he too just wanted to horde the docs. He had been stock piling the classified information and docs in his home and even in his car, for over some 20 years.

There were no signs that he ever disseminated the classified/top secret docs or any indications that he ever did anything with docs, except hold on to them, for his own "beautiful mind" boxes. That very same Trump administration/DOJ case, was resolved with the prosecution of Harold Thomas Martin III, getting 9 yrs in the clink.

Perhaps (although I doubt it), Donnie J. Dummkopf and Harold Martin, will make "beautiful mind" boxes, together in the clink, in adjoining jail cells...kkkk!

Elvis 2008

06-18-23, 23:44

I don't believe for a minute that Biden really had anything to do with getting Viktor Shokin fired.Tiny, he bragged about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azLKK0xTOFI.

How can that NOT be true?

I watched the Cruz video, also the Comer one in your post. Notwithstanding, I don't believe they'll tie the money back to Joe Biden, except perhaps for trivial items like what Hunter paid for some maintenance and improvements on Joe's house. I suspect the tapes and FD-1023 are nothing burgers. Why? One of two things happened.

1. Hunter and Jim Biden (Joe's brother) traded on Joe's name, making millions. Joe was either powerless or too stupid to stop them.

2. Joe did play a part in the family business. He helped out people who forked money over to Hunter and Jim, or gave people the impression he would. For reasons I set out above, and also because a person with presidential aspirations doesn't want to control foreign bank accounts in tax havens, Joe preferred the money go to his son and his brother and their companies.

Now I have no idea which happened. But strongly doubt that Joe Biden would be stupid enough to leave a paper trail or video recordings that would incriminate him, if it was "2" that happened.My understanding is that Senator Grassley has the FD-1023. When he asked the FBI about it, they denied it existed, and they freaked out when he told them he had it already. The Republican Congressmen were stunned to learn that the FD-1023 was not allowed for the public to see because it is not classified. The FBI is holding it to cover Biden's ass.

Then they lied and said Giulani wrote it. Well, that turned out to be false. Then there are rumors (or really people have told) and the Republican Congressmen have been told there are seventeen recordings between Burisma and the Bidens, 15 with Hunter and 2 with Joe. You can disbelieve it if you want to, but I will say not a soul has denied those recordings exist save for our Democratic douches here who know nothing about anything and deal in projections and not fact.

Hunter being on the Burisma board may have been legal, but if so, it was a legal bribe. Shokin tried to investigate it and was fired. Trump asked Zelensky to look into it and there is an attempted impeachment. Now there is war in Ukraine and Biden is making our money rain there. I have to ask, was this whole damned war a distraction from the fact that Biden may have been bribed? All this crazy Putin talk does not work with me. I think Biden provoked Putin.

You think Biden is not that stupid, but I see a narcissist who thinks he can get away with anything. I have read the bullshit here about how Trump is so much worse than Biden because he was not cooperating with the Feds on classified documents. The WSJ just ran an editorial saying that was pure bullshit. Biden thinks he can get away with anything.

Hell, the whole Trump indictment may just be a show to get the media away from the Biden bribery case.

We will see how this plays out but this may actually be in the hands of Dems. I think the Republicans are going to impeach Biden. The natural inclination is to say it will never work but the Dems do not want Biden in 2024. Maybe they negotiate a graceful way for him to leave. Ironically, RFK Jr. Seems to be the only candidate out there right now that has an organization in place. He is not a corporate hooker like Biden is, but his stock is way up, and I would consider voting for him.

Thing about RFK is he is as anti deep state as Trump is. He blasted Fauci and IMO the Dems need an anti deep state candidate.

Joe Rogan asked Dr. Peter Hotez, pharma's #2 hooker behind Fauci, on to debate RFK on his show. He offered $100,000 to any charity Hotez wanted. Just like that, others piped in and upped the ante. It is now at $1. 5 million and Hotez is still cowardly staying away. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/double-talking-vaccine-scientist-refuses-debate-rfk-jr-despite-15-million-charity-pot.

It is funny how when you shine a lot on these deep state douche bags all they do is run away.

That is my take on things now. We will see what happens but IMO things look really, really bad for Biden.

EihTooms

06-19-23, 02:19

LOL. More about Putin? You still do not get the whole Russiagate thing was a complete lie fabricated by Hiliary Clinton and law enforcement, and I doubt you ever will.

Now you do not see the irony of your other bullshit impeachment, Ukrainegate. I cannot say I am surprised.Really? Is that why Repubs are constantly trying to Defund the Police? Because they think they fabricated all that stuff about Trump's Campaign Director working for the Russians, Trump proudly and publicly siding with the Russians against America at Helsinki, him trying to blackmail Zelenskyy into fabricating dirt on the one political opponent he justifiably feared the most or he would deny Ukraine the military aid to fight Russia that was earmarked for that purpose by Congress and so on?

Is that really what is behind the Repubs' constant efforts to Defund the Police? When they are not trying to beat the them to death with American flagpoles, that is. Oh, and we can find the video and audio recordings of that, BTW.

EihTooms

06-19-23, 08:48

Tiny, he bragged about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azLKK0xTOFI.

How can that NOT be true?

My understanding is that Senator Grassley has the FD-1023. When he asked the FBI about it, they denied it existed, and they freaked out when he told them he had it already. The Republican Congressmen were stunned to learn that the FD-1023 was not allowed for the public to see because it is not classified. The FBI is holding it to cover Biden's ass.

Then they lied and said Giulani wrote it. Well, that turned out to be false. Then there are rumors (or really people have told) and the Republican Congressmen have been told there are seventeen recordings between Burisma and the Bidens, 15 with Hunter and 2 with Joe. You can disbelieve it if you want to, but I will say not a soul has denied those recordings exist save for our Democratic douches here who know nothing about anything and deal in projections and not fact.

Hunter being on the Burisma board may have been legal, but if so, it was a legal bribe. Shokin tried to investigate it and was fired. Trump asked Zelensky to look into it and there is an attempted impeachment. Now there is war in Ukraine and Biden is making our money rain there. I have to ask, was this whole damned war a distraction from the fact that Biden may have been bribed? All this crazy Putin talk does not work with me. I think Biden provoked Putin.

You think Biden is not that stupid, but I see a narcissist who thinks he can get away with anything. I have read the bullshit here about how Trump is so much worse than Biden because he was not cooperating with the Feds on classified documents. The WSJ just ran an editorial saying that was pure bullshit. Biden thinks he can get away with anything.

Hell, the whole Trump indictment may just be a show to get the media away from the Biden bribery case.

We will see how this plays out but this may actually be in the hands of Dems. I think the Republicans are going to impeach Biden. The natural inclination is to say it will never work but the Dems do not want Biden in 2024. Maybe they negotiate a graceful way for him to leave. Ironically, RFK Jr. Seems to be the only candidate out there right now that has an organization in place. He is not a corporate hooker like Biden is, but his stock is way up, and I would consider voting for him.

Thing about RFK is he is as anti deep state as Trump is. He blasted Fauci and IMO the Dems need an anti deep state candidate.

Joe Rogan asked Dr. Peter Hotez, pharma's #2 hooker behind Fauci, on to debate RFK on his show. He offered $100,000 to any charity Hotez wanted. Just like that, others piped in and upped the ante. It is now at $1. 5 million and Hotez is still cowardly staying away. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/double-talking-vaccine-scientist-refuses-debate-rfk-jr-despite-15-million-charity-pot.

It is funny how when you shine a lot on these deep state douche bags all they do is run away.

That is my take on things now. We will see what happens but IMO things look really, really bad for Biden.That numbskull in your video asked, "What am I missing"?

Well, here is what we are all sure is just a tiny portion of easily observable and easily researched reality that he is missing:

Fact check: Biden leveraged $1B in aid to Ukraine to oust corrupt prosecutor, not to help his son.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/21/fact-check-joe-biden-leveraged-ukraine-aid-oust-corrupt-prosecutor/5991434002/

Despite a recently concluded investigation by Senate Republicans that found no wrongdoing by the Bidens, claims to the contrary have continued to circulate on social media.That's right. Even dimwit Senate Repubs weren't stupid enough to "miss" what you and that other numbskull in your video link missed. Or pretended to miss. LOL.

Elvis 2008

06-19-23, 16:04

Fact check: Biden leveraged $1B in aid to Ukraine to oust corrupt prosecutor, not to help his son.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/21/fact-check-joe-biden-leveraged-ukraine-aid-oust-corrupt-prosecutor/5991434002/

That's right. Even dimwit Senate Repubs weren't stupid enough to "miss" what you and that other numbskull in your video link missed. Or pretended to miss. LOL.LOL. Tooms, if you knew anything about anything, everyone in Ukraine is corrupt.

Second, the "aid package" ensured higher prices for natural gas and electricity for the Ukrainian consumer.

Tiny 12

06-19-23, 19:03

Tiny, he bragged about it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azLKK0xTOFI.

How can that NOT be true?

....You think Biden is not that stupid, but I see a narcissist who thinks he can get away with anything.

Sorry Elvis. I read a lot on this several years ago. I've forgotten a lot, and probably didn't know as much as I thought I did.

I believed that Biden didn't make the decision precisely because he is stupid. Barrack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who was running the state department, did not hold him in high regard. Obama was president of the Harvard Law Review. Hillary was a member of the Yale Law Review. Biden on the other hand was at the bottom of his class at the University of Delaware and Syracuse Law School. He might not have gotten degrees if he hadn't been plagiarizing in his classes. Obama and Clinton arguably were among the best and the brightest. Joe Biden on the other hand, now especially at his advanced age, is among the worst and dumbest. Despite our differences with others here, I believe Biden's dumber than anyone who's posted on this page. The Democratic Party could have plastered the name of every Democrat in the USA on the wall, thrown a dart, and probably come up with a smarter candidate for president than Biden.

Obama and Hillary might agree with me. So I figured the decision to try to get Shokin fired came from the State Department or the White House. And Biden was merely the messenger boy.

Apparently from what I'm reading today, I was wrong. Biden pushed Obama to be in charge of the Ukrainian portfolio, and that happened, coincidentally(?) at about the same time that Hunter became a director of Burisma.

You're probably right, that Joe did have something to do with the decision to use the $1 billion in loan guarantees as leverage to push out Shokin. Biden was lying, or close to it, in your video though when he implied he gave the Ukrainians 6 hours to fire Shokin and they did it. In reality, the firing happened three months later, and required the approval of the Ukrainian Parliament. It probably had a lot more to do with pressure by the IMF, which was going to withhold $40 billion, instead of any role Biden played. Biden's just trying to take undeserved credit.

Shokin was slow walking any investigation of Burisma. Burisma may have been paying him off. The only person in the whole sordid mess who you can believe is Vitaly Kasko, one of Shokin's deputies who appears to be clean, and that's what Kasko says. Shokin was corrupt. So was Yuriy Lutsenko, Shokin's successor as head prosecutor, who fed information to Giuliani and Parnas. And the Ukrainian presidents, except maybe Zelensky. The Ukrainians actually opened an investigation into Hunter and Burisma after the phone call between Trump and Zelensky. Then they promptly dropped it in the last part of 2020, when Biden was elected. They were doing whatever they believed to be in their best interest.

A Biden presidency was probably welcomed by the Ukrainians. Biden was pushing Obama to provide more military aid to Ukraine back in 2014 when Russia invade Crimea. Obama was reluctant as he didn't want to start World War III. Now we're supplying 10X more aid to Ukraine than any European country, even though Ukraine is on Europe's doorstep and it's 4500 miles away from the USA. Undoubtedly a significant part of that aid is being drained off by corrupt Ukrainians.

Anyway Mykola Zlochevsky, owner of Burisma, was a genius to get Hunter Biden to serve on his board. Two years prior to when he hired Hunter, he was transferring government oil and gas leases to his own company while he was Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources, in a strongly pro-Russian government. When his party got kicked out and replaced by Ukrainian nationalists, Zlochevsky could have been toast. But with the son of the Vice President of the United States on his board, maybe he was bullet proof.

As to your other points, I thought the Congressmen had already seen the FD-1023. If the 17 recordings exist, hopefully they'll come out. You've been following this a lot closer than I have.

And I believe Kennedy is worse than Biden. He'd take away the jobs of my friends and family who work for oil and gas companies. So would Biden, but Kennedy would do it quicker. He's a class warrior who wants to screw over the billionaire entrepreneur class that's made the USA a world beater. And as you'd guess, I believe his fears of vaccines verge on paranoia.

EihTooms

06-19-23, 21:46

LOL. Tooms, if you knew anything about anything, everyone in Ukraine is corrupt.

Second, the "aid package" ensured higher prices for natural gas and electricity for the Ukrainian consumer.And how does that refute the irrefutable truth that your video link proved nothing of what you and those numbskulls in your video link claimed?

If you knew anything about anything, that is.

Your beloved Repubs investigated it. They found no wrongdoing by the Bidens. And they were even more desperate to find wrongdoing by the Bidens than you and your video hero numbskulls.

I realize your and Trump's "enemies" must be everyone, everywhere all the time, otherwise claimed to be the "Deep State", because you can't just blame The Democrats for revealing the sad truth about Dear Leader while exonnerating Obama, Hillary, Biden etc when far more Repubs have been doing the investigations and testifying to that result than Dems. But at some point you still need to produce some evidence of your and other Trump Cultists' silly claims.

Xpartan

06-19-23, 21:50

LOL. Tooms, if you knew anything about anything, everyone in Ukraine is corrupt.Ah, the main argument from putin-lovers. Ukraine is corrupt.

While no one would deny that there are plenty of corruption in Ukraine, if EVERYONE in Ukraine was corrupt, Russian garrisons would've already been stationed in Kiyv and Lviv, and elsewhere. Instead, they're getting their asses handed to them. Also everywhere.

SubCmdr

06-20-23, 01:02

Neither party is interested in the people. Only more control for themselves and the government. Both parties fear independent thinkers.

PVMonger

06-20-23, 04:21

Tiny 12

06-20-23, 05:31

And how does that refute the irrefutable truth that your video link proved nothing of what you and those numbskulls in your video link claimed?

If you knew anything about anything, that is.

Your beloved Repubs investigated it. They found no wrongdoing by the Bidens. And they were even more desperate to find wrongdoing by the Bidens than you and your video hero numbskulls.

I realize your and Trump's "enemies" must be everyone, everywhere all the time, otherwise claimed to be the "Deep State", because you can't just blame The Democrats for revealing the sad truth about Dear Leader while exonnerating Obama, Hillary, Biden etc when far more Repubs have been doing the investigations and testifying to that result than Dems. But at some point you still need to produce some evidence of your and other Trump Cultists' silly claims.Elvis' video link did show I was wrong. And you're not being honest with yourself if you believe the Biden's weren't involved in any wrongdoing. In the case of Hunter it's apparent he was. As to Joe, if you want to argue he's incredibly stupid and naive, then I guess hauling his son on the vice presidential jet to China so he could lock in business deals wouldn't constitute wrongdoing.

Tiny 12

06-20-23, 05:33

Neither party is interested in the people. Only more control for themselves and the government. Both parties fear independent thinkers.Agreed. I don't think it used to be as bad. Independent thinkers and good people like Jeff Flake and Kyrsten Sinema are being run off from their parties.

Tiny 12

06-20-23, 05:54

Ah, the main argument from putin-lovers. Ukraine is corrupt.

While no one would deny that there are plenty of corruption in Ukraine, if EVERYONE in Ukraine was corrupt, Russian garrisons would've already been stationed in Kiyv and Lviv, and elsewhere. Instead, they're getting their asses handed to them. Also everywhere.There was a lot of corruption in Stalin's USSR and it kicked Germany's ass. Ukraine is in a tie for 116th on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, alongside Angola, Mongolia, the Philippines, El Salvador, Algeria and Zambia. No wonder the EU never put Ukraine on track for membership.

https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022

Admittedly the Ukrainian people are enduring incredible hardship by standing up to Russia. And Russia's the aggressor. I just don't know whether we should be enabling the killing to the extent we are. The USA is putting no pressure on Ukraine to settle this. We seem content to let them fight the Russians to the last Ukrainian.

Xpartan

06-20-23, 07:46

There was a lot of corruption in Stalin's USSR and it kicked Germany's ass. You're way off. Of course, you can say there was some corruption in Stalin's USSR. But it not even remotely close to the feastfuck that's going on today in Russia and other post Soviet states.

Ukraine is in a tie for 116th on Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, alongside Angola, Mongolia, the Philippines, El Salvador, Algeria and Zambia. No wonder the EU never put Ukraine on track for membership.

https://www.transparency.org/en/cpi/2022And your point is? Russia is 137. What does this number prove?

Admittedly the Ukrainian people are enduring incredible hardship by standing up to Russia. And Russia's the aggressor. I just don't know whether we should be enabling the killing to the extent we are. The USA is putting no pressure on Ukraine to settle this. We seem content to let them fight the Russians to the last Ukrainian.Enabling? Still no F16. Still no ATACMS. Still no Abrams. Still, the most ridiculous restrictions to NOT fire INSIDE Russia. WTF! They're firing on Ukraine from INSIDE RUSSIA, but god forbid Ukraine should hit them back with American weapon. How much pressure do you say we put on Ukraine to appease Putin and your lot?

EihTooms

06-20-23, 10:10

Neither party is interested in the people. Only more control for themselves and the government. Both parties fear independent thinkers.Even if that were true, the fact is the House, Senate and White House will be controlled by either the Dems or the Repubs for the rest of your life and that of your childrens' children. The only choice your vote might result in is will they be controlled by the Party that throws around a lot of big talk about handling the economy and National Security better than the opposition but in reality has legislated, produced and led us into every Great Depression, Great Recession, Massive Jobs Loss and Mass Murder of Americans and none of the Great Recoveries, Great Expansions and Historic Job Gains since the late 1920's with no indication that their agenda and methods for producing those results has changed one iota in 100 years or do you want your vote to go to the Party that has legislated and produced the exact opposite of those horrific results in that same timeframe.

Hoping the Party your vote helps to win will be filled with saintly, altruistic monks, priests and rabbis is a nice idea. But, frankly, I believe worrying about such things in the face of inarguable historic patterns, results and realities regarding Real World critical issues is for suckers. The former Party I cited above knows it is for suckers. Hence, The Great 2024 Repub War On Woke!

LOL.

JustTK

06-20-23, 16:01

This is old news. It has been known for a while that three researchers at the Wuhan lab had flu like illnesses back around the end of 2019 and were treated at a hospital. The Wall Street Journal broke the story over two years ago.

This doesn't prove COVID 19 came from a lab leak, although it certainly provides evidence it may have. It also doesn't prove it resulted from gain of function research.

Respectfully JustTK, if your suspicions are true, I don't see why the USA should pay reparations instead of China. Or know if anybody should pay. Gain of function research was intended to protect us from the next pandemic, and sometimes shit happens.I had no idea that this story had broke before. I am surprised it never got much traction. Thanks for that.

It doesn't prove lab leak? Like if I find a starnger in my house with a bloody knife in his hand and my wife dead on the floor, that doesn't prove the stranger killed her either. Its true maybe an infected bat flew in thru the lab window and infected them. Hey strange things happen!

And most certainly the lab was doing gain of function, so again you just want to ignore all the evidence and "wah, wah, wah, I can't hear you!

About reparations. Your excuse is truly terrible here Tiny. First I didn't say that China should not pay. They are just as guilty as USA. The are both guilty of reckless endangerment and should pay rapartaions to all. RFK agrees with me. - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl-Fv9ZF-Og.

It is NO EXCUSE that they were doing it for good purpose. And that has not been proven either. They were doing it for their own benefit, not mine or yours or Sinezo's in Tanzania. The Nazis would argue the same thing.

Tiny 12

06-20-23, 18:49

You're way off. Of course, you can say there was some corruption in Stalin's USSR. But it not even remotely close to the feastfuck that's going on today in Russia and other post Soviet states.Really?

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/697363

Other post Soviet states like Ukraine?

I presume you're not an admirer of Stalin, just trying to make a point.

And your point is? Russia is 137. What does this number prove?I was just replying to you:

"if EVERYONE in Ukraine was corrupt, Russian garrisons would've already been stationed in Kiyv and Lviv, and elsewhere. Instead, they're getting their asses handed to them. ".

Enabling? Still no F16. Still no ATACMS. Still no Abrams. Still, the most ridiculous restrictions to NOT fire INSIDE Russia. WTF! They're firing on Ukraine from INSIDE RUSSIA, but god forbid Ukraine should hit them back with American weapon. How much pressure do you say we put on Ukraine to appease Putin and your lot?Any Americans who voluntarily want to donate to war efforts in Ukraine or actually go there and fight should be free to do so. As a semi-believer in the 2nd amendment, if they want to take up a collection to buy F16's and Abrams tanks and ship them to Ukraine, they should have at it. I would draw the line at strategic nuclear weapons though.

I don't want our tax dollars being used, to the tune of $75 billion, to promote a war 5000 miles away, when we're not simultaneously trying to bring an end to it. Instead we've told Ukraine that they have a blank check for as long as they want. And the Ukrainians say they're not going to stop until they've regained Crimea.

What do you think our reaction would be if the Warsaw Pact were arming Mexico to the tunes of billions of dollars and talking about taking it in as a member? How many countries in Latin America have we invaded? Remember Grenada?

Gorbachev thought he had a commitment from the USA not to expand NATO. It hasn't turned out that way.

Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. We should be working to end this lunacy, instead of throwing gasoline on the fire.

Tiny 12

06-20-23, 18:51

JustTK

06-20-23, 19:13

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree JustTK. I'm not a fan of RFK.If China sent a nuclear bomb across and it landed on your city and somehow you managed to survive. China said it was a mistake, they pressed the wrong button. The bombs wer supposed to improve world peace not for attack. Would you expect reparations?

EihTooms

06-20-23, 20:18

Of course, everyone at Fux News knew what Brett Baier is saying here, contrary to Trump's Big Lie, since they called Arizona for Biden the night of the 2020 election. Did Trumpty-Dumpty not hear about the $800 Million that Fux News was fined for repeating his lies for the past 2 1/2 years and think they were going to repeat those lies on his behalf again last night and pay another $800 Million for the honor? LOL.

"First of all, I won in 2020 by a lot, ok? Let's get that straight. ".

Uh. Nope. Fux News is not going there anymore. Not for another $800 Million.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1670922502510452738/mediaViewer?currentTweet=1670922502510452738&currentTweetUser=Acyn

Tiny 12

06-20-23, 20:24

If China sent a nuclear bomb across and it landed on your city and somehow you managed to survive. China said it was a mistake, they pressed the wrong button. The bombs wer supposed to improve world peace not for attack. Would you expect reparations?I don't believe COVID 19 was developed as a bioweapon, so have a tough time accepting the analogy. Forcing reparations on a country is a bad idea. We learned that from the Treaty of Versailles. The effect on Germany, and later on the world after Hitler came to power, was devastating. Furthermore, the USA is one of the wealthiest countries in the world. Why should China, a developing country, provide reparations to USA Citizens? The USA should be able to take care of itself.

Now if China wanted to voluntarily provide aid to a poor country like, say Sri Lanka or Peru, that was badly hit by COVID, that would be great.

PVMonger

06-20-23, 22:36

That numbskull in your video asked, "What am I missing"?

Well, here is what we are all sure is just a tiny portion of easily observable and easily researched reality that he is missing:

Fact check: Biden leveraged $1B in aid to Ukraine to oust corrupt prosecutor, not to help his son.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/10/21/fact-check-joe-biden-leveraged-ukraine-aid-oust-corrupt-prosecutor/5991434002/

That's right. Even dimwit Senate Repubs weren't stupid enough to "miss" what you and that other numbskull in your video link missed. Or pretended to miss. LOL.I just love it when Repubs scream about Hunter Biden being on Burisma's Board of Directors, despite having no experience in the oil / gas industries.

I challenge anyone to research the current makeup of, say, the P&G (Procter & Gamble) Board of Directors. P&G's focus is in the areas of "Consumer Packaged Goods". How many of the executives that sit on P&G's current BoD have expertise in "Consumer Packaged Goods"? The P&G BoD has 13 members and none of them. I repeat none of them have CPG experience. https://us.pg.com/structure-and-governance/board-of-directors-composition/ Each member of the P&G BoD earns roughly $300 K USD per year.

Xpartan

06-21-23, 04:00

Really?

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/697363Yes, really.

Of course there was corruption during Stalin. Russia has always been corrupt. Corruption has never paused in Russian history, not for a second. Yet, again, the corruption under Stalin's regime was very careful, it always looked over the shoulder, it was small, apologetic and timid. It wasn't scaled and in your face like today.

Other post Soviet states like Ukraine?Yes! And like Belarus, and like Armenia and like all the "Stans" too. Again, what's your point? Does corruption in Ukraine justify the Russian aggression?

I presume you're not an admirer of Stalin, just trying to make a point.You presume correctly.

I was just replying to you:

"if EVERYONE in Ukraine was corrupt, Russian garrisons would've already been stationed in Kiyv and Lviv, and elsewhere. Instead, they're getting their asses handed to them. ".That's right. Russia had spent billions to bribe people in Ukraine prior to the invasion. Of course, most of the monies were stolen in the process, but if everyone was corrupt in Ukraine, they wouldn't have the army, the effective intelligence services, the working government, nothing.

Any Americans who voluntarily want to donate to war efforts in Ukraine or actually go there and fight should be free to do so. As a semi-believer in the 2nd amendment, if they want to take up a collection to buy F16's and Abrams tanks and ship them to Ukraine, they should have at it. I would draw the line at strategic nuclear weapons though.Now, this is a 5-year old's musings. You, a private citizen, can't buy F16, you can't buy Abrams, you can't ship them anywhere, it's total bullshit.

I don't want our tax dollars being used, to the tune of $75 billion, to promote a war 5000 miles away, when we're not simultaneously trying to bring an end to it. Instead we've told Ukraine that they have a blank check for as long as they want. And the Ukrainians say they're not going to stop until they've regained Crimea.Yeah, sure. It's we who're promoting the most destructive war in Europe in the last 100 year. Sure. Give us more please, you're on the roll today.

What do you think our reaction would be if the Warsaw Pact were arming Mexico to the tunes of billions of dollars and talking about taking it in as a member? How many countries in Latin America have we invaded? Remember Grenada?That's a false analogy. Neither NATO nor the US was arming Ukraine prior to the 2022 invasion. We should've after they grabbed Crimea in 2014. If we had, this war would simply not have happened. That we betrayed our ally in 2014 after putting our signatures on the Budapest Memorandum is a shameful stain on our reputation, and it'll stay there for good. Not unlike Munich Agreement with Hitler in 1938.

I have another question for you. I find it kind of funny that you believe Ukraine should cede Crimea to the aggressor, though. How would you feel if Mexico tried to take back California by force?

Wait, that's a libtard state, so I'm sure you wouldn't mind. How about Texas then? How about Utah and Arizona? Would it be OK for Mexico to take them all back? Why not (if not)? Why is it OK for Russia to grab Crimea, but not for Mexico?

Gorbachev thought he had a commitment from the USA not to expand NATO. It hasn't turned out that way.No, he didn't. It's yet another myth picked by Putin from the history dustbin. It's unfortunate that you repeat this Putin propaganda nonsense.

Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal in the world. We should be working to end this lunacy, instead of throwing gasoline on the fire.Ah, here we go. Don't upset Russia because Russia has nukes.

Give them what they want because they have nukes.

Suck their dick because they have nukes.

How do you suggest we work "to end this lunacy"? Drop the euphemisms already and say what you mean. You do want to tell Ukraine to cede the territories Russia has already occupied. This is what you, Elvis and every other appeaser of war criminals mean by "ending this lunacy".

There is the name for it: Munich-38.

And it didn't work.

Tiny 12

06-21-23, 04:24

I just love it when Repubs scream about Hunter Biden being on Burisma's Board of Directors, despite having no experience in the oil / gas industries.

I challenge anyone to research the current makeup of, say, the P&G (Procter & Gamble) Board of Directors. P&G's focus is in the areas of "Consumer Packaged Goods". How many of the executives that sit on P&G's current BoD have expertise in "Consumer Packaged Goods"? The P&G BoD has 13 members and none of them. I repeat none of them have CPG experience. https://us.pg.com/structure-and-governance/board-of-directors-composition/ Each member of the P&G BoD earns roughly $300 K USD per year.You have a very good point PVMonger. P&G's directors may not be crackheads. And they may have much more impressive resumes and experience than Hunter Biden. But comparatively Burisma and its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, got much better value for their money out of Hunter than P&G did out of its board members.

Now Hunter may have cost a little more, around $600,000 per year. But how many P&G directors can say that their very presence on the board may have prevented the company from liquidation? And kept its owners out of prison?

Mykola Zlochevsky, owner of Burisma, was a genius to get Hunter Biden to serve on his board. Two years prior to when he hired Hunter, he was transferring government oil and gas leases to his own company while he was Minister of Ecology and Natural Resources, in a strongly pro-Russian government. When his party got kicked out and replaced by Ukrainian nationalists, Zlochevsky could have been toast. But with the son of the Vice President of the United States on his board, maybe he was bullet proof.

SubCmdr

06-21-23, 06:48

I do not agree with anything you wrote in your post. I have not paid attention to American Politics for over 10 years and I left the country. I felt it was deteriorating rapidly and feel that if you are not going to do anything for me, at least do not fuck with me. I am now truly free and I go where I am treated best You should get a passport and use that birth privilege that your mama gave you to see that the Dis (United States of America) is not the center of the world. Only those that have never left it shores think that. The most important vote is the vote of my USD. And that USD does not get spent in the Dis (United States of America). People that think that their vote at the ballot box means anything when the executives in countries around the world do not control things tells me they need to be WOKE up and deal with the reality of the world as it is. Not fantasies of what they would like it to be. I have taken the orange pill. And the world looks completely different now.

Even if that were true, the fact is the House, Senate and White House will be controlled by either the Dems or the Repubs for the rest of your life and that of your childrens' children. The only choice your vote might result in is will they be controlled by the Party that throws around a lot of big talk about handling the economy and National Security better than the opposition but in reality has legislated, produced and led us into every Great Depression, Great Recession, Massive Jobs Loss and Mass Murder of Americans and none of the Great Recoveries, Great Expansions and Historic Job Gains since the late 1920's with no indication that their agenda and methods for producing those results has changed one iota in 100 years or do you want your vote to go to the Party that has legislated and produced the exact opposite of those horrific results in that same timeframe.

Hoping the Party your vote helps to win will be filled with saintly, altruistic monks, priests and rabbis is a nice idea. But, frankly, I believe worrying about such things in the face of inarguable historic patterns, results and realities regarding Real World critical issues is for suckers. The former Party I cited above knows it is for suckers. Hence, The Great 2024 Repub War On Woke!

LOL.

PVMonger

06-21-23, 15:14

You have a very good point PVMonger. P&G's directors may not be crackheads. And they may have much more impressive resumes and experience than Hunter Biden. But comparatively Burisma and its owner, Mykola Zlochevsky, got much better value for their money out of Hunter than P&G did out of its board members.

Now Hunter may have cost a little more, around $600,000 per year. But how many P&G directors can say that their very presence on the board may have prevented the company from liquidation? And kept its owners out of prison?Addiction is a disease, not a state of mind. Yes, Hunter is an addict and will be to the day he dies. If he is clean now, more power to him. But to call him a "crackhead" as a pejorative isn't right.

Tiny 12

06-21-23, 18:52

That's a false analogy. Neither NATO nor the US was arming Ukraine prior to the 2022 invasion. We should've after they grabbed Crimea in 2014. If we had, this war would simply not have happened. That we betrayed our ally in 2014 after putting our signatures on the Budapest Memorandum is a shameful stain on our reputation, and it'll stay there for good. Not unlike Munich Agreement with Hitler in 1938.The USA provided 1.94 billion in "selected" military assistance to Ukraine during its 2016 to 2021 fiscal years. See Table 2 in the link below. Add in contributions from other NATO countries and any categories of funding not included in the table, and you're in the billions, like I wrote. I don't imagine Russia was envisioning Ukraine might become a member of NATO at the time the Budapest Memorandum was signed. We were pretty friendly with Russia back then. Unfortunately, in no small part because of neocons in the USA, that's not the case right now.

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12040

I have another question for you. I find it kind of funny that you believe Ukraine should cede Crimea to the aggressor, though. How would you feel if Mexico tried to take back California by force?

Wait, that's a libtard state, so I'm sure you wouldn't mind. How about Texas then? How about Utah and Arizona? Would it be OK for Mexico to take them all back? Why not (if not)? Why is it OK for Russia to grab Crimea, but not for Mexico?Your analogy is backwards. The USA stole California, Arizona and Utah from Mexico. Texas was an independent country at the time.

Furthermore, indisputably, the majority of Crimeans wanted to be part of Russia, before and after the 2014 Referendum and the Russian takeover. See Polling, here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum

If Mexico had taken back Southern California in the 1880's, when Mexican Americans were still a majority of the population, and if the majority of the population wanted to be part of Mexico, would I argue that the United Kingdom should be pumping billions into this imaginary war on the side of the USA? No.

No, he didn't. It's yet another myth picked by Putin from the history dustbin. It's unfortunate that you repeat this Putin propaganda nonsense.The preceding was replying to my comment, "Gorbachev thought he had a commitment from the USA not to expand NATO. " This is another one where I believe I'm indisputably right.

From the link below, which goes into a lot more detail.

USA Secretary of State James Baker's famous "not one inch eastward" assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified USA, Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early

How do you suggest we work "to end this lunacy"? Drop the euphemisms already and say what you mean. You do want to tell Ukraine to cede the territories Russia has already occupied. This is what you, Elvis and every other appeaser of war criminals mean by "ending this lunacy".

There is the name for it: Munich-38.

And it didn't work.The people in Crimea, and probably in some parts of Donetsk and Luhansk would have preferred to be part of Russia before the 2022 war. Ideologically, it would make sense for Ukraine to cede those areas. Practically, if Ukraine cedes more, the end result will be much preferable to the status quo right now, where people are dying and the economy is suffering.

With respect to any territory retained by Russia, it may turn out very much like what happened in those areas Mexico ceded to the USA in the 1800's. Undoubtedly the Mexicans living there preferred to be governed by Mexico, and some must have fought against the USA. But California, Utah and Arizona are much more prosperous than they would be if still part of Mexico. Russia's per capita GDP is about 2-1/2 times that of Ukraine.

Historically on average Democrats have been somewhat more anti-war than Republicans. Why is this different this time around? Maybe some of it has to do with Trump. Putin and Russia tried to help Trump in the 2016 election, and perhaps Democrats want to punish them for it. I just wish we weren't in a new cold war.

Tiny 12

06-21-23, 22:09

Furthermore, indisputably, the majority of Crimeans wanted to be part of Russia, before and after the 2014 Referendum and the Russian takeover. See Polling, here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendumI should read links and footnotes before I post. I should have said the majority of Crimeans indisputably wanted to be part of Russia after the 2014 Referendum. The polls before had mixed results, but show support for unification of Russia or autonomy far preferred to becoming a common province of Ukraine, like Donetsk and Luhansk. Crimea did have autonomy in Ukraine before 2014. Crimea was a part of Russia until 1954.

Tiny 12

06-21-23, 22:35

I do not agree with anything you wrote in your post. I have not paid attention to American Politics for over 10 years and I left the country. I felt it was deteriorating rapidly and feel that if you are not going to do anything for me, at least do not fuck with me. I am now truly free and I go where I am treated best You should get a passport and use that birth privilege that your mama gave you to see that the Dis (United States of America) is not the center of the world. Only those that have never left it shores think that. The most important vote is the vote of my USD. And that USD does not get spent in the Dis (United States of America). People that think that their vote at the ballot box means anything when the executives in countries around the world do not control things tells me they need to be WOKE up and deal with the reality of the world as it is. Not fantasies of what they would like it to be. I have taken the orange pill. And the world looks completely different now.Tooms has already done that, left the USA. He's just extremely partisan.

A question, is that passport you mention an American one? I understand the USA and Eritrea are the only countries in the world that tax their citizens and require them to file income tax returns regardless of where they live in the world. And also that some foreign banks won't accept USA Citizens as customers, because of our government's onerous reporting requirements. So a USA citizen living abroad may have to jump through hoops to simply open a bank account. All of that seemingly would make it difficult to truly be free, just by leaving the USA.

And a second question, when you say "take the orange pill," do you mean you finally recognized what the USA government's all about? Or are you talking about crypto?

And finally, what does "Dis" mean?

Sorry for all the questions. You may be my new guru.

EihTooms

06-22-23, 02:33

I do not agree with anything you wrote in your post. I have not paid attention to American Politics for over 10 years and I left the country. I felt it was deteriorating rapidly and feel that if you are not going to do anything for me, at least do not fuck with me. I am now truly free and I go where I am treated best You should get a passport and use that birth privilege that your mama gave you to see that the Dis (United States of America) is not the center of the world. Only those that have never left it shores think that. The most important vote is the vote of my USD. And that USD does not get spent in the Dis (United States of America). People that think that their vote at the ballot box means anything when the executives in countries around the world do not control things tells me they need to be WOKE up and deal with the reality of the world as it is. Not fantasies of what they would like it to be. I have taken the orange pill. And the world looks completely different now.I moved out of the USA to retire in Thailand almost 11 years ago and have not returned since. I worked, made money and invested in the USA and still have rental property there. I vote and care about what happens in the USA because I have friends, family and investments there. And because what happens in the USA does not stay in the USA. Obviously.

Ok, if executives in other countries control everything then my votes for Dems have been empowering executives to produce virtually every result that has presented me with more, better and higher paying income, business and investment gains over the years while some numbskulls' votes for Repubs have empowered executives to produce the only meaningful crap results, income, business and investment losses I have experienced in the past 70 years. And any historical data record you've got shows I was clearly not alone in that experience.

So if it makes you feel better, here is a big Thank You for the executives in other countries pulling the strings on Dems. Piss on the executives in other countries pulling the strings on Repubs.

Xpartan

06-22-23, 05:31

The USA provided 1.94 billion in "selected" military assistance to Ukraine during its 2016 to 2021 fiscal years. See Table 2 in the link below. Add in contributions from other NATO countries and any categories of funding not included in the table, and you're in the billions, like I wrote. I don't imagine Russia was envisioning Ukraine might become a member of NATO at the time the Budapest Memorandum was signed. We were pretty friendly with Russia back then. Unfortunately, in no small part because of neocons in the USA, that's not the case right now.

https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12040 Yes, non-lethal assistance after the non-provoked Russia's invasion of Crimea and Donbass. That cowardice has come back to bite us in the ass because if we had armed Ukraine to the teeth, the February 24 wouldn't have happened.

Your analogy is backwards. The USA stole California, Arizona and Utah from Mexico. Texas was an independent country at the time. Seriously, it was "independent" for 9 years or so. But that's besides the point.

Furthermore, indisputably, the majority of Crimeans wanted to be part of Russia, before and after the 2014 Referendum and the Russian takeover. See Polling, here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum Indisputably, no less! The first sentence in your link says it is a disputed referendum. The article goes on listing numerous issues with this so-called referendum. Did you even read it?

But sure, why not advocate a so-called "referendum" held under the guidance of Russian armed forces and intelligence agencies.

If Mexico had taken back Southern California in the 1880's, when Mexican Americans were still a majority of the population, and if the majority of the population wanted to be part of Mexico, would I argue that the United Kingdom should be pumping billions into this imaginary war on the side of the USA? No. You've masterfully evaded my question. Bravo!

The preceding was replying to my comment, "Gorbachev thought he had a commitment from the USA not to expand NATO. " This is another one where I believe I'm indisputably right.

From the link below, which goes into a lot more detail.

USA Secretary of State James Baker's famous "not one inch eastward" assurance about NATO expansion in his meeting with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on February 9, 1990, was part of a cascade of assurances about Soviet security given by Western leaders to Gorbachev and other Soviet officials throughout the process of German unification in 1990 and on into 1991, according to declassified USA, Soviet, German, British and French documents posted today by the National Security Archive at George Washington University.

The documents show that multiple national leaders were considering and rejecting Central and Eastern European membership in NATO as of early 1990 and through 1991, that discussions of NATO in the context of German unification negotiations in 1990 were not at all narrowly limited to the status of East German territory, and that subsequent Soviet and Russian complaints about being misled about NATO expansion were founded in written contemporaneous memcons and telcons at the highest levels.

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/russia-programs/2017-12-12/nato-expansion-what-gorbachev-heard-western-leaders-early I've got it, you just like the word "indisputably".

Read:

Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says "No".

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no

TL; DR.

NO, Baker has never ever, ever, ever, ever, but wait, let me repeat once again -- ever -- promised Gorbachev or anyone else that NATO wouldn't expand eastward.

And did I fucking say NEVER?

Whatever they were discussing was in the terms "what if". No promises were given. Ever!

We now have a very authoritative voice from Moscow confirming this understanding. Russia behind the Headlines has published an interview with Gorbachev, who was Soviet president during the discussions and treaty negotiations concerning German reunification. The interviewer asked why Gorbachev did not insist that the promises made to you (Gorbachev) particularly U.S. Secretary of State James Bakers promise that NATO would not expand into the Eastbe legally encoded? Gorbachev replied: The topic of NATO expansion was not discussed at all, and it wasnt brought up in those years. Another issue we brought up was discussed: making sure that NATOs military structures would not advance and that additional armed forces would not be deployed on the territory of the then-GDR after German reunification. Bakers statement was made in that context Everything that could have been and needed to be done to solidify that political obligation was done. And fulfilled.Here is the interview with Gorbachev. Will that be enough for you to stop this nonsense?

https://www.rbth.com/international/2014/10/16/mikhail_gorbachev_i_am_against_all_walls_40673.html

The people in Crimea, and probably in some parts of Donetsk and Luhansk would have preferred to be part of Russia before the 2022 war. Ideologically, it would make sense for Ukraine to cede those areas. Practically, if Ukraine cedes more, the end result will be much preferable to the status quo right now, where people are dying and the economy is suffering. I could rant and rant about your hypocrisy (Russia and her proxies have KILLED the economy of Donbass in the last 9 years; it's one ghost town after another now), but since you don't insert "indisputably" I'll let it slip.

With respect to any territory retained by Russia, it may turn out very much like what happened in those areas Mexico ceded to the USA in the 1800's. Undoubtedly the Mexicans living there preferred to be governed by Mexico, and some must have fought against the USA. But California, Utah and Arizona are much more prosperous than they would be if still part of Mexico. Russia's per capita GDP is about 2-1/2 times that of Ukraine. All Russia's GDP is in Moscow and Saint Petersburg. Russia is a 3rd world country everywhere outside a few large cities. Very soon it'll be a failed state. Every part of Russia-occupied territory in Ukraine is a hot mess, and it was a mess long before the war started. But that's beside the point. It's not their country, period!

Historically on average Democrats have been somewhat more anti-war than Republicans. They have? Well, FDR wasn't anti-war when the choice was to fight Hitler or let him have his fun. Maybe Democrats know what wars are worth fighting and what wars are unnecessary like Iraq. I wonder if you remember the administration that started that war.

PVMonger

06-22-23, 16:00

JustTK

06-22-23, 16:09

I don't believe COVID 19 was developed as a bioweapon, so have a tough time accepting the analogy. Forcing reparations on a country is a bad idea. We learned that from the Treaty of Versailles. The effect on Germany, and later on the world after Hitler came to power, was devastating.
Bioweapons was never part of the analogy, so you can out that part aside. The point I am making is that when the actions of one party cause damage not another parties property, financial or physical, the causer is held repsonsible for those damages.

The big difference between German reparations then and USA now is that Germany had been destroyed by war and was unable to pay those reparations. USA has done nothing but cause war and is perfectly able to pay reparations. Just ask Besos and Musk to cough it up. Better still, Gates.

Tiny 12

06-23-23, 01:21

There's some damning coverage on the Wall Street Journal editorial page today, coming from whistleblower Gary Shapley, "leader of an elite team of (IRS) agents specializing in international tax investigations, (who) was brought in as supervisor of the Hunter case in January 2020." For example,

Mr. Shapley recounts that his team obtained a July 30, 2017 WhatsApp message from Hunter Biden to Henry Zhao, a Chinese businessman. The testimony says Hunter wrote:

I am sitting here with my father and we would like to understand why the commitment made has not been fulfilled. Tell the director that I would like to resolve this now before it gets out of hand, and now means tonight. And, Z, if I get a call or text from anyone involved in this other than you, Zhang, or the chairman, I will make certain that between the man sitting next to me and every person he knows and my ability to forever hold a grudge that you will regret not following my direction. I am sitting here waiting for the call with my father.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/irs-whistleblower-hunter-biden-probe-gary-shapley-joe-biden-bc42321d?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

Now was he really sitting there with his father? I kind of doubt it. But that sounds a lot like blackmail and extortion.

The IRS investigators were prevented from doing their jobs by higher ups every step of the way, but still came up with a recommendation to charge Hunter with felony tax evasion, felony false tax returns, and failures to pay tax. Mr. Shapley says this was partially based on Hunters textbook tax evasion of declaring his income from the Ukrainian firm Burisma as a loan. Mr. Shapley says the team was also looking into a Foreign Agents Registration Act case. Recall that's part of what sent Paul Manafort to prison.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-hunter-biden-whistle-blows-arrest-doj-irs-firearm-felony-jail-9d114e5f?mod=article_inline

I would dare expect that if any of us were disguising $500,000 a year in directors fees as loans, they'd throw the book at us. Hunter got off with two misdemeanor charges.

Equal justice for all, right. We have a federal government of the politicians, by the politicians and FOR the politicians. And for their kids and grandkids. Attorneys at the DOJ refused to allow the IRS agents to interview financial transactions of Joe Biden's grandchildren, or pursue a search warrant of Joe's guest house (Hunter's onetime residence.)

Tiny 12

06-23-23, 01:28

Bioweapons was never part of the analogy, so you can out that part aside. The point I am making is that when the actions of one party cause damage not another parties property, financial or physical, the causer is held repsonsible for those damages.

The big difference between German reparations then and USA now is that Germany had been destroyed by war and was unable to pay those reparations. USA has done nothing but cause war and is perfectly able to pay reparations. Just ask Besos and Musk to cough it up. Better still, Gates.JustTK, You never made a good case that the USA should pay reparations for COVID in my mind. I believe the USA Role in the world was very positive during the pandemic. The Moderna and Pfizer vaccines and Paxlovid, mostly developed in the USA, saved hundreds of thousands of lives all over the world.

Now if you want to argue the USA Should pay reparations for war in certain instances, I believe you could make a very good case. Getting the USA, or China, to pay reparations would be next to impossible though. They're the top two economic and military powers in the world, and their politicians and people aren't going to agree to it.

Gates is giving his fortune away to charity in a way that will benefit many of the world's poorest. Musk has used his capital to pioneer developments in electric vehicles, solar batteries, and satellite technology. I believe taking money away from them and giving it to inefficient and often corrupt governments to distribute as reparations would be very unwise. Bezos' giving on the other hand might be a good argument for socialism. He gave a $100 million, probably tax deductible, gift to Dolly Parton for example. But in general I'm opposed to taking capital away from our most successful capitalists, in excess of normal taxes levied on everyone else.

Tiny 12

06-23-23, 01:37

I should read links and footnotes before I post. I should have said the majority of Crimeans indisputably wanted to be part of Russia after the 2014 Referendum. The polls before had mixed results, but show support for unification of Russia or autonomy far preferred to becoming a common province of Ukraine, like Donetsk and Luhansk. Crimea did have autonomy in Ukraine before 2014. Crimea was a part of Russia until 1954.

And I think that almost everyone has seen the videos of Russian soldiers (with weapons) taking people to "vote" last year. Any "vote" where somebody holds a gun to your head isn't a "vote" at all.

Indisputably, no less! The first sentence in your link says it is a disputed referendum. The article goes on listing numerous issues with this so-called referendum. Did you even read it?

But sure, why not advocate a so-called "referendum" held under the guidance of Russian armed forces and intelligence agencies.That's why I referred to the polling, not the referendum. The post referendum polls referenced in the link were conducted by the USA Government Broadcasting Board of Governors agency, Gallup, the Pew Research Center, and GfK, which is Germany's biggest market research organization. All showed overwhelming support among Crimeans for the results of the referendum. None of those groups were holding guns to people's heads. None were conducted under the guidance of Russian armed forces or intelligence agencies. Again, see Post-referendum polls in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum..

Xpartan, I strongly disagree with a number of your points but need to get some dinner before I have to go back to work. I'll be back with you.

EihTooms

06-23-23, 03:58

Tooms has already done that, left the USA. He's just extremely partisan.

A question, is that passport you mention an American one? I understand the USA and Eritrea are the only countries in the world that tax their citizens and require them to file income tax returns regardless of where they live in the world. And also that some foreign banks won't accept USA Citizens as customers, because of our government's onerous reporting requirements. So a USA citizen living abroad may have to jump through hoops to simply open a bank account. All of that seemingly would make it difficult to truly be free, just by leaving the USA.

And a second question, when you say "take the orange pill," do you mean you finally recognized what the USA government's all about? Or are you talking about crypto?

And finally, what does "Dis" mean?

Sorry for all the questions. You may be my new guru.It has been years since I had to choose and current laws might be different, but I believe there are several countries around the world with an agreement with the USA that allows the expat to choose which country's federal taxes to pay. Thailand is one of them. I could have chosen to pay Thailand taxes on income rather than USA taxes. But, again, I have not looked into it in years.

I never even considered choosing to pay Thailand taxes instead of USA Federal taxes. For one thing I don't know the Thai language well enough to be absolutely certain what I would owe, who to pay and that there isn't a badly translated passage in paragraph 12 on page 1,523 of the Thai tax code that really states all of my income and property transfers to the royals at my age 70 or some such craziness. Of course, there is no option not to pay Thailand's 7% consumer VAT tax on some purchases. However, some businesses allow visitors to get that refunded at the airport on departure if you've kept all the receipts and don't mind waiting in a queue or at the airport for who knows how long to get that money back. I don't think I have ever met a USA visitor to Thailand that has done it.

But primarily it is because I have never in my life felt paying taxes in the USA was so onerous or had the least bit of more downside than upside to pay them that I needed to jump through flaming hoops to avoid it. And that was especially true when I included California State tax to the mix. My god, the upside to being lucky enough to have lived, worked, earned and invested in California USA for 50+ years so far surpassed any potential downside it was ridiculous and pathetic to spend as much as a minute whining and complaining about it.

PVMonger

06-23-23, 04:34

That's why I referred to the polling, not the referendum. The post referendum polls referenced in the link were conducted by the USA Government Broadcasting Board of Governors agency, Gallup, the Pew Research Center, and GfK, which is Germany's biggest market research organization. All showed overwhelming support among Crimeans for the results of the referendum. None of those groups were holding guns to people's heads. None were conducted under the guidance of Russian armed forces or intelligence agencies. Again, see Post-referendum polls in

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Crimean_status_referendum..

Xpartan, I strongly disagree with a number of your points but need to get some dinner before I have to go back to work. I'll be back with you.Every Repub who posts here say polls aren't valid. Unless, of course, the polls favor their position. I certainly don't give any credence to a poll conducted in Ukraine.

Here are some quotes from the link above. "Before, during and after the referendum was proclaimed, the Crimean peninsula saw Russian soldiers take over public buildings and Ukrainian military installations. When the referendum was proclaimed, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People called for a boycott of the referendum. " and "A poll by the International Republican Institute in May 2013 found that 53% wanted "Autonomy in Ukraine (as today)", 12% were for "Crimean Tatar autonomy within Ukraine", 2% for "Common oblast of Ukraine" and 23% voted for "Crimea should be separated and given to Russia". ".

Tiny 12

06-23-23, 17:24

I had no idea that this story had broke before. I am surprised it never got much traction. Thanks for that.

It doesn't prove lab leak? Like if I find a starnger in my house with a bloody knife in his hand and my wife dead on the floor, that doesn't prove the stranger killed her either. Its true maybe an infected bat flew in thru the lab window and infected them. Hey strange things happen!

And most certainly the lab was doing gain of function, so again you just want to ignore all the evidence and "wah, wah, wah, I can't hear you!If you don't know JustTK, eating crow is an American saying for ashamedly admitting you were wrong. I'm not quite there yet, and I already admitted you may be right. But there's some new reporting, out this week, again in the Wall Street Journal. Some of it repeats what you've already said.

The three researchers working at the Wuhan Lab back in late 2019 who fell ill were as follows.

Ben Hu, who had done extensive laboratory research on how coronaviruses infect humans.

Yu Ping, a Chinese scientist who wrote a 2019 thesis that was the first to describe a new family of SARS-like coronaviruses that are most closely related to the COVID 19 virus.

Yan Zhu.

The three "published on SARS-related coronavirus experiments done at inappropriately low biosafety settings that could have resulted in a laboratory infection," according to Robert Kadlec, a former senior Health and Human Services department official who conducted a Senate study that concluded a lab leak was the more likely cause of COVID.

The article goes on to say, "The Government Accountability Office noted in a report last week that some of the research at the Wuhan Institute was funded by the USA Agency for International Development and the National Institutes of Health. Between 2014 and 2019, about $1. 4 million was disbursed for work at the institute by both agencies before such grants were suspended. ".

Tiny 12

06-23-23, 17:32

Every Repub who posts here say polls aren't valid. Unless, of course, the polls favor their position. I certainly don't give any credence to a poll conducted in Ukraine.Historically Republicans have been more motivated to go out and vote. The polls may reflect voters intentions reasonably well, but not as many Democratic and Democratic leaning voters showed up at the polls. So the Republicans had a point.

That started changing around 2020 for three reasons.

Trump encouraged Republicans not to participate in mail in and absentee voting.

Democrats and many independents are mad as hell at Trump because he tried to steal an election. And Trump's the figurehead of the Republican Party.

The Supreme Court abortion decision made many Democrats and independents mad as hell too.

Now Democrats are more motivated to vote, and outperforming the polls. You saw that in 2022.

Going forward, I expect Democrats will be the ones saying the polls aren't valid.

Here are some quotes from the link above. "Before, during and after the referendum was proclaimed, the Crimean peninsula saw Russian soldiers take over public buildings and Ukrainian military installations. When the referendum was proclaimed, the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People called for a boycott of the referendum. " and "A poll by the International Republican Institute in May 2013 found that 53% wanted "Autonomy in Ukraine (as today)", 12% were for "Crimean Tatar autonomy within Ukraine", 2% for "Common oblast of Ukraine" and 23% voted for "Crimea should be separated and given to Russia". ".Yeah, that's why I posted the correction. The May, 2013 poll was pre-referendum. The post referendum polls in the Wikipedia link, all conducted by respected western organizations, showed overwhelming support for the results of the referendum.

Paulie97

06-23-23, 22:24

It doesn't prove lab leak? Like if I find a starnger in my house with a bloody knife in his hand and my wife dead on the floor, that doesn't prove the stranger killed her either. Its true maybe an infected bat flew in thru the lab window and infected them. Hey strange things happen!You have both a false analogy and a non-sequitur going here. These recent revelations come from questionable anonymous sources while there remains some decent evidence to point to the wet market spillover theory. There likely will never be a slam dunk on this one thus dogmaticism is invalid.

https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2023/06/covid-origin-theories-rival-data-evidence/674495/

Tiny 12

06-24-23, 03:43

It has been years since I had to choose and current laws might be different, but I believe there are several countries around the world with an agreement with the USA that allows the expat to choose which country's federal taxes to pay. Thailand is one of them. I could have chosen to pay Thailand taxes on income rather than USA taxes. But, again, I have not looked into it in years.

I never even considered choosing to pay Thailand taxes instead of USA Federal taxes. For one thing I don't know the Thai language well enough to be absolutely certain what I would owe, who to pay and that there isn't a badly translated passage in paragraph 12 on page 1,523 of the Thai tax code that really states all of my income and property transfers to the royals at my age 70 or some such craziness. Of course, there is no option not to pay Thailand's 7% consumer VAT tax on some purchases. However, some businesses allow visitors to get that refunded at the airport on departure if you've kept all the receipts and don't mind waiting in a queue or at the airport for who knows how long to get that money back. I don't think I have ever met a USA visitor to Thailand that has done it.

But primarily it is because I have never in my life felt paying taxes in the USA was so onerous or had the least bit of more downside than upside to pay them that I needed to jump through flaming hoops to avoid it. And that was especially true when I included California State tax to the mix. My god, the upside to being lucky enough to have lived, worked, earned and invested in California USA for 50+ years so far surpassed any potential downside it was ridiculous and pathetic to spend as much as a minute whining and complaining about it.There are dual tax treaties between the USA and Thailand and other countries. They do not give you any choice as to where you file returns or pay tax. If you're a USA Citizen, you must file a USA Tax return, no matter where you live. It's been that way during your entire adult life. The only exception is if your income is under $14,700.

If you don't have any Thai sourced income, I'm not sure whether or not you need to file a tax return in Thailand. I looked into this some time back, and Thailand used to have a territorial tax system. You didn't have to pay tax in Thailand for income realized from the USA, or any other country besides Thailand. But from a quick Google search, Thailand may now be taxing foreign income brought into Thailand from abroad, if the taxpayer is resident in Thailand over 180 days in a year.

The USA taxes your worldwide income. There is one exception. You could realize up to $112,000 per year in EARNED income (for example, from a salary) in a foreign country and not pay USA Taxes on that amount. This is not available if you spend over 30 days in the USA over a 12 month period.

You are generally allowed to use foreign income taxes paid as a tax credit on your USA Income tax. You will generally end up paying the higher of the tax rates of the two countries. For example, say you pay 10% tax on income from a Thai rental property, and you're in the 30% tax bracket in the USA. Then you end up paying a tax of 10% on that income to Thailand, and 20% to the USA.

If you have a Thai bank account or a bank or securities account in any other country, I assume you know you need to file Form Fincen 114 with the Treasury Department, and Form 8938 with your Form 1040. The penalties for not filing are severe. A friend had about $30,000 in a foreign bank account that he didn't report. He received roughly $50 interest income over a several year period. He went through voluntary disclosure with the IRS because he hadn't filed the Fincen 114, and ended up paying about 30% of his highest bank balance, or $9000 in penalties, plus about $3000 in accounting or legal fees. Again, he only had $50 in undeclared income! If he hadn't gone through voluntary disclosure and the IRS had caught him, he figures he would have paid a fine of about $45,000, or 150% of his highest bank balance.

You seem pretty astute, so you probably have been complying with the reporting requirements for foreign financial accounts and foreign income, if you have any. If not feel free to PM me. I may be a dreaded Republican/Bothsider/Neithersider, but otherwise am a reasonably nice person. And have unfortunately had to put a lot of time in over the years on this subject.

I don't begrudge paying the state of Texas or my city or county taxes. They're efficient and don't rape me. I'd happily pay them more. I do not share your view of the taxes I pay to the federal government.

EihTooms

06-24-23, 06:09

U.S. intelligence agencies remain divided over likely Covid origin, report shows

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/24/us-intelligence-agencies-remain-divided-over-likely-covid-origin.html?__source=androidappshare

A long-anticipated government report on the origins of Covid-19 offered new details on the U.S. intelligence communitys findings but did not state definitively whether the source of the coronavirus was exposure to an infected animal or an event at a laboratory.

All agencies continue to assess that both a natural and laboratory-associated origin remain plausible hypotheses to explain the first human infection, the 10-page declassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence said.

The report laid out divisions within the Intelligence Community.

While the National Intelligence Council and four unnamed agencies found that natural exposure to an infected animal was most likely, the Department of Energy and FBIs assessment was that a laboratory-associated incident was the more likely scenario for the first human infection.

Meanwhile, the CIA and an unidentified agency remain unable to determine the precise origin of the COVID-19 pandemic, as both hypotheses rely on significant assumptions or face challenges with conflicting reporting, the report states.

But almost all intelligence agencies agreed that the virus wasnt genetically engineered, and all agencies agreed that Covid was not manufactured as a biological weapon.

Congress passed legislation earlier this year requiring the intelligence community to declassify information relating to potential links between the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the pandemics origins.

The report shed light on the Wuhan institute, which has been at the center of a hypothesis that the virus escaped from a lab and began infecting people or was transmitted to humans from an animal.

In 2021, a U.S. intelligence report identified three researchers at the Wuhan Institute of Virology who sought treatment at a hospital after falling ill in November 2019 -- providing inconclusive, circumstantial evidence that appeared to bolster a hypothesis that the virus may have spread to humans after escaping from the lab.

The intelligence community in March expanded its inquiry into Covid-19, by examining whether the first human infection with the virus was the result of natural exposure to an infected animal or a lab-linked incident, according to Fridays report.

A spokesman for the White House National Security Council said the reports release reflects a commitment from President Joe Biden to declassify and share as much information as possible related to the origins of COVID-19, while protecting sources and methods. The spokesman added that getting to the bottom of the origins of Covid remains a top priority for the president.Now, if only there had been some Pandemic Prevention and Response agents in that lab in November 2019 to monitor and report those first cases to the world so immediate action could have been taken to prevent or at least greatly delay its development into a Pandemic until effective vaccines had been invented, distributed and administered throughout the world. Word is just a 2-3 month heads up would have made all the difference.

I hear such agents were fully funded and maintained there during the Obama Administration. I wonder what happened to them after that.

Lololol.

Tiny 12

06-24-23, 17:13

U.S. intelligence agencies remain divided over likely Covid origin, report shows

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/06/24/us-intelligence-agencies-remain-divided-over-likely-covid-origin.html?__source=androidappshare

Now, if only there had been some Pandemic Prevention and Response agents in that lab in November 2019 to monitor and report those first cases to the world so immediate action could have been taken to prevent or at least greatly delay its development into a Pandemic until effective vaccines had been invented, distributed and administered throughout the world. Word is just a 2-3 month heads up would have made all the difference.

I hear such agents were fully funded and maintained there during the Obama Administration. I wonder what happened to them after that.

Lololol.Whether COVID 19 came from a lab leak, from gain of function research, and / or the Wuhan market is indeed not settled, and as you say various USA government agencies disagree about the source.

Some evidence came out earlier this year that supports the theory that the transmission of COVID-19 to humans was through animals at the Wuhan market. See.

https://www.science.org/content/article/covid-19-origins-missing-sequences

If this theory is correct, it points to a Chinese coverup, of the origin of COVID. The Chinese CDC acquired samples from stalls of the Wuhan market between January 1, 2020 and March 2, 2020. They submitted papers that said the samples that tested positive for the COVID virus contained human genetic material, but no DNA from animals. Furthermore, they concluded that the animals at the marketplace probably weren't the origin of COVID.

Fast forward to 2023. On March 4, Florence Debarre, a French evolutionary biologist, randomly came across a previously unknown sequence of data from the samples collected at the Wuhan market, while doing other research, on the GISAID virology database. The data had been posted there by Chinese researchers, probably in order to satisfy requirements to get their research published in a journal. Based on her analysis, some samples from the Wuhan market that tested positive for COVID did contain animal DNA, from raccoon dogs, bamboo rats, palm civets, and other animals.

What happens next? Well, the data mysteriously disappears from the GISAID database. It's removed, at the request of the submitter.

So why did the data disappear? Well, at one time the Chinese military was pushing the idea that the USA developed the virus and was using it as a weapon. And China also claimed it shut down all its wet markets, where live animals were sold. Neither of those is very compatible with the idea that COVID 19 was initially transmitted to humans at the Wuhan market.

Anyway, Debarre's theory is consistent with JustTK's belief that the Chinese government bears some responsibility for the pandemic, by engaging in a cover up. The Chinese initially reported an outbreak of pneumonia, with no deaths, in late December, 2019 and early January, 2020. The data they provided to the World Health Organization caused the WHO to state there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission on January 22, 2020. The Chinese knew better. On the same day, January 22, they announced a quarantine of the Wuhan area. If the Chinese hadn't been involved in a cover up, perhaps the world could have responded better and fewer lives would have been lost. Or maybe not. The reproduction rate of the virus was pretty high -- as many as 6.5 new infections were generated by each infectious person, according to estimates by researchers. It must be hard to prevent the spread of something like that. See

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7074654/

Debarre's theory is not consistent with your and JustTK's belief that the USA Government bears responsibility for the worldwide pandemic. It's not reasonable to expect that a president Hillary Clinton would have somehow shut down the Wuhan market prior to 2020, or otherwise caused the USA to respond quickly enough to prevent a pandemic, when the Chinese were doing their best to cover it up. Remember, while the first few COVID-19 cases in the USA may have come from China, the pandemic initially spread from China to Europe, and then from Europe to the USA.

EihTooms

06-24-23, 19:53

Whether COVID 19 came from a lab leak, from gain of function research, and / or the Wuhan market is indeed not settled, and as you say various USA government agencies disagree about the source.

Some evidence came out earlier this year that supports the theory that the transmission of COVID-19 to humans was through animals at the Wuhan market. See.

https://www.science.org/content/article/covid-19-origins-missing-sequences

If this theory is correct, it points to a Chinese coverup, of the origin of COVID. The Chinese CDC acquired samples from stalls of the Wuhan market between January 1, 2020 and March 2, 2020. They submitted papers that said the samples that tested positive for the COVID virus contained human genetic material, but no DNA from animals. Furthermore, they concluded that the animals at the marketplace probably weren't the origin of COVID.

Fast forward to 2023. On March 4, Florence Debarre, a French evolutionary biologist, randomly came across a previously unknown sequence of data from the samples collected at the Wuhan market, while doing other research, on the GISAID virology database. The data had been posted there by Chinese researchers, probably in order to satisfy requirements to get their research published in a journal. Based on her analysis, some samples from the Wuhan market that tested positive for COVID did contain animal DNA, from raccoon dogs, bamboo rats, palm civets, and other animals.

What happens next? Well, the data mysteriously disappears from the GISAID database. It's removed, at the request of the submitter.

So why did the data disappear? Well, at one time the Chinese military was pushing the idea that the USA developed the virus and was using it as a weapon. And China also claimed it shut down all its wet markets, where live animals were sold. Neither of those is very compatible with the idea that COVID 19 was initially transmitted to humans at the Wuhan market.

Anyway, Debarre's theory is consistent with JustTK's belief that the Chinese government bears some responsibility for the pandemic, by engaging in a cover up. The Chinese initially reported an outbreak of pneumonia, with no deaths, in late December, 2019 and early January, 2020. The data they provided to the World Health Organization caused the WHO to state there was no evidence of human-to-human transmission on January 22, 2020. The Chinese knew better. On the same day, January 22, they announced a quarantine of the Wuhan area. If the Chinese hadn't been involved in a cover up, perhaps the world could have responded better and fewer lives would have been lost. Or maybe not. The reproduction rate of the virus was pretty high -- as many as 6.5 new infections were generated by each infectious person, according to estimates by researchers. It must be hard to prevent the spread of something like that. See

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7074654/

Debarre's theory is not consistent with your and JustTK's belief that the USA Government bears responsibility for the worldwide pandemic. It's not reasonable to expect that a president Hillary Clinton would have somehow shut down the Wuhan market prior to 2020, or otherwise caused the USA to respond quickly enough to prevent a pandemic, when the Chinese were doing their best to cover it up. Remember, while the first few COVID-19 cases in the USA may have come from China, the pandemic initially spread from China to Europe, and then from Europe to the USA.Seriously, Tiny. I have never seen anyone work so hard to sidestep, dismiss and ignore the most blatantly obvious incomparable World Leader contribution made by Trump in making sure the initial spread developed into a Pandemic regardless where or how it started.

The World expected China to engage in cover ups of that kind. That is what they do. That is why we had agents stationed in those labs, in order to alert responsible officials at the earliest possible time rather than wait until whatever was spreading around in China got so bad even the Chinese could not cover it up anymore.

A President Hillary Clinton could not have prevented a Pandemic from developing by the time China's cover up was no longer possible in the face of so many covered up infection cases? LOL. Hey, no kidding. And neither could a so-called president Trump. Obviously.

But, of course, that utterly misses, ignores and misdirects from the unavoidable fact of Trump's incomparable contribution in removing those agents against all expert warnings not to do something so stupid and dangerous in the first place so as to allow China free reign to engage in a cover up.

How about this; I will even concede that a so-called president Trump could have and indeed might have moved to prevent or at least far more quickly and effectively responded to the earliest possible cases alerts if only that same so-called president Trump had not so stupidly and dangerously removed all the "anti China cover up" agents assigned to that job 5 months earlier. We don't even need to compare him to a Dem in that regard.

Who knows, maybe Roger Stone would have gotten wind of those earliest alerts and decide preventing a historic worldwide economic and health disaster would look nice on Trump's bio instead him having contributed more to creating one than any other individual on the planet and he would have had one his famous meetings with him where he fools big dumb Trump into thinking Stone's idea was something he thought up himself.

Elvis 2008

06-25-23, 14:15

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/msm-betrays-biden-regime-savages-spoxs-over-corruption-bombshells

Globalists now seek:

1) Biden out on health grounds.

2) Hunter out with him faded into obscurity after his plea deal.

3) Trump locked up or disqualified.

4) RFK Jr marginalised like Bernie Sanders was.

5) A Gavin Newsome Vs Ron DeSantis presidential race.

Yeah, that sounds about right.

Paulie97

06-27-23, 21:05

The conservative stacked Supreme Court has in a 6-3 decision rejected the "independent state legislature theory," an unconstitutional angle used by MAGAs to try and steal the 2020 election. It's based on a misreading of Article 1 of the Constitution that reads, "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof. " Looks like MAGAs will still have to win the old fashioned way, at the ballot box.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/27/moore-v-harper-supreme-court-rejects/

All the major news outlets are covering this so take your pick. The bottom line? State legislatures DO NOT have exclusive and unlimited power in setting the rules for national elections. As a consequence state court decisions in the context of Covid which allowed mail in ballot provisions were perfectly valid. There's other implications, especially in matters of district gerrymandering that gives us a better outlook going forward.

Tiny 12

06-28-23, 05:12

I wouldn't vote for Trump for dog catcher, let alone president Tooms. Nor would I vote for Biden. But yes, I admire some of Trump's policies and actions more than Elvis and Cali Guy put together. For example, the changes in the corporate tax in the TCJA that he signed into law. And the way he pushed approval of the COVID vaccines through the FDA. And Operation Warp speed. Contrast to the abysmal failure of the Biden administration in supporting COVID testing during the Omicron wave and in doing something about the extreme shortage of many cancer drugs right now. Biden's FDA shut down our main supplier of cisplatin and carboplatin. People are dying as a result. President Trump never would have let that happen. Yeah he may have sponsored the occasional super spreader event. But nobody's perfect.

EihTooms

06-28-23, 16:20

I wouldn't vote for Trump for dog catcher, let alone president Tooms. Nor would I vote for Biden. Then you might as well vote directly for Trump. With the cactus, tumbleweed, rattlesnake and outhouse Red State Repub-advantaged Electoral College election rigging in place, any vote not cast or not cast for a Dem more often than not ultimately helps a Repub win. But you knew that already.

But yes, I admire some of Trump's policies and actions more than Elvis and Cali Guy put together. For example, the changes in the corporate tax in the TCJA that he signed into law. And the way he pushed approval of the COVID vaccines through the FDA. And Operation Warp speed. Contrast to the abysmal failure of the Biden administration in supporting COVID testing during the Omicron wave and in doing something about the extreme shortage of many cancer drugs right now. Biden's FDA shut down our main supplier of cisplatin and carboplatin. People are dying as a result. President Trump never would have let that happen. Yeah he may have sponsored the occasional super spreader event. But nobody's perfect.So-called president Trump's decisions contrary to all expert warnings not to do something so stupid and dangerous in 2018 and 2019 not only let Trump's Pandemic happen but his 2020 year long dismissal of its spread as a "HOAX", mocking known and proven mitigation measures and lies about how it was already disappearing and disappearing without a vaccine so nobody needed to bother wasting time and money inventing one or taking one made sure with absolute certainty that it would be as historically damaging and economically disastrous as it was.

But you knew that already too.

And, at which point, so much for any phantom or perceived net economic benefit to anyone of that piddling tax cut.

Tiny 12

06-28-23, 19:05

And, at which point, so much for any phantom or perceived net economic benefit to anyone of that piddling tax cut.The federal rate went from 35% to 21%. That's a 40% reduction. We went from the highest corporate income tax rate (state + federal) in the developed world to the middle of the pack. That's not piddling. The corporate cut and other provisions in the TCJA like the GILTI tax on foreign earnings of USA Companies, were badly needed to encourage our companies to add jobs and investment in the USA instead of other countries. And this last fiscal year tax receipts on corporate income were close to an all time high! Thank you President Trump, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and all the other Republican Congressmen who voted for the TCJA!

Tiny 12

06-28-23, 20:17

Yes, non-lethal assistance after the non-provoked Russia's invasion of Crimea and Donbass. That cowardice has come back to bite us in the ass because if we had armed Ukraine to the teeth, the February 24 wouldn't have happened.Arm Ukraine to the teeth before February 24? Yeah, confirm Putin's paranoia, execute the Cuban missile crisis in reverse, risk World War III, that's the ticket!

Indisputably, no less! The first sentence in your link says it is a disputed referendum. The article goes on listing numerous issues with this so-called referendum. Did you even read it?

But sure, why not advocate a so-called "referendum" held under the guidance of Russian armed forces and intelligence agencies.You well know from my earlier posts, including the correction, that I was referring to post referendum polls, conducted by western polling organizations like Gallup.

Read:

Did NATO Promise Not to Enlarge? Gorbachev Says "No".

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no

TL; DR.

NO, Baker has never ever, ever, ever, ever, but wait, let me repeat once again -- ever -- promised Gorbachev or anyone else that NATO wouldn't expand eastward.

And did I fucking say NEVER?

Whatever they were discussing was in the terms "what if". No promises were given. Ever!

Here is the interview with Gorbachev. Will that be enough for you to stop this nonsense?

https://www.rbth.com/international/2014/10/16/mikhail_gorbachev_i_am_against_all_walls_40673.htmlI'm confused. You want me to read a link that you say is so long you didn't read it?

Where did I or my link say that Baker promised Gorbachev anything? Where did I even mention Baker? The words we used were assurance and commitment. YOUR link quotes Gorbachev using the same word, assurance:

"The decision for the USA And its allies to expand NATO into the east was decisively made in 1993. I called this a big mistake from the very beginning. It was definitely a violation of the spirit of the statements and assurances made to us in 1990. ".

Here's Gorbachev in 2008:

The Americans promised that Nato wouldn't move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/1933223/Gorbachev-US-could-start-new-Cold-War.html

Here's another quote, from Gorbachev, from 2009:

Kohl, US Secretary of State James Baker and others assured me that NATO would not move an inch east. The Americans didn't stick to that, and the Germans didn't care. Maybe they even rubbed their hands at how well the Russians were ripped off. What did it bring? It's just that the Russians no longer trust Western promises.

https://www.bild.de/politik/2009/bild-medienpreis/die-deutschen-waren-nicht-aufzuhalten-7864098.bild.html

The assurances about NATO enlargement didn't just come from Baker and weren't directed solely to Gorbachev on the Russian side. They also came from George H. W. Bush, Helmut Kohl, Robert Gates, and others. See my prior link to the National Security Archive / George Washington University link.

You'll undoubtedly find a lot of neocons and Russia hawks and overly legalistic types who agree with you. More historians would probably come down on my side.

I could rant and rant about your hypocrisy (Russia and her proxies have KILLED the economy of Donbass in the last 9 years; it's one ghost town after another now), but since you don't insert "indisputably" I'll let it slip.Here's an article from the strongly pro-Ukraine Kyiv Post in November, 2019:

https://www.kyivpost.com/post/7557

At that point in time, only 5.1% of people living in Russia-controlled parts of Donetsk and Luhansk regions wanted Ukraine to regain control over the territories under the old terms. Fifty-one percent wanted a union with Russia and another 13.4% wanted accession to Russia with special status.

Philosophically, I don't believe a federal government run by people like Joe Biden, Bernie Sanders and AOC should impose Green-New-Deal-Like legislation on Texas, if Texas doesn't want it. And Texas governor Greg Abbott shouldn't impose restrictions on abortion on Austin, if Austinites don't want that. Same principal. Since you seem inclined to use the "f" word for emphasis, I shall too. Let the people do what they fucking want. If Crimeans and people in occupied Donbas (pre-2022) want to be part of Russia anyway, why not encourage the Ukrainians to make that part of a solution to this madness?

All Russia's GDP is in Moscow and Saint Petersburg. Russia is a 3rd world country everywhere outside a few large cities. Very soon it'll be a failed state. Every part of Russia-occupied territory in Ukraine is a hot mess, and it was a mess long before the war started. Malarkey. See the GDP figures from 2018 from this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_federal_subjects_of_Russia_by_GDP_per_capita

Russian nominal GDP per capita was 11,290 USD. Moscow oblast has a population of about 8. 5 million and Leningrad 1. 7 million. The population of Russia is 143 million. Exclude Moscow and Leningrad, do the math, and nominal GDP only drops from 11,290 USD / person to 10,595/ per person, still two or three times Ukraine's. As to "Very soon (Russia will) be a failed state," that's not likely.

They have? Well, FDR wasn't anti-war when the choice was to fight Hitler or let him have his fun. Maybe Democrats know what wars are worth fighting and what wars are unnecessary like Iraq. I wonder if you remember the administration that started that war.I'm a semi-pacifist. If Americans had viewed the world like I do, we wouldn't have gotten into World War I, the Vietnam War or the Iraq War. So what I wrote, that Democrats are somewhat more anti-war than Republicans, was a compliment to Democrats from my perspective.

Since you bring up Hitler, if he'd had 6000 nuclear warheads, many pointed at the USA, when he was backed up against a wall in his bunker in Berlin during the final days of WWII, do you think he would have used them? You appear to view Putin as irrational, so I don't know why this isn't a concern to you. Maybe you should be more worried about this possibility than I am. I view him as rational, nationalistic, and paranoid.

If Russia had pumped $100 billion into support for Iraq and Afghanistan during the Bush/Obama/Trump war on terror, would you have said Russia was doing the right thing?

Tiny 12

06-28-23, 22:15

Very soon it'll be a failed state.However I have to admit, reluctantly, that if Prigozhin had marched all the way into Moscow and civil war broke out, you'd look pretty damn smart. Or psychic.

Spidy

06-28-23, 22:47

However I have to admit, reluctantly, that if Prigozhin had marched all the way into Moscow and taken control, you'd look pretty damn smart. Or psychic.
But perhaps the real beauty of that chess move/stratagem (we'll call it, the Prigozhin gambit), was brilliant in a way, so much so, that it perhaps had the desired effect, without having to march all the way to Moscow.

To the world watching, it exposed Putin for the the coward, weakened and frightened "strongman", that he really is and provided the necessary chink in the armour, that all the circling sharks, need to finished the job.

Tiny 12

06-28-23, 23:14

But perhaps the real beauty of that chess move/stratagem (we'll call it, the Prigozhin gambit), was brilliant in a way, so much so, that it perhaps had the desired effect, without having to march all the way to Moscow.

To the world watching, it exposed Putin for the the coward, weakened and frightened "strongman", that he really is and provided the necessary chink in the armour, that all the circling sharks, need to finished the job.It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out. Will Prigozhin survive the next 30 days? It is amazing that he advanced as far as he did with no resistance from anyone except the Air Force. Ironically, some believe the head of the Air Force, Surovikin, and some other generals were in on the scheme or at least aware of it, which Prigozhin had been planning for weeks. He supposedly had to accelerate the time line when word leaked of his plans to oust the heads of the military. I don't remember where I read this, but it was coming from American government sources.

You might want to take a look at Xpartan's posts over in the Stupid Kyiv thread. While perhaps fanciful they're a good read and some of it kind of fits with your view.

JustTK

06-29-23, 01:10

This is the reason I am against both sides of the political spectrum in USA, bcos people and views like this have been shut down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-5r0rDzynw

EihTooms

06-29-23, 02:44

The federal rate went from 35% to 21%. That's a 40% reduction. We went from the highest corporate income tax rate (state + federal) in the developed world to the middle of the pack. That's not piddling. The corporate cut and other provisions in the TCJA like the GILTI tax on foreign earnings of USA Companies, were badly needed to encourage our companies to add jobs and investment in the USA instead of other countries. And this last fiscal year tax receipts on corporate income were close to an all time high! Thank you President Trump, Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and all the other Republican Congressmen who voted for the TCJA!The failure of major corporate or top marginal tax rate cuts to contribute much if anything to the economy, much less "create jobs" in any meaningful way, has been well known and documented since forever.

Profits Without Prosperity

https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity

Why Dont Jobs and Corporate Profits Match Up?

https://business.time.com/2011/06/03/why-dont-jobs-and-corporate-profits-match-up/

Searching for supply-side effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/searching-for-supply-side-effects-of-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/

These latest Repub Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cuts were no exception to that repeated and utterly predictable result.

Yes, thank you so-called president Trump, Paul Ryan, Moscow Mitch McConnell and all the other Republican Congressmen who voted for the TCJA! But let's not leave out a big thank you to Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, whose similar agenda with their wonderful tax policies all produced similar Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions, Great Repub Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates, Great Repub Job Losses and zero sustained boom times, historic expansions or historic sustained job gains.

John Clayton

06-29-23, 03:30

This is the reason I am against both sides of the political spectrum in USA, bcos people and views like this have been shut down.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C-5r0rDzynwHow exactly has this person been "shut down"? He has 1. 2 M subscribers on Youtube. How are his (kooky, conspiritorial) views being suppressed? And by whom?

PVMonger

06-29-23, 04:25

Since Repubs seem to love conspiracy theories (like the 2020 presidential election was stolen, Chinese thermostats changed votes from Trump to Biden, Jewish space lasers cause forest fires, etc) they ought to chew on this: In September of 2019, the one-term, twice-impeached, twice-indicted, former-guy let funding run out for PREDICT, the USAID project tasked with predicting the viruses that had the potential to turn into pandemics. Several months later, COVID appeared. Coincidence? Could be. It is at least as likely as Hunter Biden's laptop being fruitful.

JustTK

06-29-23, 04:43

How exactly has this person been "shut down"? He has 1. 2 M subscribers on Youtube. How are his (kooky, conspiritorial) views being suppressed? And by whom?I am talkig about JFK. People and views like his have been shut down. Examples, Bernie S, RFK. Did you listen to the JFK speech? You simply cannot speak like that these days. You will be sidelined or ignored, bcos mainstream media is owned now by the loigarchs and simply parrots their narrative.

Tiny 12

06-29-23, 04:44

How exactly has this person been "shut down"? He has 1. 2 M subscribers on Youtube. How are his (kooky, conspiritorial) views being suppressed? And by whom?I think JustTK's referring to JFK. He's got a good point. Kennedy kept our involvement in Vietnam limited. Only 191 Americans died there while Kennedy was in office. After LBJ ramped up, 16,899 Americans died there in 1967 alone. JFK also ultimately made a good decision not to support an invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs, although his timing, like Trump's when he recalled the planes from Iran, was terrible. Finally, resolving the Cuban missile crisis by withdrawing our nuclear weapons from Turkey made the world a safer place.

As to your point, yeah, Jimmy Dore does kind of go off the deep end at the end of the video.

Tiny 12

06-29-23, 05:20

The failure of major corporate or top marginal tax rate cuts to contribute much if anything to the economy, much less "create jobs" in any meaningful way, has been well known and documented since forever.

Profits Without Prosperity

https://hbr.org/2014/09/profits-without-prosperity

Why Dont Jobs and Corporate Profits Match Up?

https://business.time.com/2011/06/03/why-dont-jobs-and-corporate-profits-match-up/

Searching for supply-side effects of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act

https://www.brookings.edu/articles/searching-for-supply-side-effects-of-the-tax-cuts-and-jobs-act/

These latest Repub Tax Cuts and Jobs Act cuts were no exception to that repeated and utterly predictable result.

Yes, thank you so-called president Trump, Paul Ryan, Moscow Mitch McConnell and all the other Republican Congressmen who voted for the TCJA! But let's not leave out a big thank you to Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover, Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush, whose similar agenda with their wonderful tax policies all produced similar Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions, Great Repub Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates, Great Repub Job Losses and zero sustained boom times, historic expansions or historic sustained job gains.I've already addressed your brookings and hbr links here:

What do investors do with cash they receive from buybacks and dividends? They reinvest the money. In the process our economy becomes more efficient. Cash flow realized from buggy manufacturers was recycled into automobile manufacturing for example.

As to the Brookings article, they were absolutely right: "By only analyzing results through 2019, we focused only on short-term effects, which may be a poor guide to the longer run. Short-term growth dynamics typically are dominated by changes in aggregate demand while long-term growth stems from changes in supply. Both experts and advocates emphasize that the supply-side process may take a significant amount of time to take full effect. ".

You don't close down an operation in Ireland for example and move it to Austin the year after a tax cut.

And indeed if you look at investing cash flows, which include capex but not investments in working capital, that's what has happened. Here are cash flows from investments (negative because you're spending money) per share for the S&P 500 going back to 2017, the year before the TCJA took effect.

2017 -141.34.

2018 -138.90.

2019 -181.10.

2020 -214.82.

2021 -221.41.

2022 -226.86.

Investments by the S&P 500 companies have increased by 60% since the TCJA took effect! Not including investments in working capital.

And corporate profits resulting from this additional investment in America are kicking in too. In fact, tax receipts on corporate income were the third highest in history in 2022!

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FCTAX

Now those numbers aren't adjusted for inflation, but just eyeballing the graph, it looks to me like your claim that the TCJA will reduce the amount the federal government steals by 2. 5 trillion over 10 years is bogus. Total federal receipts as a % of GDP also are up, to the fourth highest level in history in 2022. All under a tax regime last modified by the TCJA.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFRGDA188S

Your links, except the Brookings piece, were before the TCJA. Yes, when companies were paying the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world, investing in businesses in America and adding jobs in America wasn’t as compelling.

Please be patient. In due time, I will address your fallacious and hyper-partisan argument that the correlation between GOP presidents and post World War II recessions is meaningful, while the correlation between GDP growth and a GOP controlled House is spurious. I'll also give you another shot at showing the correlation between blood thirsty Democratic presidents and American fatalities in foreign wars is spurious.

EihTooms

06-29-23, 08:08

I've already addressed your brookings and hbr links here:

Your links, except the Brookings piece, were before the TCJA. Yes, when companies were paying the highest corporate tax rate in the developed world, investing in businesses in America and adding jobs in America wasnt as compelling.

Please be patient. In due time, I will address your fallacious and hyper-partisan argument that the correlation between GOP presidents and post World War II recessions is meaningful, while the correlation between GDP growth and a GOP controlled House is spurious. I'll also give you another shot at showing the correlation between blood thirsty Democratic presidents and American fatalities in foreign wars is spurious.Yeah, those pre-TCJA links are there to prove how well known and documented it has been that Repub Supply-SideTrickle-Down policies have failed to produce anything of a net positive as advertised "since forever. ".

The post-TCJA link about its failure to do so was 4 years after it was signed and passed. Contrast that to the positives in declining Unemployment Rates, Jobs Creation, Recovery and Great Recession avoidance just 2 years after Bidenomics was introduced, legislated, signed and passed.

Oh, I have been patiently waiting for hard, real world evidence that Dem economic stewardship results in Great Depressions, Great Recessions, Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates and Massive Job Losses while Repub Economic Stewardship does not for 70 years. And looking for it in the data prior to that going back about 100 years.

Patiently.

Waiting.

And Waiting.

And Waiting.

Paulie97

06-30-23, 20:09

How exactly has this person been "shut down"? He has 1. 2 M subscribers on Youtube. How are his (kooky, conspiritorial) views being suppressed? And by whom?The more conspiratorial and kooky the content the more subscribers and the more $ the guy makes. It's a great racket in the modern era. And YouTube is pretty much the wild wild west, no responsible editorial departments to reign the logical fallacies, half-truths, and lies. This while there's no shortage of suckers eager to drink at those fountains.

Paulie97

06-30-23, 22:23

Oh, I have been patiently waiting for hard, real world evidence that Dem economic stewardship results in Great Depressions, Great Recessions, Skyrocketing Unemployment Rates and Massive Job Losses while Repub Economic Stewardship does not for 70 years. And looking for it in the data prior to that going back about 100 years.

Patiently.

Waiting.

And Waiting.

And Waiting.This has been demonstrated to you for years, with evidence of successes from certain Republican admins that did not experience the ills you speak of. Your coming here daily for years repeating the same fallacious talking points over and over will never change that. To quote a judge that shot down Trump's election lies, "Saying it's so doesn't make it so. "

Paulie97

06-30-23, 23:44

EihTooms

07-01-23, 03:50

This has been demonstrated to you for years, with evidence of successes from certain Republican admins that did not experience the ills you speak of. Your coming here daily for years repeating the same fallacious talking points over and over will never change that. To quote a judge that shot down Trump's election lies, "Saying it's so doesn't make it so. "Ok, so your best shining example of Repub economic stewardship since the late 1920's was just three medium Recessions in 8 years instead of one or two Great ones under Eisenhower along with one of the worst jobs creation records of all time.

But at least some cool cars were built in those Happy Days that many Americans could continue making payments on under those crap jobs creation circumstances thanks to the Unemployment Insurance program set up by FDR.

Impressive.

I guess that one sterling Repub economic stewardship success changes everything else the data shows and proves over and over and over again.

EihTooms

07-01-23, 06:05

Tooms has also been presented with the failings of the one term wonder Jimmy Carter, the same which led to a landslide defeat in his re-election bid. No amount of singing, dancing, twisting himself in knots, or the easiest way out of all, ignore the facts and repeat the same lies over and over will make it all go away.Number of jobs created in the United States from 1933 to 2022, by sitting president(in millions)

https://www.statista.com/statistics/985577/number-jobs-created-sitting-president/

Eisenhower lands DEAD LAST with only 4. 8 million jobs created over 8 years. Oh, along with 3 medium Repub Recessions in those Happy Days years.

By stark contrast, Carter lands in 4th Place with MORE THAN TWICE the number of jobs created under Eisenhower's stewardship in only 4 years. Along with only one piddling Recession that only saw one quarter of GDP Growth contraction of more than -1% while the quarter after that only saw a contraction of less than a single percent. And that one piddling Recession was artificially induced by the Fed in order to cool down an overheated economy that was creating way too many jobs for the number of applicants to take them. Which is the same reason the Fed is trying to artificially induce one today under Biden's stewardship.

BTW, there is no known record of the Fed having to do such a thing to cool down a Repub stewardship economy that was creating too many jobs. Ever. Just in their creating every Great Depression, Great Recession and Serial Recessions within one presidency of the past 100 years, whereupon the Fed had to react in a very, very different way, right? Gee, I guess that makes Repubs the champions of making sure their economic stewardship will never produce meaningful inflation. Oh boy. Or meaningful jobs creation and wage gains either. Congratulations.

Jobs created during U.S. presidential terms

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_created_during_U.S._presidential_terms

Here again the Dem vs Repub pattern is unavoidable and inarguable. Yes, Obama's overall numbers were badly damaged by the fact that he took office just as George W. Bush's Reagonomics-style stewardship results were crashing in around our ears, wiping out millions of job over those first months of Obama's presidency before he and his Dem Congress' economic recovery legislation hit the streets, stopped that Great Repub Recession in its tracks and reversed it into a historic long term economic and jobs creation recovery.

However, as I assume you can plainly see, we've still got Carter soundly destroying Eisenhower in jobs creation and percentage of job gains either by term or if you combine both of Eisenhower's terms vs Carter's one term or reading them inside out or upside down or reverse or inverse, while singing, dancing, twisting or even if you throw in one of Tiny's E=MC2 equations for exponential gains per minute or any other way you want to look at it.

See, I wouldn't have to repeat these inarguable, irrefutable truths right there in the data and all historical records nearly so often if creative, pro-Repub revisionist historians here didn't continue to repeat falsehoods about what really happened and thereby encourage more crap Repub economic results to occur over and over again.

Now, the only question remaining is; Have you selected the Playlist for your singing, dancing and twisting performance tonight?

EihTooms

07-01-23, 06:58

Tiny 12

07-02-23, 06:00

Ok, so your best shining example of Repub economic stewardship since the late 1920's was just three medium Recessions in 8 years instead of one or two Great ones under Eisenhower along with one of the worst jobs creation records of all time.

But at least some cool cars were built in those Happy Days that many Americans could continue making payments on under those crap jobs creation circumstances thanks to the Unemployment Insurance program set up by FDR.

Impressive.

I guess that one sterling Repub economic stewardship success changes everything else the data shows and proves over and over and over again.I'll quote here from a a New York Times article penned by Neil Irwin. While most journalists don't know jack about economics, Irwin has an MBA from Columbia. He's an exception.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/upshot/presidents-have-less-power-over-the-economy-than-you-might-think.html

In most democracies, the lower house of the legislature has more control over fiscal policy than the president or the upper house. In our Congress, the House of Representatives is the lower house. All bills for raising revenue must originate in the House. While admittedly budget bills are an exception, the Senate in general can only pass bills with 60% approval, making party politics less relevant.

As Irwin says, "Congress has, if anything, greater power than the president over how the government taxes and spends. It's almost a punch line that when a president issues a proposed budget each winter, congressional opponents call it "dead on arrival."

Please recall my groundbreaking research, first published here, where I showed that twelve of the fourteen recessions that occurred after the Great Depression occurred under Democratic leadership and control of the House. Republicans did control the House when the 1953 recession started in July, but Democrats controlled it for the four years prior to that, up through January of 1953. Republicans also controlled the House during the 2001 recession. But the GDP decline, from peak to trough, was only a measly 0. 3%.

Yes, Democrats in the House have presided over all the Great Recessions after the Great Depression, which occurred almost 100 years ago.

What was your explanation for this? Well, apparently you believe we live in a dictatorship, where the dictator changes every four years. The president controls the economy. Congress, Fed policy, population growth, innovation and technology, oil shocks, a pandemic, what's happening outside the USA, the business cycle, those are all irrelevant:

Neither any Great Depression, Great Recession or Massive Jobs Destruction nor any Great Recovery, Great Expansion or Historic Jobs Gain occurred because the House made some quirky or meaningful move contrary to what the POTUS ran on, proposed, lobbied for, directed, guided or could have vetoed. The House waits for guidance from the POTUS. The direction of the economy is in the hands of the POTUS as the direction of a ship is in the hands of the Captain. And no major historical result came about, good or bad, because of the ship's crew mutiny and insistence we reverse course.Oh, but I forgot. You do find a way to put the blame for pandemic on Trump. Just like you also blame Trump for Fed policy that failed to control inflation during Biden's presidency, and Eisenhower for the Vietnam War. Do you think you may be a tad bit partisan?

In reality, correlations between economic performance and the party of the president and party that controls the House are spurious. There's no cause and effect. And the legislation and actions during a president's term often don't affect the economy until years later. For example, from Irwin's article.

"The Congressional Budget Office estimated that (Obama's) Affordable Care Act would reduce the labor supply by 2. 3 million because more people would choose not to work. (The thinking being that they were working mainly so they could have employee-sponsored health insurance.) It said this would happen not immediately, but by 2021, a full 11 years after the law was passed and four years after the president who signed it would be out of office."

I provided a second example with corporate taxation below. Right now, the USA under a Biden presidency, is reaping the benefits of a competitive corporate tax regime, implemented by Republicans.

By far, the most cited paper on the correlation between the party of the President and economic performance was written by Alan Blinder, a Democrat who was one of Bill Clinton's economic advisers, and also an adviser to Al Gore and John Kerry during their presidential campaigns. Blinder did indeed find that GDP and employment growth historically were better on average under Democratic presidents. And what did he attribute it to? Luck. His conclusion:

"The Democratic edge stems mainly from more benign oil shocks, superior total factor productivity (TFP) performance, a more favorable international environment, and perhaps more optimistic consumer expectations about the near-term future. "

https://pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1257/aer.20140913

The most popular explanation for outperformance under Democratic presidents perhaps is that the Democrats supposedly emphasize short term demand stimulus while Republicans emphasize supply side economics. For example, when Biden and the Democrats passed the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan and sent out $1400 checks to most Americans, the effects were felt almost immediately, while Biden was president. On the other hand, the changes in the corporate tax regime during the Trump presidency took longer to work. Biden's reaping the benefits now. HOWEVER, according to Blinder and others, this doesn't explain the Democratic Presidents' outperformance.

EihTooms

07-03-23, 03:55

I'll quote here from a a New York Times article penned by Neil Irwin. While most journalists don't know jack about economics, Irwin has an MBA from Columbia. He's an exception.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/17/upshot/presidents-have-less-power-over-the-economy-than-you-might-think.html

In most democracies, the lower house of the legislature has more control over fiscal policy than the president or the upper house. In our Congress, the House of Representatives is the lower house. All bills for raising revenue must originate in the House. While admittedly budget bills are an exception, the Senate in general can only pass bills with 60% approval, making party politics less relevant.

As Irwin says, "Congress has, if anything, greater power than the president over how the government taxes and spends. It's almost a punch line that when a president issues a proposed budget each winter, congressional opponents call it "dead on arrival.".Here are two possible explanations:

1. The agenda proposed and won on by the POTUS as presented by him to the House on which it is now their turn to "originate", "pen" and "control" tax and spending legislation to enact under his direction and power to veto is crap out of the brain of a Repub so-called president and highly effective out of the brain of a Dem President.

Or.

2. It is just a chaotic mess of Mystical Magical Economic Cycles, Witch's Curses, Once in a Hundred Years Catastrophes and Wild Coincidences plaguing Repub so-called presidents and blessing Dem Presidents over and over again.

Does it really matter which reason it is? Your vote for a Dem President has been a vote for every Great Recovery, Economic Expansion and Historic Job Gains if you are that witch and have been voting for almost 100 years so far while voting for any other candidate or not at all has been a vote for every Great Depression, Great Recession, Serial Recessions, Atrocious Jobs Creating Record and Massive Jobs Destruction.

Tiny 12

07-04-23, 04:19

Here are two possible explanations:

1. The agenda proposed and won on by the POTUS as presented by him to the House on which it is now their turn to "originate", "pen" and "control" tax and spending legislation to enact under his direction and power to veto is crap out of the brain of a Repub so-called president and highly effective out of the brain of a Dem President.

Or.

2. It is just a chaotic mess of Mystical Magical Economic Cycles, Witch's Curses, Once in a Hundred Years Catastrophes and Wild Coincidences plaguing Repub so-called presidents and blessing Dem Presidents over and over again.

Does it really matter which reason it is? Your vote for a Dem President has been a vote for every Great Recovery, Economic Expansion and Historic Job Gains if you are that witch and have been voting for almost 100 years so far while voting for any other candidate or not at all has been a vote for every Great Depression, Great Recession, Serial Recessions, Atrocious Jobs Creating Record and Massive Jobs Destruction.You don't have to believe in mystical magical cycles or witches' curses on Republicans any longer Tooms. I've shown you stronger correlations between Democratic control of the House and recessions. And Democratic presidents and American fatalities in wars.

What are the odds that the Democrats would control the House of Representatives for every recession after the great depression except two? One of those two exceptions was the mildest recession (only 0.3% decline from peak to trough) since we began keeping records. And one was preceded months earlier by 4 years of continuous Democratic Party rule in the House.

And what are the odds that 95% of the American fatalities in wars fought since the turn of the last century would have occurred under Democratic Presidents?

Well, like your belief that Republican Presidents screw up the economy worse than Democrats, that's all a load of crap. There's no cause and effect. For example, Trump couldn't have prevented the pandemic and the consequent recession and loss of jobs. Or at least that's what Anthony Fauci said on CNN last night. And Roosevelt just happened to be president when World War II broke out. Shit happens.

I actually believe over the last 30 years the best combination for the economy has been a Democratic President and Republican House, or, better yet, Democratic President and Republican House and Senate. That combination has actually cut spending as a % of GDP and resulted in smaller government. Smaller government means a larger private sector. And when you leave more money in the hands of the private sector, that is, in the hands of the people and businesses, the economy grows and we're all more prosperous.

Furthermore, our national debt is out of control. Somebody needs to stop the fuckers in Washington from spending us into oblivion. And when one party controls government, especially if it's the Democrats, they spend like there's no tomorrow. A Republican president and Democratic House sometimes isn't much better. Look at how Democrats followed right along with George W. Bush in wasting massive amounts on the Iraq invasion. Trump jumped into bed with Pelosi, and he and a Democratic House ran up the national debt by over 20% in just 2020. But admittedly Trump is a Democrat who infiltrated the Republican Party, so maybe that's not the best example.

In hindsight, I should have voted for Clinton for president in 1996 instead of Dole. I wouldn't ever vote for Obama or Biden though, any more than I'd vote for Trump. Those two bastards say I didn't build my business and I didn't pay my fair share. And Biden and the Progressive politicians who increasingly control the Democratic Party want to take the jobs away from my friends and family who work for oil and gas and related companies. Screw them. Why can't they be content to wield power over the states and cities they represent. Why do they have to impose their agendas on the rest of us. There are some parallels between today and 18th century America. And the bicoastal Democratic elite (the politicians, not misguided souls like you) are the Redcoats.

EihTooms

07-05-23, 04:14

You don't have to believe in mystical magical cycles or witches' curses on Republicans any longer Tooms. I've shown you stronger correlations between Democratic control of the House and recessions. And Democratic presidents and American fatalities in wars.

What are the odds that the Democrats would control the House of Representatives for every recession after the great depression except two? One of those two exceptions was the mildest recession (only 0.3% decline from peak to trough) since we began keeping records. And one was preceded months earlier by 4 years of continuous Democratic Party rule in the House.

And what are the odds that 95% of the American fatalities in wars fought since the turn of the last century would have occurred under Democratic Presidents?

Well, like your belief that Republican Presidents screw up the economy worse than Democrats, that's all a load of crap. There's no cause and effect. For example, Trump couldn't have prevented the pandemic and the consequent recession and loss of jobs. Or at least that's what Anthony Fauci said on CNN last night. And Roosevelt just happened to be president when World War II broke out. Shit happens.

I actually believe over the last 30 years the best combination for the economy has been a Democratic President and Republican House, or, better yet, Democratic President and Republican House and Senate. That combination has actually cut spending as a % of GDP and resulted in smaller government. Smaller government means a larger private sector. And when you leave more money in the hands of the private sector, that is, in the hands of the people and businesses, the economy grows and we're all more prosperous. .Then I guess presidential elections don't matter to you regarding the economy, national security and wars since "shit happens" that presidents can neither avert, avoid, prevent or respond well or badly to.

Maybe you, Elvis, Caliguy and the others should demand Dear Leader run for Representative in whatever House distrct he retreats to and calls home during the indictments and trials. He would surely be elected by his fellow Repubs as Minority Leader or Majority Leader and Speaker of the House on the first vote on day one. If the latter, then he will again be Leader of the Free World and Steward of the Economic Agenda usually but apparently mistakenly reserved for whoever runs for and wins the presidency.

You know, like President Pelosi and President McQarthy.

That way he won't have to hide from another debate with Biden or encite another violent, cop-killing Insurrection on a future January 6.

Tiny 12

07-05-23, 05:27

Then I guess presidential elections don't matter to you regarding the economy, national security and wars since "shit happens" that presidents can neither avert, avoid, prevent or respond well or badly to.

Maybe you, Elvis, Caliguy and the others should demand Dear Leader run for Representative in whatever House distrct he retreats to and calls home during the indictments and trials. He would surely be elected by his fellow Repubs as Minority Leader or Majority Leader and Speaker of the House on the first vote on day one. If the latter, then he will again be Leader of the Free World and Steward of the Economic Agenda usually but apparently mistakenly reserved for whoever runs for and wins the presidency.

You know, like President Pelosi and President McQarthy.

That way he won't have to hide from another debate with Biden or encite another violent, cop-killing Insurrection on a future January 6.These are the first words in our Constitution, Article I, Section 1:

"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

Yes, the president does have the power to veto legislation, although Congress can override his veto.

Our founders did not want to recreate a European style monarchy in the United States of America, let alone some kind of command and control style economy directed by a single person.

A Speaker Pelosi or Speaker McCarthy works for and serves at the pleasure of members of her or his party who are members of the House of Representatives. The actual power is vested in the 435 voting representatives.

As I've stated repeatedly, Fed policy, population growth, innovation and technology, oil shocks, changes in productivity, a pandemic, what's happening outside the USA, Congress, and the business cycle have collectively affected GDP and jobs growth, much, much more than the Presidents. And policies and legislation which presidents helped implement often don't affect the economy until after they've left office.

Given that I said I would not vote for Trump for dogcatcher, you should assume I would also not vote for him as a representative in a house district.

As to wars and national security, I'm not sure that either party has done a better job than the other. You can credit Reagan for helping end the cold war, and criticize LBJ and George W. Bush for getting us into stupid wars. You guys of course argue that every war pursued by a Democratic President is right and just, while those pursued by the Republicans are wrong and stupid. Which can become confusing when wars overlap presidencies. And which makes you look warlike and cavalier about the lives of our young men, given that (coincidentally in my view), Democratic presidents have presided over more wars and American fatalities.

EihTooms

07-05-23, 07:28

These are the first words in our Constitution, Article I, Section 1:

"All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives."

Yes, the president does have the power to veto legislation, although Congress can override his veto.

Our founders did not want to recreate a European style monarchy in the United States of America, let alone some kind of command and control style economy directed by a single person.

A Speaker Pelosi or Speaker McCarthy works for and serves at the pleasure of members of her or his party who are members of the House of Representatives. The actual power is vested in the 435 voting representatives.

As I've stated repeatedly, Fed policy, population growth, innovation and technology, oil shocks, changes in productivity, a pandemic, what's happening outside the USA, Congress, and the business cycle have collectively affected GDP and jobs growth, much, much more than the Presidents. And policies and legislation which presidents helped implement often don't affect the economy until after they've left office.

Given that I said I would not vote for Trump for dogcatcher, you should assume I would also not vote for him as a representative in a house district.

As to wars and national security, I'm not sure that either party has done a better job than the other. You can credit Reagan for helping end the cold war, and criticize LBJ and George W. Bush for getting us into stupid wars. You guys of course argue that every war pursued by a Democratic President is right and just, while those pursued by the Republicans are wrong and stupid. Which can become confusing when wars overlap presidencies. And which makes you look warlike and cavalier about the lives of our young men, given that (coincidentally in my view), Democratic presidents have presided over more wars and American fatalities.Yes, the list of wars fought by Americans are many more than most can even recall. Under both Parties. I will leave calculating the overall number of American fatalities under this or that POTUS to the noted Mathematicians:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

However, if we just look at the big wars with American involvement that resulted in notable numbers of American fatalities that most of us even know occurred it should at least be among the ones where someone in American leadership, either the President or the Speaker of the House and I'll go with it being the President on that, voluntarily committed us to by word, deed and / or treaty and not because we were provoked into it by a direct attack on our soil, our troops or by an official declaration of war against us.

So in order to at least compare Repub vs Dem Presidents on that issue, why be so cavalier about American War fatalities and omit that first really big one where a true comparison could begin, The American Civil War? Yeah, I'll put that one on the Repub President at the time. Started by Americans and nobody else on his watch, no argument about it.

Then there was Eisenhower's Vietnam War. He plunged us into that one voluntarily by word, deed and treaty. Sure enough. We were not required to take over for the French when they were defeated and retreated. There was no direct attack on our troops prior to Eisenhower choosing to do that.

George H. W. Bush's Gulf War. Again, not provoked by an attack on our soil or troops.

George W. Bush's War in Irag and Afghanistan. Again, neither of those nations attacked our soil or troops.

Well, that leaves WWI and the Korean War to the Dem presidents up to now. Although I think Truman probably should share a bit of that with Ulysses S. Grant. Yep, Grant. Look it up.

Now, noted Mathematician that you are, I always wondered why you never applied the most rudimentary factor to just about any calculation regarding what happens to some people within a population; the Per Capita number rather than the raw number. Shouldn't we be less cavalier about American fatalities in those wars by at least considering the Per Capita number of Americans killed in them?

Oh, but then I realized going back to at least that first Repub President for the Dem vs Repub comparison, Lincoln and his American Civil War, that Per Capita thing would not be helpful to your cause.

Then I wondered why someone as adamant about deflecting responsibility from Presidents for just about anything negative, passing the buck to others, well especially Repub presidents since almost every really bad thing that has happened to America over the past several decades has happened on a Repub President's watch and extremely little positive, which as we all now know is a wild coincidence of course, why you didn't deflect and pass the buck for all those big war fatalities from the President's responsibility to that of the Generals? That would even apply to the provoked wars.

I mean, much like the Speaker of the House is to the President on economic results, shouldn't you be arguing that those American fatalities in war are the Generals' responsibility? Aren't they the ones who take the basic agenda and goal of the ineffectual and unnecessary President and "originate", "pen" and "control" the details and produce the results?

But then I remembered who the Party affiliation of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Force in Europe was during WWII and realized that would not serve your purposes either.

Oh, and the Party affiliation of the Supreme Union General during The American Civil War.

And the Party affiliation of the Commander of the American Expeditionary Forces on the Western Front during World War I.

And the Party affiliation of the USA General of the Army during the Korean War.

And the Party affiliation of the Commander of Military Assistance and Chief of Staff of the United States Army during the Vietnam War.

And, well, you get the idea I'm sure.

Tiny 12

07-05-23, 19:10

Yes, the list of wars fought by Americans are many more than most can even recall. Under both Parties. I will leave calculating the overall number of American fatalities under this or that POTUS to the noted Mathematicians:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_the_United_States

However, if we just look at the big wars with American involvement that resulted in notable numbers of American fatalities that most of us even know occurred it should at least be among the ones where someone in American leadership, either the President or the Speaker of the House and I'll go with it being the President on that, voluntarily committed us to by word, deed and / or treaty and not because we were provoked into it by a direct attack on our soil, our troops or by an official declaration of war against us.

So in order to at least compare Repub vs Dem Presidents on that issue, why be so cavalier about American War fatalities and omit that first really big one where a true comparison could begin, The American Civil War? Yeah, I'll put that one on the Repub President at the time. Started by Americans and nobody else on his watch, no argument about it.

Then there was Eisenhower's Vietnam War. He plunged us into that one voluntarily by word, deed and treaty. Sure enough. We were not required to take over for the French when they were defeated and retreated. There was no direct attack on our troops prior to Eisenhower choosing to do that.

George H. W. Bush's Gulf War. Again, not provoked by an attack on our soil or troops.

George W. Bush's War in Irag and Afghanistan. Again, neither of those nations attacked our soil or troops.

Well, that leaves WWI and the Korean War to the Dem presidents up to now. Although I think Truman probably should share a bit of that with Ulysses S. Grant. Yep, Grant. Look it up.

Now, noted Mathematician that you are, I always wondered why you never applied the most rudimentary factor to just about any calculation regarding what happens to some people within a population; the Per Capita number rather than the raw number. Shouldn't we be less cavalier about American fatalities in those wars by at least considering the Per Capita number of Americans killed in them?

Oh, but then I realized going back to at least that first Repub President for the Dem vs Repub comparison, Lincoln and his American Civil War, that Per Capita thing would not be helpful to your cause.

Then I wondered why someone as adamant about deflecting responsibility from Presidents for just about anything negative, passing the buck to others, well especially Repub presidents since almost every really bad thing that has happened to America over the past several decades has happened on a Repub President's watch and extremely little positive, which as we all now know is a wild coincidence of course, why you didn't deflect and pass the buck for all those big war fatalities from the President's responsibility to that of the Generals? That would even apply to the provoked wars.

I mean, much like the Speaker of the House is to the President on economic results, shouldn't you be arguing that those American fatalities in war are the Generals' responsibility? Aren't they the ones who take the basic agenda and goal of the ineffectual and unnecessary President and "originate", "pen" and "control" the details and produce the results?

But then I remembered who the Party affiliation of the Supreme Commander of the Allied Force in Europe was during WWII and realized that would not serve your purposes either.

Oh, and the Party affiliation of the Supreme Union General during The American Civil War.

And the Party affiliation of the Commander of the American Expeditionary Forces on the Western Front during World War I.

And the Party affiliation of the USA General of the Army during the Korean War.

And the Party affiliation of the Commander of Military Assistance and Chief of Staff of the United States Army during the Vietnam War.

And, well, you get the idea I'm sure.Tooms, please see below. The good parts are highlighted!

Out of the 623,715 USA military fatalities during the 20th and 21st centuries, 602,450 occurred under Democrat Presidents:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1009819/total-us-military-fatalities-in-american-wars-1775-present/

Most of the 21,267 deaths under Republicans occurred in Vietnam, when President Nixon was extracting us from that conflict, which LBJ started.

So Democrat Presidents are responsible for over 95% of the deaths of our young men and women.

Democrats are a bloodthirsty lot. A Democratic Party president will start a war at the drop of a hat to boost his approval rating. Democrats know the best way to win an election or pull the country out of a recession is to start a war.

And this post, like all my others on this topic, is satirical. Like I said, there's no cause and effect. For some reason Tooms feels compelled to argue against what I'm labeling as a spurious correlation. I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans.

Reply to Paulie:

Yes, it is curious that Tooms is compelled to label the Civil War as a Republican War. Presumably if he maintains that the present day Republican Party should accept responsibility for the Civil War, then he believes present day Democrats should accept responsibility for slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and repression afterwards.

Reply to you:

Agreed except for the Vietnam War. Only two Congressmen voted against the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, so it's not fair to pin the War entirely on LBJ. However you mischaracterize Eisenhower's role. Only nine out of 58,220 American casualties in Vietnam occurred during the Eisenhower administration.

https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics

Now that I've cleared that up, it would be nice if you'd admit that Republican Presidents weren't responsible for recessions in 1981, 1990, and 2008, and the 2020 pandemic.

Again, this post, like all my others on this topic, is satirical. Like I said, there's no cause and effect.... I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans.

EihTooms

07-06-23, 03:14

Tooms, please see below. The good parts are highlighted!

Again, this post, like all my others on this topic, is satirical. Like I said, there's no cause and effect.... I do not believe Democrats are any more responsible for war deaths than Republicans.LOL. Clever of you to omit the first war listed at the very top of your link, The American Civil War, where 620,000 Americans were killed in that one alone, every one of them killed on a Repub President's watch in a war begun on his watch, possibly by whoever was Speaker of the House I suppose, but for sure started by America and by no other country. And the Per Capita American Fatality rate for that Repub war must have been astronomical. I suspect it was much higher than it was for WWI and the Korean War combined.

And "Democrat" President LBJ "started" the Vietnam War? In 1955, eight years before he became President? LOL. Oh wait. Who was Speaker of the House in 1955? Maybe we can pass the buck of blame for that one to him.

Well, since you have fessed up about the humorous tone of all your other posts on this topic it is nice to see you admit that, contrary to your "wouldn't vote for Trump" claim, you are actually quite happy to help Trump win any and every election thanks to your stealth pro Repub Bothsider / Neithersiderism rather than by voting directly for him. The latter of which is not really necessary to help Repubs win elections, as your beloved Repub Party and I am sure you know perfectly well, considering their foremost strategy for winning elections has for decades been to challenge, obstruct, suppress, deny, not count or overturn likely Dem / Lib votes.

That has been understood by politically ambitious "Conservatives" for decades, even before Repub Chief Justice Oath of Office Gobbledygook's Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act in order to better facilitate that now critical Repub election strategy and certainly for every Trump-involved election ever since.

Of course, you know it is fine and dandy for you to proudly proclaim you would not vote for Trump. You and The Party know very well your Bothsider / Neithersiderism and any vote not for a Dem works almost as well to help Repubs win as a direct vote for one. You just don't have to openly admit your stance is really a vote for Trump anyway, that's all.

It's similar to the Repub delusion applied to their "no Russian collusion by Team Trump" claim. Putin and Russia knows very well they colluded with Team Trump to help Trump win those elections even if Team Trump was too ashamed to openly admit it or too stupid to realize it was happening all around them all along.

EihTooms

07-06-23, 11:39

There seems to be confusion and misunderstanding about the words "Escalate" and "Increase" as they pertain to Eisenhower's Vietnam War. I assure you that confusion has been going on since the 1960's. Please note; one cannot "Escalate" or 'Increase" military presence and involvement in a war that had not yet begun or wasn't ongoing. The typical year cited as the beginning of the Vietnam War and America's involvement in it militarily is 1955, not 1963 and not 1964.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution merely legally and officially authorized USA Forces to shoot back after the North Vietnamese had provoked an armed response with their multiple attacks on USA Navy Destroyers, as reported by USA Military commanders on the scene.

U.S. Involvement in the Vietnam War: the Gulf of Tonkin and Escalation, 1964

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/gulf-of-tonkin#text=On%20 August%207%2 see%201964%2 see%20 Congress, and%20 security%20 in%20 southeast%20 Asia.

In early August 1964, two U.S. destroyers stationed in the Gulf of Tonkin in Vietnam radioed that they had been fired upon by North Vietnamese forces. In response to these reported incidents, President Lyndon B. Johnson requested permission from the U.S. Congress to increase the U.S. military presence in Indochina. On August 7, 1964, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, authorizing President Johnson to take any measures he believed were necessary to retaliate and to promote the maintenance of international peace and security in southeast Asia. This resolution became the legal basis for the Johnson and Nixon Administrations prosecution of the Vietnam War.Of course, USA Forces would never have been in a position to be provoked into an escalation and increase in our presence by multiple attacks from the North Vietnamese or to shoot back had President Eisenhower not made it his mission as early as 1954 to commit the USA Fully, totally and unambiguously by word, deed and treaty to fighting North Vietnam on behalf of South Vietnam.

Sure enough, it turned out once we started shooting back the fatalities rose on both sides. On the other hand, no one knows how much more lopsided the USA Fatalities would have been by the end of it if LBJ and the USA Congress had not reacted or done anything at all in response to those reported multiple attacks on our troops. Would North Vietnam had said, "Well, that was interesting. Nevermind. Let's change the subject and do something else" or would they have been emboldened to engage in more and bigger attacks on our troops without them shooting back or retaliating?

As was typical then and now, Mainstream Media and even this site spent decades bending over backwards to keep beloved old WWII General Eisenhower's name out of it, despite him being the President who committed us to fighting that war in the first place, putting us in harms way for the North Vietnamese provocation, making it necessary to shoot back, retaliate and escalate our involvement and despite his apparent idiotic expectation that we would or could fight and win it for sake of Democracy by only being shot at but never shooting back.

Notice how even this site pretends as though Eisenhower's zealously guarded, super secret pseudonyms during his presidency were "the countries" and "The United States".

After the end of the First Indochina War and the Viet Minh defeat of the French at Dien Bien Phu in 1954, the countries meeting at the Geneva Conference divided Vietnam into northern and southern halves, ruled by separate regimes, and scheduled elections to reunite the country under a unified government. The communists seemed likely to win those elections, thanks mostly to their superior organization and greater appeal in the countryside. The United States, however, was dedicated to containing the spread of communist regimes and, invoking the charter of the Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (1954), supported the South Vietnamese leader, Ngo Dinh Diem, when he refused to hold the elections. Diem held control of the South Vietnamese Government, but he could not halt the communist infiltration of the South. By 1959, the Viet Cong, South Vietnamese communist guerillas, and the Viet Minh, began a large scale insurgency in the South that marked the opening of the Second Indochina War.See, they had no qualms about naming names for these military commitments to the Vietnam War as long as it was Kennedy, LBJ and Nixon. But, strangely, they seem to think "the countries" and "The United States" were some disembodied entities without a first, middle and last name. Hey guys, they had one alright. It was Dwight David Eisenhower. They even had a nickname; Ike.

EihTooms

07-06-23, 17:18

Private sector adds 497,000 jobs in June, more than double expectations, ADP says.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/06/adp-jobs-report-private-sector-added-497000-workers-in-june.html?__source=androidappshare

Private sector jobs surged by 497,000 in June, well ahead of the 267,000 gain in May and much better than the 220,000 estimate.

Leisure and hospitality led with 232,000 new hires, followed by construction with 97,000, and trade, transportation and utilities at 90,000.

The unexpected jump in payrolls comes despite more than a years worth of Federal Reserve interest rate increases.We used to attribute these kind of results to the economic stewardship stated, campaigned on, won on, proposed, promoted, fought for, negotiated, legislated, signed and passed by the President. Like Joe Biden has done over the past 2 1/2 years.

But now some folks are passionately and repeatedly arguing that these results are really due to the brilliant and heroic efforts by the Repub Squeaker of the Pink Tinkle House NOT to once again within those same years apply brilliant Repub economic stewardship to Crash Worldwide Economies and Wipe Out millions upon millions upon millions of jobs by defaulting on the debts largely produced due to and in response to previous typically horrific Repub economic stewardship.

Well, anyway, that would be the only notable accomplishment by this particular Pink Tinkle House that could possibly be related to the ongoing jobs creation and avoidance of even a medium size recession, much less a Great Recession.

Now, back to pro Repub MSM reminding us heading into an election year how much better most people think Repubs are at handling the economy than Dems.

Lololol.

Tiny 12

07-06-23, 17:24

There seems to be confusion and misunderstanding about the words "Escalate" and "Increase" as they pertain to Eisenhower's Vietnam War. I assure you that confusion has been going on since the 1960's. Please note; one cannot "Escalate" or 'Increase" military presence and involvement in a war that had not yet begun or wasn't ongoing. The typical year cited as the beginning of the Vietnam War and America's involvement in it militarily is 1955, not 1963 and not 1964.

The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution merely legally and officially authorized USA Forces to shoot back after the North Vietnamese had provoked an armed response with their multiple attacks on USA Navy Destroyers, as reported by USA Military commanders on the scene.

U.S. Involvement in the Vietnam War: the Gulf of Tonkin and Escalation, 1964

https://history.state.gov/milestones/1961-1968/gulf-of-tonkin#text=On%20 August%207%2 see%201964%2 see%20 Congress, and%20 security%20 in%20 southeast%20 Asia.

Of course, USA Forces would never have been in a position to be provoked into an escalation and increase in our presence by multiple attacks from the North Vietnamese or to shoot back had President Eisenhower not made it his mission as early as 1954 to commit the USA Fully, totally and unambiguously by word, deed and treaty to fighting North Vietnam on behalf of South Vietnam.

Sure enough, it turned out once we started shooting back the fatalities rose on both sides. On the other hand, no one knows how much more lopsided the USA Fatalities would have been by the end of it if LBJ and the USA Congress had not reacted or done anything at all in response to those reported multiple attacks on our troops. Would North Vietnam had said, "Well, that was interesting. Nevermind. Let's change the subject and do something else" or would they have been emboldened to engage in more and bigger attacks on our troops without them shooting back or retaliating?

As was typical then and now, Mainstream Media and even this site spent decades bending over backwards to keep beloved old WWII General Eisenhower's name out of it, despite him being the President who committed us to fighting that war in the first place, putting us in harms way for the North Vietnamese provocation, making it necessary to shoot back, retaliate and escalate our involvement and despite his apparent idiotic expectation that we would or could fight and win it for sake of Democracy by only being shot at but never shooting back.

Notice how even this site pretends as though Eisenhower's zealously guarded, super secret pseudonyms during his presidency were "the countries" and "The United States".

See, they had no qualms about naming names for these military commitments to the Vietnam War as long as it was Kennedy, LBJ and Nixon. But, strangely, they seem to think "the countries" and "The United States" were some disembodied entities without a first, middle and last name. Hey guys, they had one alright. It was Dwight David Eisenhower. They even had a nickname; Ike.If Eisenhower were a Democrat, you'd love him, and you'd try to somehow pin the blame for Vietnam on Richard Nixon. Hell, if Trump had remained a card carrying member of the Democratic Party, you'd love him too.

Think about what you wrote Tooms. That's crazy. See deaths by year in Vietnam here.

https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics

During Eisenhower's term in office, during 1956 to 1960 (or from 1954 if you prefer), a total of 9 American servicemen died in Vietnam. From 2000 to 2006, five servicemen died there, and we weren't at war with Vietnam. According to Wikipedia, we had fewer than 1,000 advisors in Vietnam during Eisenhower's administration. That rose to 23,000 advisors under Kennedy. LBJ ramped that on up to 549,500 servicemen. Ultimately 58,220 Americans died in Vietnam.

What I really don't understand is that you apparently believe this war was just and good, because you praise LBJ's escalation of the war effort. (I disagree on that BTW.) Yet you criticize Eisenhower, for doing what we've done in many countries all over the world -- provide military advisors to friendly regimes.

Tiny 12

07-06-23, 19:08

LOL. Clever of you to omit the first war listed at the very top of your link, The American Civil War, where 620,000 Americans were killed in that one alone, every one of them killed on a Repub President's watch in a war begun on his watch, possibly by whoever was Speaker of the House I suppose, but for sure started by America and by no other country. And the Per Capita American Fatality rate for that Repub war must have been astronomical. I suspect it was much higher than it was for WWI and the Korean War combined.Again,

Yes, it is curious that Tooms is compelled to label the Civil War as a Republican War. Presumably if he maintains that the present day Republican Party should accept responsibility for the Civil War, then he believes present day Democrats should accept responsibility for slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and repression afterwards.Do you really believe that what happened during the Civil War, over 150 years ago, has anything to do with the propensity of modern day Democratic and Republican presidents to wage foreign wars? Given that I've said there's no cause and effect between the Party of the President and wars, and that Democrats are somewhat less anti-war than Republicans, I don't understand why you're focusing on this. Again, I just pointed out the correlation between deaths and Democratic presidents to highlight a spurious correlation (correlation where there's no cause and effect), like yours between Republican presidents and GDP and job growth.

Tiny 12

07-06-23, 19:14

It's similar to the Repub delusion applied to their "no Russian collusion by Team Trump" claim. Putin and Russia knows very well they colluded with Team Trump to help Trump win those elections even if Team Trump was too ashamed to openly admit it or too stupid to realize it was happening all around them all along.Team Trump never colluded, other perhaps than Trump encouraging Russia to pursue Hillary's email messages on national television. Russia did unilaterally try to interfere in the election. Putin was out to get Hillary because he believed she interfered in the 2012 Russian election. I don't know whether she, the State Department, the CIA, NSA or DOD did or not. I do know that the sanctimony and moral outrage that some Democratic politicians like to direct at certain foreign leaders and Republicans can backfire.

Tiny 12

07-06-23, 19:22

Well, since you have fessed up about the humorous tone of all your other posts on this topic it is nice to see you admit that, contrary to your "wouldn't vote for Trump" claim, you are actually quite happy to help Trump win any and every election thanks to your stealth pro Repub Bothsider / Neithersiderism rather than by voting directly for him. The latter of which is not really necessary to help Repubs win elections, as your beloved Repub Party and I am sure you know perfectly well, considering their foremost strategy for winning elections has for decades been to challenge, obstruct, suppress, deny, not count or overturn likely Dem / Lib votes.

That has been understood by politically ambitious "Conservatives" for decades, even before Repub Chief Justice Oath of Office Gobbledygook's Supreme Court weakened the Voting Rights Act in order to better facilitate that now critical Repub election strategy and certainly for every Trump-involved election ever since.

Of course, you know it is fine and dandy for you to proudly proclaim you would not vote for Trump. You and The Party know very well your Bothsider / Neithersiderism and any vote not for a Dem works almost as well to help Repubs win as a direct vote for one. You just don't have to openly admit your stance is really a vote for Trump anyway, that's all.Baloney. A Democrat will be the next president if Trump's the Republican nominee and there's no popular 3rd party candidate. Why? Because some Republicans and right-of-center independents like me either won't go to the polls or won't vote for Trump. And because Democrats and Democrat leaning independents are mad as hell at Trump and will show up to the polls in larger numbers.

Now if No Labels succeeds in nominating a popular, reasonable Democrat or left of center candidate like Kyrsten Sinema or Joe Manchin, then Trump will win. There are a lot of independents and moderate Democrats fed up with the direction that Biden and the progressives are taking America. They'll vote for the third party candidate. I'd say that's what you should worry about, but you benefitted greatly from the last period of Republican control of government. Maybe you will again, the next time that happens. With the corporate income tax cut and the Qualified Business Income deduction provided to owners of rental real estate like you and Trump, your mutual fund and real estate investments put together are worth perhaps 15% or 20% more than they would be otherwise.

You sound like admirers of Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell, only you're a Democrat. The Republicans "challenge, obstruct, suppress, deny, (do) not count or overturn" votes and steal elections. Right.

Xpartan

07-06-23, 22:40

Team Trump never colluded, other perhaps than Trump encouraging Russia to pursue Hillary's email messages on national television. Russia did unilaterally try to interfere in the election. Putin was out to get Hillary because he believed she interfered in the 2012 Russian election. I don't know whether she, the State Department, the CIA, NSA or DOD did or not. I do know that the sanctimony and moral outrage that some Democratic politicians like to direct at certain foreign leaders and Republicans can backfire.2016.

June 9: Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner meet at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer who promised dirt on Hillary Clinton. The Trump aides say her information was not useful and that the meeting primarily focused on adoption policy.

June 19: Papadopoulos offers in an email to a high-ranking campaign official to travel to Russia to meet with officials if Trump is unable to. He states he is willing "to make the trip off the record if it's in the interest of the Mr. Trump and the campaign to meet specific people. ".

Week of July 18: Three Trump national security advisers Page, J. The. Gordon and Walid Phares meet with Kislyak in Cleveland. Theytell him they hope to see improved relations with Russia.

July 20: Sen. Jeff Sessions, an early Trump endorser who led his national security advisory committee, meets with Ambassador Kislyak and a group of other ambassadors at a Republican National Convention event.

July 27: Trump calls on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton's emails from the private server she used as secretary of state.

"I will tell you this, Russia: If you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump said at a news conference. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. ".

Aug. 14: The New York Times publishes an expos on Ukrainian documents that appear to show that $12.7 million in cash was earmarked for Manafort by the Russia-aligned Party of Regions.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, a prominent Trump surrogate, meets in his Senate office with Kislyak.

Trump tells the Kremlin-backed Russia Today inan interview that "it's probably unlikely" Russia is interfering in the election.

Nov. 10: A senior Russian diplomat, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Rybakov, tellsInterfax news agency that there "were contacts" between the Russian government and the Trump campaign during the election campaign. Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later tells the Associated Press that the contacts were "quite natural, quite normal" and took place with both campaigns.

December: Flynn and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner meet with Kislyak at Trump Tower.

Dec. 28: Obama signs an executive order to sanction Russia for its interference in the presidential election. The sanctions are to take effect the following day.

Kislyak contacts Flynn.

Dec. 29: Obama orders the ejection of 35 suspected Russian intelligence operatives from the country and imposes sanctions on two Russian intelligence services as retaliation for the election-interference campaign.

Flynn has a series of phone calls with Kislyak. He would later acknowledge that it was possible they discussed the newly imposed sanctions, but he "couldn't be certain. " According to The New York Times, the phone calls came after Kislyak was brought to the State Department and informed of the sanctions, and became "irate and threatened a forceful Russian response. ".

Court filings later reveal that Flynn asks Kislyak to refrain from escalating the situation in response to the sanctions. This conversation takes place after Flynn confers with a senior official on the Trump transition team about how to address the sanctions.

Flynn calls the transition official after his conversation with Kislyak to update him on the call.

Flynn goes on to lie to the FBI about this on Jan. 24.

https://www.politico.com/trump-russia-ties-scandal-guide/timeline-of-events

That's only a 6-month timeline. Shall we continue?

Paulie97

07-06-23, 23:42

Baloney.... I'd say that's what you should worry about, but you benefitted greatly from the last period of Republican control of government. Maybe you will again, the next time that happens. With the corporate income tax cut and the Qualified Business Income deduction provided to owners of rental real estate like you and Trump, your mutual fund and real estate investments put together are worth perhaps 15% or 20% more than they would be otherwise. Odds are high you had it right the first time when you said "baloney. " Your typical older expat living in the 3rd World is there to try and stretch a meager to modest retirement income. That's even though you'll meet more than your share of real estate tycoons, various mega-millionaires, billionaires, and especially Navy Seals in 3rd World monger watering holes. Wink. Just pull up a seat at the bar and start a conversation with the guy next to you. You'll hear about it in no time. LOL.

EihTooms

07-07-23, 02:38

If Eisenhower were a Democrat, you'd love him, and you'd try to somehow pin the blame for Vietnam on Richard Nixon. Hell, if Trump had remained a card carrying member of the Democratic Party, you'd love him too.

Think about what you wrote Tooms. That's crazy. See deaths by year in Vietnam here.

https://www.archives.gov/research/military/vietnam-war/casualty-statistics

During Eisenhower's term in office, during 1956 to 1960 (or from 1954 if you prefer), a total of 9 American servicemen died in Vietnam. From 2000 to 2006, five servicemen died there, and we weren't at war with Vietnam. According to Wikipedia, we had fewer than 1,000 advisors in Vietnam during Eisenhower's administration. That rose to 23,000 advisors under Kennedy. LBJ ramped that on up to 549,500 servicemen. Ultimately 58,220 Americans died in Vietnam.

What I really don't understand is that you apparently believe this war was just and good, because you praise LBJ's escalation of the war effort. (I disagree on that BTW.) Yet you criticize Eisenhower, for doing what we've done in many countries all over the world -- provide military advisors to friendly regimes.Eisenhower's total commitment to replacing the defeated and retreated French and fight in their stead by word, deed and treaty was voluntary. But once commited and then having the USA troops present, thanks to Eisenhower's by then 10 years long commitment to his Domino Theory, be attacked, LBJ's decision to make it legal for us to fire back was far more inevitable and unavoidable than voluntary.

Unless, like Reagan in Beirut, you wanted LBJ to turn tail and run in response to our being attacked and thereby teach opposing forces in the region and elsewhere in the world that they can count on America to respond that way to any attack or show of aggression in the future.

If Eisenhower had been a Dem he still would have had one of the most atrocious economic and worst jobs creating records of all time. He would have been an impossible to believe outlier among the ranks of Dem presidential economic stewardship in modern times.

If Trump had remained a supposed Dem he never would have entered politics as one. To run and win as a Dem he knew very well he would have to actually work hard, pay attention, Know Something and Do Something to produce positive results for America while avoiding those "once in 100 years catastrophes" that due to wild coincidence of course only develop under Repubs and MSM would never notice or praise him for it.

That would be anathema to someone like Trump and he knew it. That's why he, Reagan and other losing celebrity types who decide to try politics for a change switch from Dem to Repub before they do.

Besides, even if Trump had somehow missed that obvious difference over his decades of observing MSM's love affair with those alarming disaster headlines the Repub Party provides them over and over and over again, he never would have made it past the first Dem debate in his bid for the nomination.

Dems tend not to fall for failed businessmen / blatantly obvious con men whose only chance to win might be his extraordinarily tight collusion with Russia and whose rare stated goal was to place enough Federalist Society judges on the bench to outlaw Sex For Pleasure and make sure all acts of sexual intercourse are solely for the purpose of procreation.

Tiny 12

07-07-23, 05:18

2016.

June 9: Donald Trump Jr, Paul Manafort and Jared Kushner meet at Trump Tower with a Russian lawyer who promised dirt on Hillary Clinton. The Trump aides say her information was not useful and that the meeting primarily focused on adoption policy.

June 19: Papadopoulos offers in an email to a high-ranking campaign official to travel to Russia to meet with officials if Trump is unable to. He states he is willing "to make the trip off the record if it's in the interest of the Mr. Trump and the campaign to meet specific people. ".

Week of July 18: Three Trump national security advisers Page, J. The. Gordon and Walid Phares meet with Kislyak in Cleveland. Theytell him they hope to see improved relations with Russia.

July 20: Sen. Jeff Sessions, an early Trump endorser who led his national security advisory committee, meets with Ambassador Kislyak and a group of other ambassadors at a Republican National Convention event.

July 27: Trump calls on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton's emails from the private server she used as secretary of state.

"I will tell you this, Russia: If you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," Trump said at a news conference. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. ".

Aug. 14: The New York Times publishes an expos on Ukrainian documents that appear to show that $12.7 million in cash was earmarked for Manafort by the Russia-aligned Party of Regions.

Sen. Jeff Sessions, a prominent Trump surrogate, meets in his Senate office with Kislyak.

Trump tells the Kremlin-backed Russia Today inan interview that "it's probably unlikely" Russia is interfering in the election.

Nov. 10: A senior Russian diplomat, Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Rybakov, tellsInterfax news agency that there "were contacts" between the Russian government and the Trump campaign during the election campaign. Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov later tells the Associated Press that the contacts were "quite natural, quite normal" and took place with both campaigns.

December: Flynn and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner meet with Kislyak at Trump Tower.

Dec. 28: Obama signs an executive order to sanction Russia for its interference in the presidential election. The sanctions are to take effect the following day.

Kislyak contacts Flynn.

Dec. 29: Obama orders the ejection of 35 suspected Russian intelligence operatives from the country and imposes sanctions on two Russian intelligence services as retaliation for the election-interference campaign.

Flynn has a series of phone calls with Kislyak. He would later acknowledge that it was possible they discussed the newly imposed sanctions, but he "couldn't be certain. " According to The New York Times, the phone calls came after Kislyak was brought to the State Department and informed of the sanctions, and became "irate and threatened a forceful Russian response. ".

Court filings later reveal that Flynn asks Kislyak to refrain from escalating the situation in response to the sanctions. This conversation takes place after Flynn confers with a senior official on the Trump transition team about how to address the sanctions.

Flynn calls the transition official after his conversation with Kislyak to update him on the call.

Flynn goes on to lie to the FBI about this on Jan. 24.

https://www.politico.com/trump-russia-ties-scandal-guide/timeline-of-events

That's only a 6-month timeline. Shall we continue?Yes, please. Continue. This is entertaining. It sounds a lot like the logic that the alt Right uses to link Joe Biden to billions in bribes from China and the Ukraine. Again, yes, I believe that Russia did try to interfere in the election. And believe that Trump perhaps colluded when he asked Russia on national television to try to find Hillary's emails.

Paulie97

07-07-23, 05:25

Russia did unilaterally try to interfere in the election. Putin was out to get Hillary because he believed she interfered in the 2012 Russian election.You completely skip over the fact that isolationist and traitorous and Trump was by far the more Russia friendly candidate. Just as you are quite a Russia friendly poster, and continually betray your true agenda while calling yourself center right and Libertarian.

Elvis 2008

07-07-23, 06:21

Odds are high you had it right the first time when you said "baloney. " Your typical older expat living in the 3rd World is there to try and stretch a meager to modest retirement income. That's even though you'll meet more than your share of real estate tycoons, various mega-millionaires, billionaires, and especially Navy Seals in 3rd World monger watering holes. Wink. Just pull up a seat at the bar and start a conversation with the guy next to you. You'll hear about it in no time. LOL.Best description I have heard of typical ISGer right there.

EihTooms

07-07-23, 08:55

Yes, please. Continue. This is entertaining. It sounds a lot like the logic that the alt Right uses to link Joe Biden to billions in bribes from China and the Ukraine. Again, yes, I believe that Russia did try to interfere in the election. And believe that Trump perhaps colluded when he asked Russia on national television to try to find Hillary's emails.Any Joe Biden links to billions in bribes from anyone anywhere has been thoroughly debunked even by Trump Admin DOJ zealots and are not supported by any evidence.

What Xpartan cited was proven or testified to by the people involved.

It was only "election interference" in the sense that Russia really, really wanted to and did help Trump win the election. It wasn't like they were randomly stuffing voting machines with banana peels in an effort to screw things up for any and all candidates and issues on the ballot.

They were only engaged in helping Trump win and working with and for anyone in Team Trump including Trump himself to accomplish that. "Interference" might sound to the ill informed that Russia was out to hurt Trump as likely as hurt Hillary. But that BS won't float with anyone who is not glued to Fux News day and night.

LOL. I see "Interference" re the 2016 election is the new substitute safe word for "collusion" among the most slavishly devoted and protective Trumpsters.

Tiny 12

07-07-23, 18:44

Wow. That Kevin McQarthy must be a brilliant Job Creator!
Private sector adds 497,000 jobs in June, more than double expectations, ADP says.Don't be silly Tooms. Kevin McCarthy had very little to do with the 209,000 jobs (not 497,000) added in June. You can give some of the credit to Paul Ryan and other Republican Congressmen and Senators who lowered the corporate tax rate from the highest in the world to the middle of the pack. Now it makes more sense to do business and add jobs in the USA. And some of the credit to the 5 Trillion+ in unfunded pork and stimulus passed by Democrats in 2021 and 2022. As a result, special interests which benefitted from this largess are creating new jobs. Time will tell how many of those jobs will disappear when companies go out of business, like Solyndra. Or what will happen when we have to pay the piper for the massive debt we're incurring.

But most of the credit goes to factors beyond the control of politicians, including the rebound from the pandemic.

Tiny 12

07-07-23, 18:54

Eisenhower's total commitment to replacing the defeated and retreated French and fight in their stead by word, deed and treaty was voluntary. But once commited and then having the USA troops present, thanks to Eisenhower's by then 10 years long commitment to his Domino Theory, be attacked, LBJ's decision to make it legal for us to fire back was far more inevitable and unavoidable than voluntary.

Unless, like Reagan in Beirut, you wanted LBJ to turn tail and run in response to our being attacked and thereby teach opposing forces in the region and elsewhere in the world that they can count on America to respond that way to any attack or show of aggression in the future.

If Eisenhower had been a Dem he still would have had one of the most atrocious economic and worst jobs creating records of all time. He would have been an impossible to believe outlier among the ranks of Dem presidential economic stewardship in modern times.

If Trump had remained a supposed Dem he never would have entered politics as one. To run and win as a Dem he knew very well he would have to actually work hard, pay attention, Know Something and Do Something to produce positive results for America while avoiding those "once in 100 years catastrophes" that due to wild coincidence of course only develop under Repubs and MSM would never notice or praise him for it.

That would be anathema to someone like Trump and he knew it. That's why he, Reagan and other losing celebrity types who decide to try politics for a change switch from Dem to Repub before they do.

Besides, even if Trump had somehow missed that obvious difference over his decades of observing MSM's love affair with those alarming disaster headlines the Repub Party provides them over and over and over again, he never would have made it past the first Dem debate in his bid for the nomination.

Dems tend not to fall for failed businessmen / blatantly obvious con men whose only chance to win might be his extraordinarily tight collusion with Russia and whose rare stated goal was to place enough Federalist Society judges on the bench to outlaw Sex For Pleasure and make sure all acts of sexual intercourse are solely for the purpose of procreation.I fully agree with the following.

The Reagan Administration's decision to remove peacekeepers from Lebanon.

The Biden and Trump Administrations' decision to remove our troops from Afghanistan.

The Nixon and Ford Administrations' decision to remove our troops from Vietnam.

The Eisenhower Administration's decision to make peace in Korea.

Maybe Xpartan was right when he criticized me for saying Democratic Politicians are somewhat less anti-war than Republicans. Maybe they really are war mongers. Or at least it looks like it's Republicans that are predominately getting us out of wars.

Yes, Eisenhower did provide money and arms to the South Vietnamese government. However, he didn't commit men, beyond a small number of advisors, perhaps fewer than we have in Ukraine now. In 1954, he told his people he "simply could not imagine the United States putting ground forces anywhere in Southeast Asia. There was just no sense in even talking about United States forces replacing the French in Indochina. If we did so, the Vietnamese could be expected to transfer their hatred of the French to us. I cannot tell you, said the President with vehemence, how bitterly opposed I am to such a course of action. This war in Indochina would absorb our troops by divisions!"

Eisenhower knew war. Kennedy did too, and although he greatly escalated military aid and the number of American advisors, his administration never sent combat troops to Vietnam. LBJ and Congress were the ones to blame.

Tiny 12

07-07-23, 19:27

You completely skip over the fact that isolationist and traitorous and Trump was by far the more Russia friendly candidate. Just as you are quite a Russia friendly poster, and continually betray your true agenda while calling yourself center right and Libertarian.A plurality of Republican and Republican leaning voters favor reducing military aid to Ukraine. I imagine a majority of libertarians would eliminate military aid entirely. I'm not necessarily Russia friendly, I'm anti war. But I do favor friendlier relations with Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea, along with a host of other countries.

Yes, Trump was much more Russia friendly than Hillary, maybe in part because he figured the probability of getting a Trump Tower built in Moscow was a lot higher than becoming president. And he is a narcissist and puts his self interest ahead of the country's. However calling him traitorous as far as Russia goes is a stretch. He did his dead level best to prevent the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from starting up, and also encouraged NATO countries to increase their defense budgets.

Tiny 12

07-07-23, 19:32

Any Joe Biden links to billions in bribes from anyone anywhere has been thoroughly debunked even by Trump Admin DOJ zealots and are not supported by any evidence.

What Xpartan cited was proven or testified to by the people involved.

It was only "election interference" in the sense that Russia really, really wanted to and did help Trump win the election. It wasn't like they were randomly stuffing voting machines with banana peels in an effort to screw things up for any and all candidates and issues on the ballot.

They were only engaged in helping Trump win and working with and for anyone in Team Trump including Trump himself to accomplish that. "Interference" might sound to the ill informed that Russia was out to hurt Trump as likely as hurt Hillary. But that BS won't float with anyone who is not glued to Fux News day and night.

LOL. I see "Interference" re the 2016 election is the new substitute safe word for "collusion" among the most slavishly devoted and protective Trumpsters.Russia collusion and the Biden Family Crime Syndicate (with reference to Joe) are largely fabrications built around kernels of truth. Pro Trump posters could prepare a list with bullet points for Bobulinski, the Big Guy, Hunter's business trip on the Presidential Jet, etc. , that would be about as convincing as Xpartan's. That's if there were any of them left. You guys should be more diplomatic with them, or you won't have anyone to argue with.

Xpartan

07-07-23, 20:55

Yes, please. Continue. This is entertaining. It sounds a lot like the logic that the alt Right uses to link Joe Biden to billions in bribes from China and the Ukraine. Again, yes, I believe that Russia did try to interfere in the election. And believe that Trump perhaps colluded when he asked Russia on national television to try to find Hillary's emails.Tiny, I linked the instances when Trump's team members (Trump Jr, Page, Manafort, Papadopoulos and others) have initiated contacts with Russian officials, not the other way around. It looks to me that it's not just Russia trying to interfere -- it's Trump's campaign begging them to. .

What am I not seeing here?

In fairness, you might have a leg to stand on (lame as hell, though).

1. You may insist that whatever Trump's people did was at their own behest (Trump didn't know).

2. You may claim that Trump was so overwhelmingly concerned about improving the Russia-US relationship (and the fate of Russian orphans, LOL) that he just couldn't wait until getting elected.

There is one or another. Choose wisely.

Elvis 2008

07-07-23, 22:11

Elvis 2008

07-07-23, 22:33

In my life where people screamed "more, more" but that is what happened when Doug Casey spoke at an investment conference. There was a Q&A period later with Casey, Newt Gingrich, and some typical bleeding heart liberal. What got me was how often Gingrich and the liberal agreed with each other. Of course, Casey was in a different league intelligence wise because he was not attached to a party but could just tell the truth.

HIs latest piece is on why RFK cannot win, and I doubt, despite being a candidate I would vote for, that I will get that chance. https://www.zerohedge.com/political/doug-casey-robert-f-kennedy-jr-and-why-deep-state-hates-him.

What I found interesting is he actually predicted Trump's win in 2016 and his losing in 2020, and his assessment of 2020 was the most realistic I have read.

https://internationalman.com/articles/six-reasons-why-the-wrong-party-will-win-the-most-important-us-election/

Reason #6 was my favorite.

This election is going to hinge on who cheats the best. And the Democrats have, over the years, developed far greater expertise in cheating than the Republicans. I grew up in Chicago, and it was a joke even then. Saul Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals" wasn't written for the kind of people who vote Republican.

For one thing, there's now an emphasis on mail-in votes, which makes it easier to cheat. You can register dead people as voters. You can register your dog as a voter. You could probably register 50 million Nigerian princes and get away with it. If the fraud is ever even discovered, it won't be until long after the election. Which means it's likely to be a contested election long after Nov 3rd.

That's only part of it, though. A high percentage of voting machines are computerized. Fraud by hacking voting machines is apparently easy to do and it's pretty untraceable. It's just a matter of planning and boldness.

Remember what Stalin said: "Who votes doesn't count. What counts is who counts the votes. " End of link.

I like another saying Stalin had and it is particularly apt when it comes to prosecuting Trump. "Find me the man, and I will find you the crime. "

What cracks me up about the Democratic douches and Russiagate was they act as if that was the only time a foreign power (or domestic corporation) interfered in an election, and that one, Russiagate, was pure bullshit. Hell, right now, Biden has singlehandedly made certain that Ukraine will not have another election until USA aid stops flowing in. The Dems are even calling it a war to save Democracy while destroying Democracy. You cannot make this stuff up.

Tiny 12

07-08-23, 03:52

Tiny, I linked the instances when Trump's team members (Trump Jr, Page, Manafort, Papadopoulos and others) have initiated contacts with Russian officials, not the other way around. It looks to me that it's not just Russia trying to interfere -- it's Trump's campaign begging them to. .

What am I not seeing here?

In fairness, you might have a leg to stand on (lame as hell, though).

1. You may insist that whatever Trump's people did was at their own behest (Trump didn't know).

2. You may claim that Trump was so overwhelmingly concerned about improving the Russia-US relationship (and the fate of Russian orphans, LOL) that he just couldn't wait until getting elected.

There is one or another. Choose wisely.Choose wisely. PLEASE.

Mueller and the FBI investigated the alleged collusion thoroughly and didn't come up with anything. Yes, they got convictions, for tax evasion, lying to the government, failure to register as a foreign lobbyist, etc., but nothing related to collusion.

My recollection of the June 9 meeting was that Donald Trump, Jr. Expressed excitement that a Russian might have dirt on Hillary Clinton. But in reality the Russian had nothing and, as you said, adoption policy was her agenda.

Papadopoulos, he's the one person on your list who may have at least tried to collude. Apparently he was low level, and couldn't get higher ups to listen to him. The FBI wasn't able to pin anything on him except lying. Your explanation "1" may apply.

Manafort was fired by the campaign when his work for pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarchs came to light. Ironically, Hunter Biden also worked for a pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarch's company. Small world.

Your explanation "2" applies to meetings with the Russian ambassador, Kislyak. Yes, Trump and his people did indeed want to improve relations with Russia.

Now admittedly Trump wasn't going to look a gift horse in the mouth. He probably was grateful for any unsolicited help the Russians might provide, which could partly explain why he was friendlier on a personal level with Putin than some of our allies. You may recall that according to Neocon John Bolton, Trump asked Xi for help in winning the 2020 election.

But I don't believe there was collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians, other than perhaps Papadopoulos' comical efforts. And yes, Trump did suggest on national television that Russia look for Hillary's emails. Circling back to where I started, if there were collusion, the FBI and DOJ and Mueller should have uncovered it. They did wiretap Manafort and Carter Page, and probably Papadopoulos and others. They tried to entrap Papadopoulos with an undercover agent. They didn't come up with anything.

Tiny 12

07-08-23, 04:33

I like another saying Stalin had and it is particularly apt when it comes to prosecuting Trump. "Find me the man, and I will find you the crime. "Are you sure that was Stalin who came up with that? Not the USA Department of Justice? Harvey Silverglate, one of the premier civil liberties attorneys in the country, pointed out in "Three Felonies a Day" that prosecutors have laws on the books so they can put anyone in jail. The Manhattan District Attorney in particular is taking advantage of that, in prosecuting Trump for paying a porn star to keep her mouth shut.

Tiny 12

07-08-23, 04:40

What cracks me up about the Democratic douches and Russiagate was they act as if that was the only time a foreign power (or domestic corporation) interfered in an election, and that one, Russiagate, was pure bullshit. I wonder how many elections we've interfered with? Answer: a lot. Probably one or more where Putin was a candidate.

EihTooms

07-08-23, 05:53

I fully agree with the following.

The Reagan Administration's decision to remove peacekeepers from Lebanon.

The Biden and Trump Administrations' decision to remove our troops from Afghanistan.

The Nixon and Ford Administrations' decision to remove our troops from Vietnam.

The Eisenhower Administration's decision to make peace in Korea.

Maybe Xpartan was right when he criticized me for saying Democratic Politicians are somewhat less anti-war than Republicans. Maybe they really are war mongers. Or at least it looks like it's Republicans that are predominately getting us out of wars.

Yes, Eisenhower did provide money and arms to the South Vietnamese government. However, he didn't commit men, beyond a small number of advisors, perhaps fewer than we have in Ukraine now. In 1954, he told his people he "simply could not imagine the United States putting ground forces anywhere in Southeast Asia. There was just no sense in even talking about United States forces replacing the French in Indochina. If we did so, the Vietnamese could be expected to transfer their hatred of the French to us. I cannot tell you, said the President with vehemence, how bitterly opposed I am to such a course of action. This war in Indochina would absorb our troops by divisions!"

Eisenhower knew war. Kennedy did too, and although he greatly escalated military aid and the number of American advisors, his administration never sent combat troops to Vietnam. LBJ and Congress were the ones to blame.Look, if it makes you and Paulie feel better, despite Eisenhower committing us fully and completely by word, deed and treaty to fighting on behalf of South Vietnam in his Vietnam War, putting our troops / advisors directly in harms way to be shot at, attacked and killed until retaliation was inevitable and unavoidable unless we were prepared to concede the defeat of Democracy and victory for Communism around the world re his decade long Domino Theory pitch, his overthrowing a developing Democracy in Iran to install the brutal Shah regime that triggered and led directly to every anti West jihad, the Islamic Revolution and War on Terrorism that followed and producing and presiding over three Recessions in just 8 years and one of the worst jobs creation records in USA history, Eisenhower's presidency could still arguably be cited as one of the better Repub presidencies.

After all, somebody designed the '57 Chevy Bel Air on his watch and there is no evidence that Ike walked off a golf course to do anything to prevent that from happening.

EihTooms

07-08-23, 08:16

Choose wisely. PLEASE.

Mueller and the FBI investigated the alleged collusion thoroughly and didn't come up with anything.
...Note the #1 most often repeated Myth on the list:

These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Wont Die. Heres Why Theyre Wrong.

https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/

Myth: Mueller found no collusion.

Response: Mueller spent almost 200 pages describing numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. He found that a Russian entity carried out a social media campaign that favored presidential candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaged presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. He also found that a Russian intelligence service conducted computer-intrusion operations against the Clinton campaign and then released stolen documents.

While Mueller was unable to establish a conspiracy between members of the Trump campaign and the Russians involved in this activity, he made it clear that a statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts. In fact, Mueller also wrote that the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts."Along with either unintentionally or intentionally misunderstanding, misstating or confusing the meaning of words like "increasing", "interference". "ADP Private Sector Jobs Report" vs "BLS Employment / Unemployment Report" and so on, some slavishly devoted Repubs can't seem to wrap their mind around the difference between "collusion" and "conspiracy to commit collusion. ".

To repeat my earlier point about this; there was TONS of evidence that Russia was colluding with Team Trump to help Trump win even if Team Trump was too stupid to notice it happening all around them.

EihTooms

07-08-23, 08:40

I wonder how many elections we've interfered with? Answer: a lot. Probably one or more where Putin was a candidate.Sure. And when we do it I assure you we don't just stuff banana peels into voting machines only to create general election results chaos. We choose a side and collude with their efforts to win in order to improve the chances of that outcome.

Oh, and another tid bit that you might add to your observations about this; We choose to collude with the side that will be beneficial to OUR agenda and goals and not the side known to oppose them.

The same as Russia did for Trump.

Tiny 12

07-08-23, 16:13

Note the #1 most often repeated Myth on the list:

These 11 Mueller Report Myths Just Wont Die. Heres Why Theyre Wrong.

https://time.com/5610317/mueller-report-myths-breakdown/

Along with either unintentionally or intentionally misunderstanding, misstating or confusing the meaning of words like "increasing", "interference". "ADP Private Sector Jobs Report" vs "BLS Employment / Unemployment Report" and so on, some slavishly devoted Repubs can't seem to wrap their mind around the difference between "collusion" and "conspiracy to commit collusion. ".

To repeat my earlier point about this; there was TONS of evidence that Russia was colluding with Team Trump to help Trump win even if Team Trump was too stupid to notice it happening all around them.By definition collusion requires secret or illegal conspiracy or cooperation. IF as you say Team Trump was too stupid to notice the interference, then how was it collusion?

Xpartan

07-08-23, 20:22

Choose wisely. PLEASE.

Mueller and the FBI investigated the alleged collusion thoroughly and didn't come up with anything. EihTooms has already addressed this falsehood.

My recollection of the June 9 meeting was that Donald Trump, Jr. Expressed excitement that a Russian might have dirt on Hillary Clinton. But in reality the Russian had nothing and, as you said, adoption policy was her agenda.1. And this wasn't a sign of the collusion? Really?

2. My recollection also includes Trump calling Jr. From the Air Force 1 and coaching him to lie about the topic of the meeting (adaption of Russian children). Not a sign either?

Papadopoulos, he's the one person on your list who may have at least tried to collude. Apparently he was low level, and couldn't get higher ups to listen to him. The FBI wasn't able to pin anything on him except lying. Your explanation "1" may apply. LOL, OK.

Manafort was fired by the campaign when his work for pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarchs came to light. Ironically, Hunter Biden also worked for a pro-Russian Ukrainian oligarch's company. Small world.Did Hunter work for his daddy's campaign?

Your explanation "2" applies to meetings with the Russian ambassador, Kislyak. Yes, Trump and his people did indeed want to improve relations with Russia.Nah, it doesn't work like this. When two ridiculous hypotheses are presented to excuse Trump's obviously criminal behavior -- that's too funny, even for a mongering forum.

Now admittedly Trump wasn't going to look a gift horse in the mouth. He probably was grateful for any unsolicited help the Russians might provide, which could partly explain why he was friendlier on a personal level with Putin than some of our allies. You may recall that according to Neocon John Bolton, Trump asked Xi for help in winning the 2020 election.Unsolicited? Russia, if you're listening. . . LOLOL!

Circling back to where I started, if there were collusion, the FBI and DOJ and Mueller should have uncovered it. They did wiretap Manafort and Carter Page, and probably Papadopoulos and others. They tried to entrap Papadopoulos with an undercover agent. They didn't come up with anything.And they did. Once again, EihTooms already answered that one. Not prosecuting a sitting president is not the same as not "uncovering it".

EihTooms

07-08-23, 20:47

By definition collusion requires secret or illegal conspiracy or cooperation. IF as you say Team Trump was too stupid to notice the interference, then how was it collusion?Because their stupidity was in part in not knowing the definition of collusion in the first place. See, now that you looked it up, you know the meaning of it and should no longer be confused by it.

The same will be true about the difference between an ADP Private Sector Jobs Report and a BLS Employment / Unemployment Report just as soon as you look that up.

EihTooms

07-08-23, 21:37

It is possible Trump was too stupid to know Russia was cooperating with him in his request. But does it really matter if he knew they were cooperating with him in his request or not?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collusion

collusion
noun
collusion kə-ˈl-zhən
Synonyms of collusion
: secret agreement or cooperation especially for an illegal or deceitful purpose
acting in collusion with the enemy.It is obvious to anyone who isn't stupid or pretending to be stupid that Russia knew they were cooperating with his request even if he was too stupid to know it:

Trump asked Russians to get Clinton emails. They immediately started trying.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/13/politics/trump-asked-russians-to-get-clinton-emails-they-immediately-started-trying-/index.html

Yeah, I know. Trump later claimed he was only joking. And anyone who actually believes that or is pretending to believe that is colluding / cooperating with Trump to con the rest of us too even if they are too stupid to know it. It can go either way.

SubCmdr

07-09-23, 07:56

Your typical older expat living in the 3rd World is there to try and stretch a meager to modest retirement income.Do you actually live overseas? And you do realize that only the ill informed use the term 3rd world? I disagree with your statement.

SubCmdr

07-09-23, 08:16

I moved out of the USA to retire in Thailand almost 11 years ago and have not returned since. I worked, made money and invested in the USA and still have rental property there. I vote and care about what happens in the USA because I have friends, family and investments there. And because what happens in the USA does not stay in the USA. Obviously.I don't give a fuck about what happens in the (Dis) United States of America. Except that they don't default on the debt before I can get of of the system completely.

Ok, if executives in other countries control everything then my votes for Dems have been empowering executives to produce virtually every result that has presented me with more, better and higher paying income, business and investment gains over the years while some numbskulls' votes for Repubs have empowered executives to produce the only meaningful crap results, income, business and investment losses I have experienced in the past 70 years. And any historical data record you've got shows I was clearly not alone in that experience.The executives of the countries around the world control nothing. The individuals who control things in corrupt plutocracies like the (Dis) United States of America are the capitalists who have the money. In country with autocrats the rich have no protection. Leaders of the central parties hit them at will across the world. It is good to be the King!

So if it makes you feel better, here is a big Thank You for the executives in other countries pulling the strings on Dems. Piss on the executives in other countries pulling the strings on Repubs.With all due respect, take this comment and put it in the freezer.

Tooms has already done that, left the USA. He's just extremely partisan.In my opinion he has issues.

A question, is that passport you mention an American one? I understand the USA and Eritrea are the only countries in the world that tax their citizens and require them to file income tax returns regardless of where they live in the world. And also that some foreign banks won't accept USA Citizens as customers, because of our government's onerous reporting requirements. So a USA citizen living abroad may have to jump through hoops to simply open a bank account. All of that seemingly would make it difficult to truly be free, just by leaving the USAWith all due respect, you are mistaken and unfamiliar with tax law in the (Dis) United States of America. Only if you define freedom by being stateless will you completely avoid tax paperwork.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/17/1-in-4-expats-seriously-considering-renouncing-us-citizenship.html#text=Although%20 there%20 was%20 a%20 sharp, amid%20 the%20 Covid%2 D19%20 pandemic.

I can run you through many examples where you can make money and be a US Citizen and pay no taxes. Although you are correct. You must file the paperwork. And it can get complicated and expensive. Donald Trump does not pay taxes.

And a second question, when you say "take the orange pill," do you mean you finally recognized what the USA government's all about? Or are you talking about crypto?Crypto.

And finally, what does "Dis" mean?(Dis) United States of America. Disunited: lacking unity.

Sorry for all the questions. You may be my new guru.With all due respect Mr. Tiny. If asked I will not serve. LOL!

MarquisdeSade1

07-09-23, 21:19

Do you actually live overseas? And you do realize that only the ill informed use the term 3rd world? I disagree with your statement.Please define ill informed? Maybe grab a mirror.

https://fortune.com/2023/07/03/what-is-global-south-china-india-third-world-developing-countries/

Paulie97

07-09-23, 22:23

Do you actually live overseas? I live in the States, not that that has anything to do with the statement you are replying to.

And you do realize that only the ill informed use the term 3rd world? Do you realize that many who use the term are aware that it's dated, but still employ it as it's widely understood and goes far to get the point across? Said countries didn't suddenly become developed when the USSR was dissolved.

I disagree with your statement.I couldn't care less. Expats with real money when retiring overseas tend to gravitate toward developed countries like France or Spain. For example the Mediterranean coastal life is superior in about every aspect, infrastructure, stability, scenery, food, and even hookers (loads of variety) than the 3rd World countries many here reside in to stretch their meager or modest retirement incomes. That's in spite of the lying that's easy online and so common in monger communities.

EihTooms

07-10-23, 01:17

EihTooms has already addressed this falsehood.

1. And this wasn't a sign of the collusion? Really?

2. My recollection also includes Trump calling Jr. From the Air Force 1 and coaching him to lie about the topic of the meeting (adaption of Russian children). Not a sign either?

LOL, OK.

Did Hunter work for his daddy's campaign?

Nah, it doesn't work like this. When two ridiculous hypotheses are presented to excuse Trump's obviously criminal behavior -- that's too funny, even for a mongering forum.

Unsolicited? Russia, if you're listening. . . LOLOL!

And they did. Once again, EihTooms already answered that one. Not prosecuting a sitting president is not the same as not "uncovering it".As Trump's former fixer, Michael Cohen, has stated several times including under oath, Trump speaks in code like a mob boss in order to maintain a buffer of deniability about his crimes and transgressions. And to keep alive his and his Crime Family's favorite go-to defence for those things; That he is too stupid to commit that crime or transgression.

That included his extraordinarily tight connection and collusion with Russia:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/05/michael-cohen-trump-code-language-lie-to-congress

Trump and his Team only dodged direct accusations of some levels of collusion because, without a written or recorded trail of a "conspiracy" to collude with Russia, it is impossible to prove they were NOT too stupid to understand the meaning of collusion and commit that transgression.

Of course, Team Trump's consciousness of guilt about their collusion is really difficult to miss in light of their astonishing number of meetings with Russians and their almost universal attempt to keep them secret until they were cornered and could no longer do so:

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/closer-meetings-russians-trump-team-failed-disclose/story?id=50397154

Sure, any pro Repub / Trump noodnik can accept that Trump Crime Family chestnut about them being too stupid to know what they were doing as long as they are happy to collude with them to propose such obvious bullshit as well.

Tiny 12

07-10-23, 01:21

Note the #1 most often repeated Myth on the list...

EihTooms has already addressed this falsehood...From page 173 of the Mueller Report:

"Ultimately, the investigation did not establish that the Campaign coordinated or conspired with the Russian government in its election-interference activities. ".

I am not a Trump fan. I did not vote for him and in fact contributed to the campaigns of two of his opponents. I have defended his policies here that I agreed with.

You haven't persuaded me. I still believe that the Democratic politician's attempts to paint Trump as conspiring or colluding with the Russians in the 2016 election are as lame as Republican's attempts to paint Joe Biden as a recipient of bribes and as a participant in extortion.

You might be excused because the left-of-center media has misled you about Trump and the Russians, as set out brilliantly by Jeff Gerth in a four part series for the Columbia Journalism Review.

https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.php

But the truth is that the Democratic Party is your religion, and you won't allow your interpretation of what's happening in the world around you to conflict with Party dogma.

John Clayton

07-10-23, 06:26

...You haven't persuaded me...Trying to persuade you is a waste of precious world bandwidth. Eventually, after Putin is deposed, it will be revealed that Trump was a closely held Kremlin asset. He is a traitor to the United States.

EihTooms

07-10-23, 09:22

From the first 2 years after it was signed and passed and now well into the 6th year after it was signed and passed, there is still zero evidence that repatriated profits due to Trump's TCJA have created any more jobs, stimulated any more domestic investment or Research & Development than would have been created without it. It was simply $2. 5 Trillion+ added to the deficit with nothing notable to show for it. Not only did that one time spike in profits serve primarily to purchase stock buybacks and nothing else, the trend of repatriating profits back to the USA was already in an upward trajectory for several years PRIOR to the TCJA, the same as the 7 year downward trend for the Unemployment Rate and the Historic Years' Long Steady Gains in Jobs. Thank you, Obama.

U.S. Corporations' Repatriation of Offshore Profits: Evidence from 2018

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/us-corporations-repatriation-of-offshore-profits-20190806.html

Investment by the top 15 cash holders also rose in 2018 figure 3, particularly relative to other nonfinancial S&P 500 firms black line. However, the increase in investment was far less notable than the increase in share buybacks. For the top 15 cash holders, the average ratio of investment, capital expenditures plus research and development expenses, to assets rose from 2.3 percent in 2017 to 2.8 percent in 2018, while it remained flat at 1.5 percent for other nonfinancial S&P 500 firms. However, it should be noted that investment by the top 15 cash holders was already on an upward trajectory for several years prior to the TCJA, both in dollar terms, red bars, and relative to other nonfinancial S&P 500 firms, black line. Given this pre-existing upward trend, it is difficult to know how much of the observed increase in investment by the top 15 cash holders might have occurred even in the absence of the repatriation. Moreover, the increase in investment by the top 15 cash holders before the passage of the TCJA is consistent with the notion that, because these are large firms, they are unlikely to have faced notable constraints or costs to accessing capital markets to fund their investment needs. Of course, it may be too early to reach a definitive conclusion, as any additional boost to investment due to the repatriation may take more time to fully materialize.Repubs just love to jump in on an already well-established positive trend created almost solely by the hard work and legislative skillfulness of Dems and claim their subsequent deficit ballooning nothingness had something to do with it. And, of course, on the other side of it, Repubs also love to crash the USA economy and wipe out millions of jobs right at the end of their term so they can enlist the aid of their beloved pro Repub Mainstream Media to blame the incoming Dem administration for it while that administration cleans up the typical historic and unprecedented mess they've made of everything.

Now, as you'll see in the Federal Reserve's charts in the above link and in the report below, this colossal Repub waste of time and money with No Jobs Created charade was already tried by the 108th Repub Congress back in 2003 and 2004 with their Homeland Investment Act (HIA) tax holiday for foreign cash holding companies. What happened then? LOL. The same thing that happened with the TCJA; they did NOT create more jobs, increase domestic investment or Research & Development. They bought back their own losing stocks:

Watch What I Do, Not What I Say: The Unintended Consequences of the Homeland Investment Act

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=37852

ABSTRACT
This paper analyzes the impact of the Homeland Investment Act of 2004, which provided a one-time tax holiday for the repatriation of foreign earnings and thereby reduced the cost to U.S. multinationals of accessing a source of internal capital. Lawmakers and lobbyists justified its passage by arguing that it would alleviate financial constraints. This paper's results indicate that repatriations did not lead to an increase in domestic investment, domestic employment, or R&D, even for the firms that appeared to be financially constrained or lobbied for the holiday. Instead, estimates indicate that a $1 increase in repatriations was associated with a $0.60 to $0.92 increase in payouts to shareholders, despite regulations stating that such expenditures were not a permitted use of repatriations qualifying for the tax holiday. The results indicate that U.S. multinationals were not financially constrained and were reasonably well governed. The fungibility of money appears to have undermined the effectiveness of the regulations.

EihTooms

07-10-23, 09:59

I live in the States, not that that has anything to do with the statement you are replying to.

Do you realize that many who use the term are aware that it's dated, but still employ it as it's widely understood and goes far to get the point across? Said countries didn't suddenly become developed when the USSR was dissolved.

I couldn't care less. Expats with real money when retiring overseas tend to gravitate toward developed countries like France or Spain. For example the Mediterranean coastal life is superior in about every aspect, infrastructure, stability, scenery, food, and even hookers (loads of variety) than the 3rd World countries many here reside in to stretch their meager or modest retirement incomes. That's in spite of the lying that's easy online and so common in monger communities.Great. Then since you have done so much better with your investments, building a retirement income and will be retiring in Spain, that leaves more 20-something Asian cuties for me to fuck and get blown by in my poor but beautifully well-located shanty in the #1 most visited city on the Planet. Personally, I prefer to live in a big city, not on a beach, staring at the ocean. I spent many years living at or near the beach in the USA:

The Worlds Most Visited Cities.

June 23, 2023

https://travelness.com/most-visited-cities-in-the-world

Yeah, Paris and London are on the list. After Bangkok. But those are the only cities in France or the United Kingdom on the list. Thailand has three on the list of the top 20, including a mongering resort town too boring for me to even consider living in. All three of them rank higher than the first city in Spain on the list.

Maybe you should do a little more traveling around Thailand and other destinations in Asia before you settle on retiring in that casa in Spain.

SubCmdr

07-10-23, 11:25

I live in the States, not that that has anything to do with the statement you are replying to.It sure does. It speaks to you knowledge on the subject. You are talking about something that you actually don't know anything about now do you? I have lived in the (Dis) United States of America and overseas. I know of what I speak from direct knowledge. Not YouTube videos.

Do you realize that many who use the term are aware that it's dated, but still employ it as it's widely understood and goes far to get the point across? Said countries didn't suddenly become developed when the USSR was dissolved.Yes, but the term is inaccurate. Relating to a time in Geopolitics that have past. And interestingly enough you used the term "developed" which is actually the term used to describe these countries at this point.

I couldn't care less. Expats with real money when retiring overseas tend to gravitate toward developed countries like France or Spain. For example the Mediterranean coastal life is superior in about every aspect, infrastructure, stability, scenery, food, and even hookers (loads of variety) than the 3rd World countries many here reside in to stretch their meager or modest retirement incomes. That's in spite of the lying that's easy online and so common in monger communities.I understand that is your opinion. But if you had some facts to back it up you would.

Why would I want to leave the (Dis) United States of America in order to reside in another Western nation with the same WACK attitudes of the nation I left. But them again, you are not talking about me personally now are you? At least not in this thread you are not. LOL!

SubCmdr

07-10-23, 11:33

Please define ill informed? Maybe grab a mirror. https://fortune.com/2023/07/03/what-is-global-south-china-india-third-world-developing-countries/I can do that for you. And I use a mirror to shave. I don't need one to answer your question. But thank you for your suggestion. There is an organization known as the World Bank. Are you familiar with it?

3rd world describes geo political situation that no longer exists. And if you look at the current world the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd world does not exist. The world is breaking down into trade blocks without unified political philosophy. The World Bank classifies economies for analytical purposes into four income groups: low, lower-middle, upper-middle, and high income.

https://datatopics.worldbank.org/world-development-indicators/the-world-by-income-and-region.html#text=The%20 World%20 Bank%20 classifies%20 economies,%2 Dmiddle%2 see%20 and%20 high%20 income.

You are welcome for the education I gave you.

Tiny 12

07-10-23, 17:12

From the first 2 years after it was signed and passed and now well into the 6th year after it was signed and passed, there is still zero evidence that repatriated profits due to Trump's TCJA have created any more jobs, stimulated any more domestic investment or Research & Development than would have been created without it. It was simply $2. 5 Trillion+ added to the deficit with nothing notable to show for it. Not only did that one time spike in profits serve primarily to purchase stock buybacks and nothing else, the trend of repatriating profits back to the USA was already in an upward trajectory for several years PRIOR to the TCJA, the same as the 7 year downward trend for the Unemployment Rate and the Historic Years' Long Steady Gains in Jobs. Thank you, Obama.

U.S. Corporations' Repatriation of Offshore Profits: Evidence from 2018

https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/notes/feds-notes/us-corporations-repatriation-of-offshore-profits-20190806.html

Repubs just love to jump in on an already well-established positive trend created almost solely by the hard work and legislative skillfulness of Dems and claim their subsequent deficit ballooning nothingness had something to do with it. And, of course, on the other side of it, Repubs also love to crash the USA economy and wipe out millions of jobs right at the end of their term so they can enlist the aid of their beloved pro Repub Mainstream Media to blame the incoming Dem administration for it while that administration cleans up the typical historic and unprecedented mess they've made of everything.

Now, as you'll see in the Federal Reserve's charts in the above link and in the report below, this colossal Repub waste of time and money with No Jobs Created charade was already tried by the 108th Repub Congress back in 2003 and 2004 with their Homeland Investment Act (HIA) tax holiday for foreign cash holding companies. What happened then? LOL. The same thing that happened with the TCJA; they did NOT create more jobs, increase domestic investment or Research & Development. They bought back their own losing stocks:

Watch What I Do, Not What I Say: The Unintended Consequences of the Homeland Investment Act

https://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=37852Sigh. Another article published in 2019 that just looks at data from the first year when changes in the corporate tax regime went into effect.

What do shareholders do with money from corporate buybacks? They re-invest it. That's the process by which typewriter manufacturers are replaced by computer manufacturers. Buybacks and dividends which move money to higher return investments are better for the economy than when empire-building CEO's keep the money and invest it in lower return projects and expansions.

Companies didn't immediately repatriate all their cash held overseas in 2018. And as I said, companies didn't immediately pick up and move a business from, say Ireland to Austin, the year when the corporate tax cut and the GILTI tax on foreign earnings took effect. And as I showed you, investment by S&P 500 companies at least didn't boom until a couple of years after the tax cut.

As to your article on the 2004 act, I'm not familiar with it. It did not lower the corporate income tax rate from the highest in the developed world to the middle of the pack, thus making many American businesses competitive again. Nor did it impose a new tax on foreign earnings like the TCJA. In the medium and long term, those changes encouraged domestic investment.

Finally why do you keep quoting the 2.5 trillion number, for the amount that the TCJA is supposed to leave in taxpayers' pockets? That assumes that all the provisions of the TCJA will be extended when they sunset. And that will require Democratic votes in Congress and most likely a Democratic President. Given the way the Republican Party is self destructing, that's unlikely to happen.

Tiny 12

07-10-23, 17:21

Trying to persuade you is a waste of precious world bandwidth. Eventually, after Putin is deposed, it will be revealed that Trump was a closely held Kremlin asset. He is a traitor to the United States.Correct, you can't persuade bots like Questner and me. If you said Trump was traitorous to American democracy for what he did after the 2020 election, I might agree with you. Your belief that he was a closely held Kremlin asset is just plain wrong. The press misled you, as described in this very-well-researched four part series by Jeff Gerth in the highly-respected Columbia Journalism Review.

https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.php

John Clayton

07-10-23, 18:43

.. the highly-respected Columbia Journalism Review.

https://www.cjr.org/special_report/trumped-up-press-versus-president-part-1.phpThe worst slam against the Times reporting on Trump's Russia connection in 2016/17 is that it was "uncorroborated", never that it was false or untrue or a lie. Prior to his election, I believed him to be simply, in KGB parlance, a "useful idiot" -- greedy, vainglorious and easily manipulated. I chalked up the 2016 changes to the GOP platform as purely (or mostly) the contrivance of Manafort who, inarguably, is a Russian agent. Trump's opposition to NATO could have been due to his primitive, internal ideology. However, my epiphany about him occurred in the summer of 2017 when he, out of nowhere and apropos of nothing, when he opposed Montenegro's talks about eventually joining the EU. Manafort, long gone by then, had had a financial interest in Ukraine, but not Montenegro. I mean, come on, could Trump even find Montenegro on a map? Clearly, someone had instructed him to say that word for word. Later, Trump in Helsinki, Trump undermining NATO, Trump blocking arms to Ukraine were just further evidence that someone was telling him what to say. The false narrative in the press was that Trump was using arm sales to Ukraine to elicit dirt on Biden. The reality is that search for Biden malfeasance was just a cover for blocking arm sales. Stopping the shipment of MANPADS was the entire point.

I'm hopeful that Russia will come to its senses after Putin is gone, and that 2016/17 uncorroborated (and unfairly maligned) NYT reporting will be shown to be wholely true. I'm looking forward to it.

Tiny 12

07-10-23, 19:15

The worst slam against the Times reporting on Trump's Russia connection in 2016/17 is that it was "uncorroborated", never that it was false or untrue or a lie. Prior to his election, I believed him to be simply, in KGB parlance, a "useful idiot" -- greedy, vainglorious and easily manipulated. I chalked up the 2016 changes to the GOP platform as purely (or mostly) the contrivance of Manafort who, inarguably, is a Russian agent. Trump's opposition to NATO could have been due to his primitive, internal ideology. However, my epiphany about him occurred in the summer of 2017 when he, out of nowhere and apropos of nothing, when he opposed Montenegro's talks about eventually joining the EU. Manafort, long gone by then, had had a financial interest in Ukraine, but not Montenegro. I mean, come on, could Trump even find Montenegro on a map? Clearly, someone had instructed him to say that word for word. Later, Trump in Helsinki, Trump undermining NATO, Trump blocking arms to Ukraine were just further evidence that someone was telling him what to say. The false narrative in the press was that Trump was using arm sales to Ukraine to elicit dirt on Biden. The reality is that search for Biden malfeasance was just a cover for blocking arm sales. Stopping the shipment of MANPADS was the entire point.

I'm hopeful that Russia will come to its senses after Putin is gone, and that 2016/17 uncorroborated (and unfairly maligned) NYT reporting will be shown to be wholely true. I'm looking forward to it.From the cjr piece, the Republican Party in its 2016 platform went farther than Obama in its support for Ukraine. Manafort wasn't a Russian agent, and the campaign dropped him like a hot potato when his Ukrainian connections came to light. Yes, he did help pro Russian Ukrainian oligarchs and politicians as a part of his consulting business.

Trump in Helsinki was just being self serving. He didn't want to admit Russia interfered in the election. Same with the Ukraine. He temporarily withheld aid to use that as leverage to try to get the Ukrainians to investigate Giuliani's loony Hunter Biden conspiracy theory and the extremely loony Crowdstrike conspiracy theory. I'm not familiar with Montenegro or MANPADS.

Trump's criticisms of NATO were coupled with demands that NATO countries spend more on defense. And Trump jumped through hoops to try to prevent the Nord Stream 2 pipeline from starting up. Those don't sound like actions of a Russian asset.

You know this subject better than I do. Still, the claim that Trump's a Russian asset sounds very dubious to me, like Republican claims linking Joe Biden to bribery and extortion.

Tiny 12

07-10-23, 19:29

For example the Mediterranean coastal life is superior in about every aspect, infrastructure, stability, scenery, food, and even hookers (loads of variety)Agreed, depending on which countries you're comparing to, at least with respect to the Costa del Sol. The hookers in France are harder to come by, and then for those of us who don't speak French, the language is an impediment. I also agree with the Commander about wacko attitudes. And you better be darn sure you don't spend over 183 days a year in either country and not file a tax return, as Shakira found out. She's facing up to 8 years in jail.

Xpartan

07-10-23, 20:01

The worst slam against the Times reporting on Trump's Russia connection in 2016/17 is that it was "uncorroborated", never that it was false or untrue or a lie. Prior to his election, I believed him to be simply, in KGB parlance, a "useful idiot" -- greedy, vainglorious and easily manipulated. I chalked up the 2016 changes to the GOP platform as purely (or mostly) the contrivance of Manafort who, inarguably, is a Russian agent. Trump's opposition to NATO could have been due to his primitive, internal ideology. However, my epiphany about him occurred in the summer of 2017 when he, out of nowhere and apropos of nothing, when he opposed Montenegro's talks about eventually joining the EU. Manafort, long gone by then, had had a financial interest in Ukraine, but not Montenegro. I mean, come on, could Trump even find Montenegro on a map? Clearly, someone had instructed him to say that word for word. Later, Trump in Helsinki, Trump undermining NATO, Trump blocking arms to Ukraine were just further evidence that someone was telling him what to say. The false narrative in the press was that Trump was using arm sales to Ukraine to elicit dirt on Biden. The reality is that search for Biden malfeasance was just a cover for blocking arm sales. Stopping the shipment of MANPADS was the entire point.And let's not forget his friendly chats with Pu without an interpreter. At least three such chats took place between 2017 and 2019, but who knows if there weren't other occasions.

And when there was an interpreter present? Well. . .

Trump has concealed details of his face-to-face encounters with Putin from senior officials in administration.

President Trump has gone to extraordinary lengths to conceal details of his conversations with Russian President Vladi*mir Putin, including on at least one occasion taking possession of the notes of his own interpreter and instructing the linguist not to discuss what had transpired with other administration officials, current and former U.S. officials said.

The constraints that Trump imposed are part of a broader pattern by the president of shielding his communications with Putin from public scrutiny and preventing even high-ranking officials in his own administration from fully knowing what he has told one of the United States main adversaries.

As a result, U.S. officials said there is no detailed record, even in classified files, of Trumps face-to-face interactions with the Russian leader at five locations over the past two years. Such a gap would be unusual in any presidency, let alone one that Russia sought to install through what U.S. intelligence agencies have described as an unprecedented campaign of election interference.https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-has-concealed-details-of-his-face-to-face-encounters-with-putin-from-senior-officials-in-administration/2019/01/12/65f6686c-1434-11e9-b6ad-9cfd62dbb0a8_story.html

I'm hopeful that Russia will come to its senses after Putin is gone, and that 2016/17 uncorroborated (and unfairly maligned) NYT reporting will be shown to be wholely true. I'm looking forward to it.No doubt! We'll get his file. The only question is what new set of lies Trump's apologists will manage to come up with.

EihTooms

07-10-23, 22:06

Sigh. Another article published in 2019 that just looks at data from the first year when changes in the corporate tax regime went into effect.

What do shareholders do with money from corporate buybacks? They re-invest it. That's the process by which typewriter manufacturers are replaced by computer manufacturers. Buybacks and dividends which move money to higher return investments are better for the economy than when empire-building CEO's keep the money and invest it in lower return projects and expansions.

Companies didn't immediately repatriate all their cash held overseas in 2018. And as I said, companies didn't immediately pick up and move a business from, say Ireland to Austin, the year when the corporate tax cut and the GILTI tax on foreign earnings took effect. And as I showed you, investment by S&P 500 companies at least didn't boom until a couple of years after the tax cut.

As to your article on the 2004 act, I'm not familiar with it. It did not lower the corporate income tax rate from the highest in the developed world to the middle of the pack, thus making many American businesses competitive again. Nor did it impose a new tax on foreign earnings like the TCJA. In the medium and long term, those changes encouraged domestic investment.

Finally why do you keep quoting the 2.5 trillion number, for the amount that the TCJA is supposed to leave in taxpayers' pockets? That assumes that all the provisions of the TCJA will be extended when they sunset. And that will require Democratic votes in Congress and most likely a Democratic President. Given the way the Republican Party is self destructing, that's unlikely to happen.Oh, then you must have loads of up-to-date links from, say, the Federal Reserve Board as well as the BLS detailing all the domestic jobs being created due to repatriated money flowing into USA thanks to TCJA lo these 6 years later.

May we see them, please?

I don't even think Fux News is on the assignment to float such a claim. Nor have I heard pro Trump Repub leadership insisting that is what is behind Bidenomics' historic jobs creation. Their preference is either to blame inflation due to too many jobs being created by Biden's remarkably successful recovery legislation or to just ignore the job gain numbers as they come in. Shouldn't they all be celebrating these fabulous results of Repub economic stewardship each and every time the same as you do?

EihTooms

07-10-23, 22:41

The worst slam against the Times reporting on Trump's Russia connection in 2016/17 is that it was "uncorroborated", never that it was false or untrue or a lie. Prior to his election, I believed him to be simply, in KGB parlance, a "useful idiot" -- greedy, vainglorious and easily manipulated. I chalked up the 2016 changes to the GOP platform as purely (or mostly) the contrivance of Manafort who, inarguably, is a Russian agent. Trump's opposition to NATO could have been due to his primitive, internal ideology. However, my epiphany about him occurred in the summer of 2017 when he, out of nowhere and apropos of nothing, when he opposed Montenegro's talks about eventually joining the EU. Manafort, long gone by then, had had a financial interest in Ukraine, but not Montenegro. I mean, come on, could Trump even find Montenegro on a map? Clearly, someone had instructed him to say that word for word. Later, Trump in Helsinki, Trump undermining NATO, Trump blocking arms to Ukraine were just further evidence that someone was telling him what to say. The false narrative in the press was that Trump was using arm sales to Ukraine to elicit dirt on Biden. The reality is that search for Biden malfeasance was just a cover for blocking arm sales. Stopping the shipment of MANPADS was the entire point.

I'm hopeful that Russia will come to its senses after Putin is gone, and that 2016/17 uncorroborated (and unfairly maligned) NYT reporting will be shown to be wholely true. I'm looking forward to it.Reports of this kind have been coming in since at least last year. Much further back than that if you count his attempt to fire Mueller.

Of course, a so-called potus illegally ordering IRS audits and investigations on his perceived foes for investigating his extraordinarily tight connection and collusion with Russia is exactly what someone does when he know there was nothing even more incriminating for the investigators to find.

Clearly, even that numbskull recognized that what those investigations did and could reveal about him and his Team regarding Russia was far from "nothing":

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12277265/Trumps-former-chief-staff-testified-asked-IRS-investigating-Peter-Strzok-Lisa-Page.html

John Kelly, who served as Donald Trump's chief of staff from July 2017 to January 2019, has testified about Trump's request to the IRS.

Kelly said that Trump wanted the IRS to investigate FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page, after they were involved in investigating his Russia ties in 2016.

MarquisdeSade1

07-11-23, 02:01

I can do that for you. And I use a mirror to shave. I don't need one to answer your question. But thank you for your suggestion. There is an organization known as the World Bank Are you familiar with it?

3rd world describes geo political situation that no longer exists. And if you look at the current world the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd world does not exist. The world is breaking down into trade blocks without unified political philosophy. The World Bank classifies economies for analytical purposes into four income groups: low, lower-middle, upper-middle, and high income.

https://datatopics.worldbank.org/world-development-indicators/the-world-by-income-and-region.html#text=The%20 World%20 Bank%20 classifies%20 economies,%2 Dmiddle%2 see%20 and%20 high%20 income.

You are welcome for the education I gave you.

There are enough posters getting high off their own farts around here, this thread doesn't need more of you.

https://youtu.be/5hfYJsQAhl0

#NO MORE FART HUFFERS!

SubCmdr

07-11-23, 02:21

One of the reasons I left the (Dis) United States of America is because of decline in civil discourse and the failure of the powers that be to enforce the law against rogue law enforcement officers and agencies. The mentality of looking at me as 3/5 of a person is still in play and due to current politics on the rise and out in the open. I don't care which party you favor, neither the donkey or the elephant care about the individuals in the country looked at as 3/5 of a person.

Wage slaves want to characterize everything they don't understand by being critical of it even thought they have no real experience with it. The (Dis) United States of America taxes all of its citizens world wide. They currently have the world's reserve currency. And they have the money printer and they make it rain at a level no one else can match. And they still cannot get their financial affairs in order. A currency collapse is coming.

It is a sad state of affairs and I loathe to return to the (Dis) United States of America. My biggest fear is Police Violence. I grew up respecting the police. I now have a NWA philosophy about the police. The last thing in the world that I want when I am in the (Dis) United States of America is a police encounter. The fear mongering and scapegoating has gotten completely out of control. That makes me a acceptable target as I am only looked at as 3/5 of a person.

There are many reasons people leave the (Dis) United States of America. It always assumed that individuals who do so are poor. Actually, I have found that you need real money in order to live a lifestyle equivalent to the one in the (Dis) United States of America. If you want to live on less money you have to do so by dramatically changing your lifestyle. I believe that the DUSoAGOV has purposely slowed down processing of passport issuance and renewal applications, because they see people running for the exits. Passport holders in DUSoA has climbed to 40% of the population. That is 133,000,000 people. DAMN!

Productivity is in danger because the parties cannot put in place immigration law that will serve the purposes of the economy. They would rather sacrifice economic viability on the alter of principle. The constitution of the (Dis) United States of America was designed to force compromise to avoid tyranny of the majority. Now it has reversed and there is tyranny of the minority of political thinkers in DUSoA. The constitution needs to an update.

MarquisdeSade1

07-11-23, 03:18

Great. Then since you have done so much better with your investments, building a retirement income and will be retiring in Spain, that leaves more 20-something Asian cuties for me to fuck and get blown by in my poor but beautifully well-located shanty in the #1 most visited city on the Planet. Personally, I prefer to live in a big city, not on a beach, staring at the ocean. I spent many years living at or near the beach in the USA:

The Worlds Most Visited Cities.

June 23, 2023

https://travelness.com/most-visited-cities-in-the-world

Yeah, Paris and London are on the list. After Bangkok. But those are the only cities in France or the United Kingdom on the list. Thailand has three on the list of the top 20, including a mongering resort town too boring for me to even consider living in. All three of them rank higher than the first city in Spain on the list.

Maybe you should do a little more traveling around Thailand and other destinations in Asia before you settle on retiring in that casa in Spain.I think theres a YUGE difference between millions of drunks / mongers choosing to spend their mongering dollars in Siam and actually living there.

I've spent over 55 yrs in comfort in what the west has to offer and even if I won 650 million on the powerball tonite I'm not moving to BKK or anywhere else in the 3rd world.

I just spent 5 months there again (Asia)!! And I won't be moving there, ever not even if you put a gun to my head!!

The 3rd world is not for me, I need to eat safe / normal food, breathe clean air, clean water, have competent physicans etc etc.

But the west does have serious flaws, ie Joe Biden and the junkie and their ilk.

I might prefer some place like eastern Europe / Budapest? Moscow? The middle east? Istanbul / Ankara?

Some place like those above far away from Joe Biden and voters but not anywhere in Latin America or anywhere in Asia NO THANK YOU!

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/visualized-ocean-plastic-waste-pollution-by-country/

the air pollution, noise pollution, water pollution , trash everywhere, massive rats and roaches AGAIN NO THANK YOU

ie, I was in Bali, what a fucking shithole, you want a nice place to visit goto Maui instead!!

EihTooms

07-11-23, 04:56

I think theres a YUGE difference between millions of drunks / mongers choosing to spend their mongering dollars in Siam and actually living there.

I've spent over 55 yrs in comfort in what the west has to offer and even if I won 650 million on the powerball tonite I'm not moving to BKK or anywhere else in the 3rd world.

I just spent 5 months there again (Asia)!! And I won't be moving there, ever not even if you put a gun to my head!!

The 3rd world is not for me, I need to eat safe / normal food, breathe clean air, clean water, have competent physicans etc etc.

But the west does have serious flaws, ie Joe Biden and the junkie and their ilk.

I might prefer some place like eastern Europe / Budapest? Moscow? The middle east? Istanbul / Ankara?

Some place like those above far away from Joe Biden and voters but not anywhere in Latin America or anywhere in Asia NO THANK YOU!

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/cp/visualized-ocean-plastic-waste-pollution-by-country/

the air pollution, noise pollution, water pollution , trash everywhere, massive rats and roaches AGAIN NO THANK YOU

ie, I was in Bali, what a fucking shithole, you want a nice place to visit goto Maui instead!!Yes, I spent over 55 years living in USA too. Almost all of those years in one of the most desirable regions of the most desirable and populace states as a matter of fact. If I won the Big Lottery tomorrow, where I live now would still be my preferred home base. Maybe I would travel more for 2-3 years but know I would get bored with that soon enough. Same as I got bored with the USA, bored with Western sensibilities and chose to experience something else in the last 1/3 or so.

In terms of relaxation, comfort, safety, peace of mind, fun, variety, freedom, pleasure and my good health, as a single man with no children, grandchildren, older parents or other family obligations in the West to speak of, it has turned out to be one of the best decisions of my life. I wish I could have done it at 38 instead of 58.

I don't think Bangkok has been ranking either #1 or #2 on those Most Visited Cities lists for years due to drunks and mongers flooding the place. It would be general tourism same as it is for Paris, London and most others at the top of the list.

The superior mongering scene over the others at the top of the list could be the icing on the cake and also addresses a point Paulie made about it.

Noise pollution, water pollution, trash everywhere, massive rats and roaches? Not a problem where I sleep. Maybe you should choose a better hotel next time you treat yourself to a trip. I hear several cities in the USA had the worst air pollution on Earth lately out of Canada, no?

Elvis 2008

07-11-23, 06:27

Trying to persuade you is a waste of precious world bandwidth. Eventually, after Putin is deposed, it will be revealed that Trump was a closely held Kremlin asset. He is a traitor to the United States.

I'm hopeful that Russia will come to its senses after Putin is gone, and that 2016/17 uncorroborated (and unfairly maligned) NYT reporting will be shown to be wholely true. I'm looking forward to it.I would ask what color is the sky in your world, JC, but obviously you are still locked up in your mom's basement and for good reason. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/.

Are you on your 10th booster?

I am not so sure why you hate Putin so much. When he invaded Ukraine, the pandemic ended.

With President Joe "I never met a war I did not like" Biden in charge, the freedom hating, defense industry funded neocons have jumped parties, and Putin is the new villain. We had M Qaddafi in Libya, S Hussein in Iraq, and Assad in Syria who somehow hung in there. Thing about regime change is that I cannot cite one since WW2 where things got better when the USA toppled a leader, but that was never the goal. The defense industry made out like bandits thank God. Toppling Putin and having another failed regime change kind of reminds me of the old Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon, "It will work this time for sure. ".

Speaking of Rocky and Bullwinkle, maybe we should go back in a time machine to 2000. Your boy Bill Clinton was a big fan of Yeltsin. Remember him? Yeah, he was getting stoned on vodka why the country burned. My brother went to Russia and heard the horror stories with Yeltsin. Women turned to prostitution like crazy, not enough food, trains not running on time ETC. Putin came in, arrested one oligarch, and said to the oligarchs you guys worry about making money, and I will run the country. It helped that oil prices rebounded but Russia became very prosperous under Putin and is in a much better economic place than Ukraine. He is not as popular as he was but he still is loved by many there.

As for history, JFK knew the truth about WW2. The Russians much more so than the USA defeated the Nazis, and you would be hard pressed to find a country that suffered more than they did in the history of the world. One in seven Russians died. Women were raped. Cities were starved ETC, and those fears linger to this day.

You can call Putin all the names you want, but you are dead wrong about how the Russian people feel. When Ukraine started shutting off water to the Crimea, had soldiers wearing Nazi symbols, abused ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine, and talked of joining NATO where Germany is a member, you may think that was no big deal, but I guarantee you the Russian people felt differently. The Russian people are determined to never again have a WW2 and if that means invading Ukraine to get themselves in a better defensive position, then the feeling for many Russians is so be it.

John Clayton

07-11-23, 16:15

Elvis 2008

07-11-23, 16:59

10% of Americans believe the Earth is flat.Are you one of them?

Tiny 12

07-11-23, 18:51

Elvis, That's the second truly thought provoking post I've read here. The first was written by PVMonger or Tooms, although I never gave him the satisfaction of knowing that.

Clayton's out of character. I believe he's usually more diplomatic.

I am not so sure why you hate Putin so much. When he invaded Ukraine, the pandemic ended.

I'm on my third booster -- that's still hilarious.

With President Joe "I never met a war I did not like" Biden in charge, the freedom hating, defense industry funded neocons have jumped parties, and Putin is the new villain. We had M Qaddafi in Libya, S Hussein in Iraq, and Assad in Syria who somehow hung in there. Thing about regime change is that I cannot cite one since WW2 where things got better when the USA toppled a leader, but that was never the goal. The defense industry made out like bandits thank God. Toppling Putin and having another failed regime change kind of reminds me of the old Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon, "It will work this time for sure. ". I started thinking about that. Yeah, Iran, Guatemala, Zaire, Libya, Iraq, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Cuba etc. , when we overthrew or tried to overthrow a leader, things got worse. Or they didn't get demonstrably better. The only interventions I can think of with good outcomes were Kuwait, and probably Kosovo and South Korea. And in those instances the population was on our side. Well, the Russian people aren't on our side. As you say, Putin's popular in Russia, a lot more popular than Biden or Trump is here. Those who believe he's going to get kicked out of power in the near future are probably mistaken. And who replace him if Putin's pushed out? Patrushev and Medvedev are the most likely, and they're to the right of Putin. This could play out like Cuba. We try to overthrow Putin, but never do. He finally dies of natural causes. And then the people who come along afterwards aren't much different.

So, aren't we on the same side as the Ukrainians? Well, yes, probably we did the right thing by pumping in support to help prevent the fall of Kyiv, Kharkiv, Odesa, etc. But Crimeans clearly want to stay part of Russia. And the majority of people in separatist areas of Donbas want to be part of Russia. I linked to a 2019 poll by Ukrainian institutions that showed that, and so did an early 2022 poll conducted by the Washington Post. An interesting question posed by the Post in January, 2022, do you agree or disagree with the following, "It doesn't matter to me in which country I live: all I want is a good salary and then a good pension. " The majority of people in both government controlled and non government controlled Donbas agreed with that statement.

Maybe Biden's wising up. Supposedly he has a couple of people at the state department talking with the Russians, looking for a solution. I hope his administration will push for peace harder, and not wait around for years until the Ukrainians have either recaptured Crimea and all the Donbas or capitulated to Russia.

I did a little reading this morning on some of your other points. There's more truth there than some of our friends here would care to admit, for example about cutting off water to Crimea and the attitude or paranoia or whatever you want to call it of many Russians towards the west. I wonder what their reaction would be if Trump used the Proud Boys like Poroshenko used the Azov Brigade.

PVMonger

07-11-23, 22:01

I would ask what color is the sky in your world, JC, but obviously you are still locked up in your mom's basement and for good reason. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/.

Are you on your 10th booster?

I am not so sure why you hate Putin so much. When he invaded Ukraine, the pandemic ended.

With President Joe "I never met a war I did not like" Biden in charge, the freedom hating, defense industry funded neocons have jumped parties, and Putin is the new villain. We had M Qaddafi in Libya, S Hussein in Iraq, and Assad in Syria who somehow hung in there. Thing about regime change is that I cannot cite one since WW2 where things got better when the USA toppled a leader, but that was never the goal. The defense industry made out like bandits thank God. Toppling Putin and having another failed regime change kind of reminds me of the old Rocky and Bullwinkle cartoon, "It will work this time for sure. ".

Speaking of Rocky and Bullwinkle, maybe we should go back in a time machine to 2000. Your boy Bill Clinton was a big fan of Yeltsin. Remember him? Yeah, he was getting stoned on vodka why the country burned. My brother went to Russia and heard the horror stories with Yeltsin. Women turned to prostitution like crazy, not enough food, trains not running on time ETC. Putin came in, arrested one oligarch, and said to the oligarchs you guys worry about making money, and I will run the country. It helped that oil prices rebounded but Russia became very prosperous under Putin and is in a much better economic place than Ukraine. He is not as popular as he was but he still is loved by many there.

As for history, JFK knew the truth about WW2. The Russians much more so than the USA defeated the Nazis, and you would be hard pressed to find a country that suffered more than they did in the history of the world. One in seven Russians died. Women were raped. Cities were starved ETC, and those fears linger to this day.

You can call Putin all the names you want, but you are dead wrong about how the Russian people feel. When Ukraine started shutting off water to the Crimea, had soldiers wearing Nazi symbols, abused ethnic Russians in Eastern Ukraine, and talked of joining NATO where Germany is a member, you may think that was no big deal, but I guarantee you the Russian people felt differently. The Russian people are determined to never again have a WW2 and if that means invading Ukraine to get themselves in a better defensive position, then the feeling for many Russians is so be it.The Russian people don't want a WWII so they thought invading Ukraine was OK?

You realize, hopefully, that Estonia and Latvia have been NATO members since 2004 and they both share a border with Russia. Finland entered NATO about 6 months ago and they share a border with Russia also.

Using your logic, it will be perfectly OK for Russia to invade those countries next.

As to this statement "I am not so sure why you hate Putin so much. When he invaded Ukraine, the pandemic ended. " it is probably tongue-in-cheek. But Repubs love post hoc ergo propter hoc thinking. Somehow, they always forget that COVID happened several months after the one-term, twice-impeached, twice-indicted, former-guy stopped funding for PREDICT. Coincidence? Not by Repub logic.

MarquisdeSade1

07-11-23, 23:29

Yes, I spent over 55 years living in USA too. Almost all of those years in one of the most desirable regions of the most desirable and populace states as a matter of fact. If I won the Big Lottery tomorrow, where I live now would still be my preferred home base. Maybe I would travel more for 2-3 years but know I would get bored with that soon enough. Same as I got bored with the USA, bored with Western sensibilities and chose to experience something else in the last 1/3 or so.

In terms of relaxation, comfort, safety, peace of mind, fun, variety, freedom, pleasure and my good health, as a single man with no children, grandchildren, older parents or other family obligations in the West to speak of, it has turned out to be one of the best decisions of my life. I wish I could have done it at 38 instead of 58.

I don't think Bangkok has been ranking either #1 or #2 on those Most Visited Cities lists for years due to drunks and mongers flooding the place. It would be general tourism same as it is for Paris, London and most others at the top of the list.

The superior mongering scene over the others at the top of the list could be the icing on the cake and also addresses a point Paulie made about it.

Noise pollution, water pollution, trash everywhere, massive rats and roaches? Not a problem where I sleep. Maybe you should choose a better hotel next time you treat yourself to a trip. I hear several cities in the USA had the worst air pollution on Earth lately out of Canada, no?Yes, I spent over 55 years living in USA too. Almost all of those years in one of the most desirable regions of the most desirable and populace states as a matter of fact?

Desirable to whom? LMAO the homeless?

https://nypost.com/2019/11/12/homeless-man-hurls-bucket-of-diarrhea-at-woman-near-hollywood-walk-of-fame/

Its so great you couldn't wait to get the fuck out of there?

Or were you the last hetero white male chased out? LMAO.

So great you haven't been back and never will go back LMAO.

Noise pollution, water pollution, trash everywhere, massive rats and roaches? Not a problem where I sleep. Maybe you should choose a better hotel next time you treat yourself to a trip.

Well I tried an upper floor at the Novotel on soi 4 for $130 usd a night and its hardly worth $30 (I think you're really close by?

Roosters making noise all day, tuk tuks etc.

Walk past 711 across the street, and be greeted by filthy food waste / trash piled up 24/7 and massive rats and massive roaches everywhere.

Asia the land of massive rats and massive roaches EVERYWHERE.

And don't get me started on the toxic air or the oppressive jungle heat and humidity 24/7.

And lets not even get into the prevalent anti white racism!!

SubCmdr

07-12-23, 05:08

There are enough posters getting high off their own farts around here, this thread doesn't need more of you.Although I find your posts to be less than eloquent I will still take portion of my valuable time to educate you some more.

There is a function the the forum makes available called "Ignore". You enter my handle onto your list and then my posts will not appear on your feed when you log in. Alternately if you feel I have violated some aspect of ISG policy you can hit the report button and bring my offensive post to the attention of the administrator. If you find either one of those actions to be too technically challenging to you your final option is to STFU and stop reading my posts. Then they won't bother you. LOL!

"Third World" is an outdated and derogatory phrase that has been used historically to describe a class of economically developing nations. It is part of a four-part segmentation that was used to describe the worlds economies by economic status. Third World falls behind First World and Second World but was ahead of Fourth World, though Fourth-World countries were hardly recognized at all. Today, the preferred terminology is a developing nation, an underdeveloped country, or a low- and middle-income country (LMIC)."

When you only know places by watching YouTube videos because you have won the birth lottery and think you sit in the center of the world, you world view can be severely misinformed.

The 3rd world is not for me, I need to eat safe / normal food, breathe clean air, clean water, have competent physicans etc etc.We should all live were we feel we are treated best. For me that is not in the (Dis) United States of America.

Where I live the food is fresher than in the (Dis) United Staes of America without all the growth hormone additives or GMO grown items. The supply chain is shorter and cleaner. While in the (Dis) United States of America I suffered from health issues that I manage easily now that I am outside of that location. And the improvements came from doing nothing more than relocating, eating locally produced food while staying away from all that imported processed junk.

I receive better medical care outside of the (Dis) United States of America than inside of it. During this time I have lived abroad, I have had two medical procedures that required anesthesia and one surgery. I have received advanced medical tests that I have never even received when in the (Dis) United States of America. Every time I have gone to the doctor they have taken time to discuss my medical issue in depth and taken what ever time is needed to provide medical care superior that I have received in the (Dis) United States of America. My dental care has been superior also. With my dental care team suggesting and performing procedures that were never addressed during my entire time of living in the (Dis) United Staes of America.

The idea that the (Dis) United States of America is the land of milk and honey has long been debunked. It is not the American dream anymore it is the American Nightmare. Living outside of the (Dis) United States of America has given me a improved standard of living and less stress.

Now let us talk about pollution:

About 1 in 4 people in the United States more than 119 million residents live with air pollution that can hurt their health and shorten their lives, according to a new report from the American Lung Association. People of color are disproportionately affected, as are residents of Western cities.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/health/state-of-the-air-2023/index.html

Water Pollution Remains Top Environmental Concern in USA.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/347735/water-pollution-remains-top-environmental-concern.aspx

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states have identified almost 70,000 water bodies nationwide that do not meet water quality standards.

https://www.gao.gov/water-quality-and-protection

What GAO Does

GAO provides Congress, the heads of executive agencies, and the public with timely, fact-based, non-partisan information that can be used to improve government and save taxpayers billions of dollars. Our work is done at the request of congressional committees or subcommittees or is statutorily required by public laws or committee reports, per our Congressional Protocols.

What were you saying what about pollution again?

Expats with real money when retiring overseas tend to gravitate toward developed countries like France or Spain. For example the Mediterranean coastal life is superior in about every aspect, infrastructure, stability, scenery, food, and even hookers (loads of variety) than the 3rd World countries many here reside in to stretch their meager or modest retirement incomes. That's in spite of the lying that's easy online and so common in monger communities.I would like to address the idea that is only people with "meager or modest retirement incomes" who move to countries in the low, lower-middle income classifications listed by the organization know as the World Bank (Headquartered here: 1818 H Street, and. W. , Mail Stop MC 13-1302, Washington, DC 20433 USA) by relating the following anecdotal story. And please stop me if I am using words that are too big for any of you. Feel free to pause and google the meaning of any of them you do not understand.

Yesterday I had breakfast with a retired intellectual property attorney, a retired electrical engineer and myself (I am not retired but I am not a wage slave either). I have my eye on retirement in 18 months. As we sat in the open under cover next to a pool on a Caribbean island I felt sorry for all the wage slaves in the (Dis) United States of America toiling away for their corporate masters. The sun was warm and the breeze was refreshing.

It was a lively and active discussion about technology, crypto, culture and many other topics. No alcohol was on the table at any point. At the end of the breakfast we discussed the activities we would be engaging in next. And we all need to goto the bank and we all just happened to be headed to the same one. One of the individuals in the group had driven his vehicle to the breakfast meeting and offered us a ride which we took him up on. Upon arrival they went inside the bank while I went to the ATM and withdrew the maximum amount that is allowed by the ATM, We all returned to the vehicle and I was offered a ride to my accommodations which I took them up on. They dropped me off and I continued my workday.

My experience of living overseas is a far cry from the misinformed ideas being propagated by certain individuals replying to my posts. And that is ok because opinions differ. But facts are real.

The United States is one of a small minority of countries that tries to suppress prostitution.

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/prostitution

American Politics does not allow me to legally pay a girl for sexual services. The straight WACK ideas that American girls have developed (and girls in the Western World in general) are causing men from the (Dis) United States of America to get their passports and go where they are treated best.

I was ahead of the curve. In going where I was treated better. And all I was looking for was better weather, less stress and better value for each USD spent. Just by seeking it out, I got a better, less stressful life. I type this from my room with air-conditioning, hot water shower, fan, television, internet. I am within walking distance of two modern grocery stores, my two banks, office supply store, pharmacy and all my favorite restaurants.

I have used the most important vote I have. I voted with me feet and with my USD. And I got the fuck up out of there. Stay on the sinking ship if you would like people. I'll wave at ya from the beach on my lounge chair (sexy bikini clad chica in the lounge chair next to me), raise a glass of 1888 and orange juice and wish you all much success with that. And enjoy my mother fucking tax dollars cause I still pay them so mothers fuckers still living in the (Dis) United States of America can live off my ass. ROTFLMAO!

If asked I will not serve

SubCmdr

07-12-23, 11:51

I read this article and if it is true the the basic elements of the legislation is good. Financial literacy is bad in the (Dis) United States of America. Wage slaves do not understand markets. Large cooperations always take advantage of the ignorance of the customer in order to rob the little guy of wealth. If individuals feel safer investing in crypto, that is going to lead to greater adoption, increase in market price and I'm going to get paid. Making it even more fun to live overseas and live off the power the petro dollar still commands before it crashes. And when it does I will have my Crypto, Gold and Silver as back ups. And by far away from the social unrest the coming currency crash will bring.

https://www.wired.com/story/congress-wants-to-take-back-power-over-crypto/#text=On%20 Wednesday%2 see%20 US%20 senators%20 Cynthia, digital%20 assets%20 should%20 be%20 regulated. &text=The%20 US%20 crypto%20 business%20 is, could%20 become%20 an%20 existential%20 one.

EihTooms

07-12-23, 18:21

Yes, I spent over 55 years living in USA too. Almost all of those years in one of the most desirable regions of the most desirable and populace states as a matter of fact?

Desirable to whom? LMAO the homeless?

https://nypost.com/2019/11/12/homeless-man-hurls-bucket-of-diarrhea-at-woman-near-hollywood-walk-of-fame/

Its so great you couldn't wait to get the fuck out of there?

Or were you the last hetero white male chased out? LMAO.

So great you haven't been back and never will go back LMAO.

Noise pollution, water pollution, trash everywhere, massive rats and roaches? Not a problem where I sleep. Maybe you should choose a better hotel next time you treat yourself to a trip.Desirable to millions more Americans who live and work there than in perhaps a dozen or more Red States combined. Those who can afford the rent and housing prices, that is. The Law of Supply and Demand being what it is, there gots to be a Demand for them first, doncha' know. And that's not even counting the domestic and international tourists who flock there year 'round.

I have not returned there because I have had no pressing need to fly 30+ hours each way when I only have one close blood relative in USA still living, a terrific management company taking care of my rental property and, most of all, my work for the last 25 years I was in USA provided me with free travel and accommodations all over the country. And where they did not pay for my travel that was the least bit of interest to me, I visited on my own time and dime. In short; The USA? Been there, done that. I don't need to see Disneyland, the Grand Canyon, the Statue of Liberty, the Na Pali Coast of Kauai, etc etc etc again.

And if you want to see big rats crawling around, check out Paris and London, the 2nd and 3rd most visited cities on that list.

I have lived in 3 different neighborhoods in Bangkok over the past 11 years and I have yet to wake up to the sound of a rooster crowing. And I was here through 2-3 pretty quiet years during your Lord and Savior's brilliantly planned for, allowed to begin, carefully developed and determinedly spread Trump's Pandemic. Now, those 2-3 years of worldwide Trump closures and travel restrictions were times when for sure my quality of life was far superior to that of anyone I knew in the USA and most other places around the world! Damn good call on my part if I say so myself.

MarquisdeSade1

07-14-23, 07:31

Although I find your posts to be less than eloquent I will still take portion of my valuable time to educate you some more.

There is a function the the forum makes available called "Ignore". You enter my handle onto your list and then my posts will not appear on your feed when you log in. Alternately if you feel I have violated some aspect of ISG policy you can hit the report button and bring my offensive post to the attention of the administrator. If you find either one of those actions to be too technically challenging to you your final option is to STFU and stop reading my posts. Then they won't bother you. LOL!

"Third World" is an outdated and derogatory phrase that has been used historically to describe a class of economically developing nations. It is part of a four-part segmentation that was used to describe the worlds economies by economic status. Third World falls behind First World and Second World but was ahead of Fourth World, though Fourth-World countries were hardly recognized at all. Today, the preferred terminology is a developing nation, an underdeveloped country, or a low- and middle-income country (LMIC)."

When you only know places by watching YouTube videos because you have won the birth lottery and think you sit in the center of the world, you world view can be severely misinformed.

We should all live were we feel we are treated best. For me that is not in the (Dis) United States of America.

Where I live the food is fresher than in the (Dis) United Staes of America without all the growth hormone additives or GMO grown items. The supply chain is shorter and cleaner. While in the (Dis) United States of America I suffered from health issues that I manage easily now that I am outside of that location. And the improvements came from doing nothing more than relocating, eating locally produced food while staying away from all that imported processed junk.

I receive better medical care outside of the (Dis) United States of America than inside of it. During this time I have lived abroad, I have had two medical procedures that required anesthesia and one surgery. I have received advanced medical tests that I have never even received when in the (Dis) United States of America. Every time I have gone to the doctor they have taken time to discuss my medical issue in depth and taken what ever time is needed to provide medical care superior that I have received in the (Dis) United States of America. My dental care has been superior also. With my dental care team suggesting and performing procedures that were never addressed during my entire time of living in the (Dis) United Staes of America.

The idea that the (Dis) United States of America is the land of milk and honey has long been debunked. It is not the American dream anymore it is the American Nightmare. Living outside of the (Dis) United States of America has given me a improved standard of living and less stress.

Now let us talk about pollution:

About 1 in 4 people in the United States more than 119 million residents live with air pollution that can hurt their health and shorten their lives, according to a new report from the American Lung Association. People of color are disproportionately affected, as are residents of Western cities.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/19/health/state-of-the-air-2023/index.html

Water Pollution Remains Top Environmental Concern in USA.

https://news.gallup.com/poll/347735/water-pollution-remains-top-environmental-concern.aspx

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the states have identified almost 70,000 water bodies nationwide that do not meet water quality standards.

https://www.gao.gov/water-quality-and-protection

What GAO Does

GAO provides Congress, the heads of executive agencies, and the public with timely, fact-based, non-partisan information that can be used to improve government and save taxpayers billions of dollars. Our work is done at the request of congressional committees or subcommittees or is statutorily required by public laws or committee reports, per our Congressional Protocols.

What were you saying what about pollution again?

I would like to address the idea that is only people with "meager or modest retirement incomes" who move to countries in the low, lower-middle income classifications listed by the organization know as the World Bank (Headquartered here: 1818 H Street, and. W. , Mail Stop MC 13-1302, Washington, DC 20433 USA) by relating the following anecdotal story. And please stop me if I am using words that are too big for any of you. Feel free to pause and google the meaning of any of them you do not understand.

Yesterday I had breakfast with a retired intellectual property attorney, a retired electrical engineer and myself (I am not retired but I am not a wage slave either). I have my eye on retirement in 18 months. As we sat in the open under cover next to a pool on a Caribbean island I felt sorry for all the wage slaves in the (Dis) United States of America toiling away for their corporate masters. The sun was warm and the breeze was refreshing.

It was a lively and active discussion about technology, crypto, culture and many other topics. No alcohol was on the table at any point. At the end of the breakfast we discussed the activities we would be engaging in next. And we all need to goto the bank and we all just happened to be headed to the same one. One of the individuals in the group had driven his vehicle to the breakfast meeting and offered us a ride which we took him up on. Upon arrival they went inside the bank while I went to the ATM and withdrew the maximum amount that is allowed by the ATM, We all returned to the vehicle and I was offered a ride to my accommodations which I took them up on. They dropped me off and I continued my workday.

My experience of living overseas is a far cry from the misinformed ideas being propagated by certain individuals replying to my posts. And that is ok because opinions differ. But facts are real.

The United States is one of a small minority of countries that tries to suppress prostitution.

https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/prostitution

American Politics does not allow me to legally pay a girl for sexual services. The straight WACK ideas that American girls have developed (and girls in the Western World in general) are causing men from the (Dis) United States of America to get their passports and go where they are treated best.

I was ahead of the curve. In going where I was treated better. And all I was looking for was better weather, less stress and better value for each USD spent. Just by seeking it out, I got a better, less stressful life. I type this from my room with air-conditioning, hot water shower, fan, television, internet. I am within walking distance of two modern grocery stores, my two banks, office supply store, pharmacy and all my favorite restaurants.

I have used the most important vote I have. I voted with me feet and with my USD. And I got the fuck up out of there. Stay on the sinking ship if you would like people. I'll wave at ya from the beach on my lounge chair (sexy bikini clad chica in the lounge chair next to me), raise a glass of 1888 and orange juice and wish you all much success with that. And enjoy my mother fucking tax dollars cause I still pay them so mothers fuckers still living in the (Dis) United States of America can live off my ass. ROTFLMAO!

If asked I will not serveYou don't get to decide whether or not your childish drivel will be read and subsequently ridiculed as it should be lololol.

Living outside of the (Dis) United States of America has given me a improved standard of living and less stress.

Boy oh boy if your standard of living actually went up.

When you went to some shithole in the Caribbean.

ID hate to see where you were living in the land of honey jajajajaja.

And please stop me if I am using words that are too big for any of you. Feel free to pause and google the meaning of any of them you do not understand.

Ok PLEASE STOP.

You write like a young child that is getting help from mommy to write his first paper for 3rd grade jajajajajaaaaaa.

SubCmdr

07-16-23, 02:46

Like I said, your responses to my posts are less than eloquent. And in my opinion contain no useful information other than to share that you do not like certain aspects of my writing style nor the fact that I share the truth of my experience with the (Dis) United States of America.

You are certainly free to ridicule my excellent work. Please note that I lose exactly 0 hours, 0 minutes, 0 seconds of sleep worrying about what MarquisdeSade1 thinks about my posts. LOL! Thanks for taking to time to read every word. It shows your level of interest. And thank you for sharing your opinions. We all know what they say about those.

I would suggest your advance your knowledge of the world by actually seeing things for yourself instead of watching YouTube videos. As that is what I have done and therefore am writing about things actually experiences instead of the making up things in their mind about the way they are by watching YouTube videos.

You don't get to decide whether or not your childish drivel will be read and subsequently ridiculed as it should be lololol.

Living outside of the (Dis) United States of America has given me a improved standard of living and less stress.

Boy oh boy if your standard of living actually went up.

When you went to some shithole in the Caribbean.

ID hate to see where you were living in the land of honey jajajajaja.

And please stop me if I am using words that are too big for any of you. Feel free to pause and google the meaning of any of them you do not understand.

Ok PLEASE STOP.

You write like a young child that is getting help from mommy to write his first paper for 3rd grade jajajajajaaaaaa.

SubCmdr

07-16-23, 04:04

Boy oh boy if your standard of living actually went up. When you went to some shithole in the Caribbean. ID hate to see where you were livingReally, there is really no need for hate. Don't you get enough of that in the (Dis) United States of America. We come here because this is forum where we should share the same basic interests. It is ok it you disagree with my views or choice of living arrangements. Everyone should live where they are treated best. I am treated best here:

New York.- Thomas DiNapoli, the New York State Comptroller, has announced progress in discussions regarding allocating a portion of the $350 billion available in New York pension funds for investment in development projects in the Dominican Republic. Accompanied by New York Transportation Commissioner Ydanis Rodrguez, Congressman Adriano Espaillat, Henry Garrido (Executive Director of the New York City Workers Union), and a committee of entrepreneurs who own significant Dominican companies and businesses in New York and the Dominican Republic, DiNapoli held a meeting in the Dominican Republic to explore investment opportunities.

Prior to the business meeting in Santo Domingo, DiNapoli was warmly welcomed by President Luis Abinader at the National Palace. DiNapoli expressed his appreciation for the economic and political stability that the country offers to investors like him. The potential investment focus areas discussed for the pension funds include agriculture, health, logistics, and others.

Following the meeting with the Dominican community, DiNapoli emphasized the importance of considering the perspectives heard from different sectors during their visit. The State of New York has a pension fund of $350 billion, the second-largest in the United States after California.

According to Ydanis Rodrguez, the presence of the New York State Comptroller in the Dominican Republic is part of an effort to connect the country with opportunities for inclusive and sustainable development. Congressman Adriano Espaillat highlighted DiNapolis significant role as the largest investor in New York. He mentioned that a similar investment model was used in the early stages of Punta Cana through lawyer and congressman Charles Rangel.

Henry Garrido, Executive Director of the New York Workers Union, described the business meeting in the Dominican Republic as historic, transformative, and promising for the country. He stated that the vision to invest New York pension funds in critical areas such as agriculture, low-cost housing, and energy began to take shape during a previous visit with then-Mayor-elect Eric Adams.

Other participants in the meeting included Ral Hernndez Bez, Technical Director of the Dominican Association of Pension Fund Administrators (Adafp), Sandy Filpo, President of the Santiago Merchants Association, and various other businessmen

https://dominicantoday.com/dr/economy/2023/07/10/new-york-comptroller-announces-they-will-invest-pension-funds-in-the-dominican-republic/

Facts!

Tiny 12

07-18-23, 04:33

My standard of living took a big jump upwards when I resided in the Dominican Republic recently, for a grand total of five days. It was the best bang for the buck I've gotten since Indonesia in the late 1990's. Now admittedly that was mostly because I got an upgrade to the Presidential Suite at the Jaragua, because of luck and status with Marriott. The suite had its own small gym and media room, along with a big balcony and sitting room, all for about $220 a night with the upgrade. The breakfast buffet was twice as good and cost a quarter as much as what I'm accustomed to in the Caribbean. The island produces its own food and many other products that I thought would have been imported. The roads I traveled over were in good shape. I was more impressed with the country than any place I've visited in the Caribbean, including Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands. Sub Commander made a choice that works well for him, which is great. I haven't spent enough time in the Dominican Republic to know whether I'd be OK living there, but there are some places in shit hole third world countries that I do know reasonably well, where I'd much prefer living over many places in the USA and Europe.

We all have our own preferences and budgets. Nobody's right or wrong.

MarquisdeSade1

07-18-23, 05:18

Really, there is really no need for hate. Don't you get enough of that in the (Dis) United States of America. We come here because this is forum where we should share the same basic interests. It is ok it you disagree with my views or choice of living arrangements. Everyone should live where they are treated best. I am treated best here:

New York.- Thomas DiNapoli, the New York State Comptroller, has announced progress in discussions regarding allocating a portion of the $350 billion available in New York pension funds for investment in development projects in the Dominican Republic. Accompanied by New York Transportation Commissioner Ydanis Rodrguez, Congressman Adriano Espaillat, Henry Garrido (Executive Director of the New York City Workers Union), and a committee of entrepreneurs who own significant Dominican companies and businesses in New York and the Dominican Republic, DiNapoli held a meeting in the Dominican Republic to explore investment opportunities.

Prior to the business meeting in Santo Domingo, DiNapoli was warmly welcomed by President Luis Abinader at the National Palace. DiNapoli expressed his appreciation for the economic and political stability that the country offers to investors like him. The potential investment focus areas discussed for the pension funds include agriculture, health, logistics, and others.

Following the meeting with the Dominican community, DiNapoli emphasized the importance of considering the perspectives heard from different sectors during their visit. The State of New York has a pension fund of $350 billion, the second-largest in the United States after California.

According to Ydanis Rodrguez, the presence of the New York State Comptroller in the Dominican Republic is part of an effort to connect the country with opportunities for inclusive and sustainable development. Congressman Adriano Espaillat highlighted DiNapolis significant role as the largest investor in New York. He mentioned that a similar investment model was used in the early stages of Punta Cana through lawyer and congressman Charles Rangel.

Henry Garrido, Executive Director of the New York Workers Union, described the business meeting in the Dominican Republic as historic, transformative, and promising for the country. He stated that the vision to invest New York pension funds in critical areas such as agriculture, low-cost housing, and energy began to take shape during a previous visit with then-Mayor-elect Eric Adams.

Other participants in the meeting included Ral Hernndez Bez, Technical Director of the Dominican Association of Pension Fund Administrators (Adafp), Sandy Filpo, President of the Santiago Merchants Association, and various other businessmen

https://dominicantoday.com/dr/economy/2023/07/10/new-york-comptroller-announces-they-will-invest-pension-funds-in-the-dominican-republic/

Facts!I love you Tucker but you can't be stealing all my lines jajajaja.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/tucker-carlson-americans-right-to-decide-who-you-hate-1234789196/

TUCKER 2028.

MarquisdeSade1

07-18-23, 05:32

Desirable to millions more Americans who live and work there than in perhaps a dozen or more Red States combined. Those who can afford the rent and housing prices, that is. The Law of Supply and Demand being what it is, there gots to be a Demand for them first, doncha' know. And that's not even counting the domestic and international tourists who flock there year 'round.

I have not returned there because I have had no pressing need to fly 30+ hours each way when I only have one close blood relative in USA still living, a terrific management company taking care of my rental property and, most of all, my work for the last 25 years I was in USA provided me with free travel and accommodations all over the country. And where they did not pay for my travel that was the least bit of interest to me, I visited on my own time and dime. In short; The USA? Been there, done that. I don't need to see Disneyland, the Grand Canyon, the Statue of Liberty, the Na Pali Coast of Kauai, etc etc etc again.

And if you want to see big rats crawling around, check out Paris and London, the 2nd and 3rd most visited cities on that list.

I have lived in 3 different neighborhoods in Bangkok over the past 11 years and I have yet to wake up to the sound of a rooster crowing. And I was here through 2-3 pretty quiet years during your Lord and Savior's brilliantly planned for, allowed to begin, carefully developed and determinedly spread Trump's Pandemic. Now, those 2-3 years of worldwide Trump closures and travel restrictions were times when for sure my quality of life was far superior to that of anyone I knew in the USA and most other places around the world! Damn good call on my part if I say so myself.Millions of illegal aliens and homeless jajajaja.

https://www.wishtv.com/as-seen-on/indiana-included-on-list-of-americas-10-worst-states-to-live-and-work-in/

Jajaja.

No California in the top 10 worst I'm shocked.

But tens of millions (not illegals or homeless) rather live in Colorado New Jersey Maine Minnesota.

I guess most sane people rather live where the homeless arent randomly dumping buckets of diarrhea on people walking down the street.

SubCmdr

07-18-23, 06:15

What is even more interesting is that if I wanted to leave the (Dis) United States of America now because of the political climate I would choose to live in Colombia, El Salvador. , Mexico, Ghana or Kenya.

https://newrepublic.com/article/170259/american-emigration-far-right-violence

EihTooms

07-18-23, 18:38

Millions of illegal aliens and homeless jajajaja.

https://www.wishtv.com/as-seen-on/indiana-included-on-list-of-americas-10-worst-states-to-live-and-work-in/

Jajaja.

No California in the top 10 worst I'm shocked.

But tens of millions (not illegals or homeless) rather live in Colorado New Jersey Maine Minnesota.

I guess most sane people rather live where the homeless arent randomly dumping buckets of diarrhea on people walking down the street.You're right. California does not appear in your list of Top Ten Worst States To Live And Work In.

With Indiana coming in at #7, here is the list in your link for The Top Ten Worst States To Live And Work In:

Florida, Arkansas, and Tennessee were listed as better states at 10th, 9th, and 8th, respectively. The states listed as worse than Indiana were Missouri at 6th, Alabama & South Carolina tied for 4th, Louisiana at 3rd, Oklahoma at 2nd, and Texas in the number one spot.Notice a pattern there? I sure do. LOL.

I haven't heard Ron DeSantis crowing about his State making the Top Ten on your list yet. Maybe he is waiting for his horrific governance of that State to boost it to #1 before that first GOP Primary so-called potus Nomination debate so he can really impress the GOP base with the goal he hopes to achieve for the rest of America.

Xpartan

07-18-23, 21:36

Millions of illegal aliens and homeless jajajaja.

I guess most sane people rather live where the homeless arent randomly dumping buckets of diarrhea on people walking down the street.Have you forgotten the homeless shooting people with a bazooka? A big miss on your part.

I wonder who on earth would want to pay that CA rent (the highest in the nation, I heard). Who'd want to buy those homes? I mean, surely, the housing prices are going to nosedive with all these hobos dumping their stool on passerby?

Tough times ahead for NJ, I reckon. I don't know how they'll manage to absorb those millions of CA aliens.

Tiny 12

07-18-23, 21:55

Millions of illegal aliens and homeless jajajaja.

https://www.wishtv.com/as-seen-on/indiana-included-on-list-of-americas-10-worst-states-to-live-and-work-in/

Jajaja.

No California in the top 10 worst I'm shocked.

But tens of millions (not illegals or homeless) rather live in Colorado New Jersey Maine Minnesota.

I guess most sane people rather live where the homeless arent randomly dumping buckets of diarrhea on people walking down the street.Respectfully Marquis, your source is CNBC, which is MSNBC's sister company. The two outlets share pundits with each other, and with NBC. Tune into Morning Joe on MSNBC and there's a pretty good chance you'll see Andrew Ross Sorkin of CNBC spouting the Democratic Party gospel on finance and economics.

It's better to look at how people vote with their feet, here:

https://www.nar.realtor/blogs/economists-outlook/where-people-moved-in-2022

The top ten gainers in 2022 were Florida, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Georgia, Arizona, Idaho, Alabama and Oklahoma.

The top ten losers were California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia and Minnesota.

I guess the people are just too stupid to know what's good for them. That's why they leave blue states for red states, and why more approve of Republicans' handling of the economy than Democrats'.

EihTooms

07-19-23, 02:48

SubCmdr

07-19-23, 03:20

EihTooms

07-19-23, 03:30

File this one under "Hey, No Kidding".

Larry Summers Was Wrong About Inflation.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/06/larry-summers-was-wrong-about-inflation.html#text=It%20 is%20 now%20 clear%20 that, has%20 remained%20 near%20 historic%20 lows.

From his newly elevated platform in June 2022, Summers delivered another prophecy of woe. During remarks before the London School of Economics, Summers declared that we need five years of unemployment above 5 percent to contain inflation in other words, we need two years of 7.5 percent unemployment or five years of 6 percent unemployment or one year of 10 percent unemployment. In the Harvard professors estimation, U.S. policymakers had no choice but to deliberately throw millions of Americans out of work or else accept a steadily deepening inflationary crisis.

It is now clear Summers was wrong.BTW, below is arguably what Transitory Inflation looks like. And note that the current rate of inflation is only a fraction of one percentage point higher than it was at the beginning of 2020, right before Trump's horrific classic Repub stewardship plunged the world into his Trump's Pandemic. Whereupon he and his Repub cult followers could and did crow about how low their brilliant policies and stewardship results place the rate of inflation. LOL.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpi

EihTooms

07-19-23, 19:30

Spent more than a quick minute living in the (Dis) United Staes of America. Lived all over the country. Never made a single decision on where to live in the (Dis) United States based on politics. Now that is just me. But I am welcome to review any article presented as to why the population is moving from blue to red states.

I don't hate anyone. I am comfortable with myself and all others in the universe.Well, according to Marqui's and Tiny's links, one big reason is a basic Supply and Demand factor. Otherwise known as "affordability":

I already quoted from Marqui's link.

This is from Tiny's link:

But this is not a new trend. Millions of people moved during the pandemic, driven by the opportunity to work remotely, the desire for more space, and better affordability.It turns out housing prices are high and generally continue to grow higher in States that many people want to live and work in. Then it turns out people who can't cut it in those States have to move to States that rank high on the list of Worst States To Live And Work In.

Also from Tiny's link; they might have to move back to where their presumably better job but, naturally, higher housing cost is anyway when their better job employer demands they come back to the office to work and stop working online from their new Worst State's residence's neighborhood Dipsy-Doodle burger and ice cream joint.

PVMonger

07-20-23, 05:02

This just in.

SubCmdr

07-20-23, 12:07

People make decisions on where to live based on personal preferences that are driven by their economic situation. Has nothing to do with politics.

I have a box of crayons. It has both a red and a blue crayon in it. When I was in school, I was not limited to just using red and blue to color. I always preferred the brown crayon.

Well, according to Marqui's and Tiny's links, one big reason is a basic Supply and Demand factor. Otherwise known as "affordability"Inflation numbers are gamed by the policy makers. The real rate of inflation is the increase in prices that individuals who want to buy something experience. If you don't buy things in the "basket of goods" then you don't experience inflation measured by the "basket of goods" used.

Elvis 2008

07-20-23, 17:32

I guess all those expert Repub economists who handle the economy so much better than Dems got it all polar opposite wrong again. For the umpteenth time.

Jim Cramer says he doesn't see a recession on the horizon.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/18/jim-cramer-doesnt-see-a-recession-on-the-horizon.html?__source=androidappshare

But but but that Yield Curve thingy happened over two years ago!

And Bidenomics was supposed to plunge us into Repub-style economic disaster!

Aw. Even a wrong headed Larry Summers pronouncement can't deliver the results Repubs and pro Repub Bothsider / Neithersiders crave.Quoting Jim Cramer? He got roasted for his banking calls in the 2008 melt down.

I actually talked to a childhood friend who is a broker because this market is a mess. I have never seen such conflicting signals. Also, the expert traders on CNBC who have been on target for so long have been way off on the market.

There is really bad news in manufacturing, horrible news about the consumer balance sheet, and a bond market still predicting recession. The concept was that it was gong to take a recession to tame inflation. It is under better control. Yes, airlines and hotels are better, but they could not have been much worse after the pandemic. People are going in debt to go on trips.

But the market rally is really based around like a dozen stocks and they all have one thing in common: AI. Keep in mind the AI hype is just as big as the dotcom hype was in 2000. You have Wall Street throwing money into a dozen names fueling the rally. The problem is these names are not the immature names in 2000 but fully mature companies and sustaining the kind of growth needed to justify the valuations is very, very hard.

We have had these talks like we did in 2000 before. He was all big on AOL, and I was super unimpressed with it. Yahoo had everything AOL did and was free. I was right there. He was into Amazon and how it sold books. I thought that was crazy but in that sense he was right for the wrong reasons as Amazon pivoted into more than books, and the rest is history. Google, the big winner, was not even around then, and Facebook was in its infancy. Apple was teetering on the edge.

So here we go again. He thinks and is being told AI is the shit, and I am skeptical. He said AI will take away his sister's job in medical industry research. What took her all day could be done in 5 minutes with AI. For me, the biggest break through was with my gal's daughter's homework. She had gone from 2 hours per night to 30 minutes per night. Apparently, a tutoring stock has crashed as people have been using chatGPT to do their homework. South Park did a hilarious episode on using chatGPT to respond to one's girl friend's texts.

The strike in Hollywood was the writers first. AI cannot replace them but the Hollywood execs were going to use AI to replace some actors, and the actors had a fit. The studios want the actors to sign away their likeness and then use AI and stick their faces on whatever they want, and the actors are not going for it. The writers are not worried about AI taking their jobs yet.

Still, the AI used with so many companies with services suck. The entire AI process is cumbersome and I can usually get what I want with a 30 second discussion with a human. TV does not equate to being at the big football game. No movie can replicate the energy of a great live musical.

Zero Hedge is a notoriously negative news site, and this was their headline today, https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/tsmc-delays-arizona-chip-plants-mass-production-amid-labor-shortage.

Yes, Taiwan semiconductor, the largest chip maker in the world, is saying the AI boom in chips is not all it is being cracked up to be.

Do I expect the news to crater the market? Hell no. The NASDAQ is down 1% today but it will soon shirk off this news and go higher still. This is a full blown mania. And of course, this has jack shit to do with Biden. Hell, Biden's policies have been as pro-inflationary as any president in history.

I am sure you have noticed the dollar tanking lately, very pro-inflationary as well. I think this is in anticipation of interest rate cuts as inflation has come down. My response is so what. Shit is still too fucking expensive. Housing, health insurance, car insurance ETC costs more now in terms of hours of labor than it did in the 1980's. San Francisco just had two of its biggest hotel operators turn their keys back into the bankers. If San Francisco housing was marked to market, the whole economy would crash.

Yes, the yield curve still suggests recession, and the stock market does not. Up to now, Tooms, you have been right, but history shows the credit markets have historically been smarter than the stock markets. I concede you have won this round but the war is not over, and I repeat, Biden has had jack shit to do with this stock market runup.

EihTooms

07-20-23, 20:06

Quoting Jim Cramer? He got roasted for his banking calls in the 2008 melt down.

I actually talked to a childhood friend who is a broker because this market is a mess. I have never seen such conflicting signals. Also, the expert traders on CNBC who have been on target for so long have been way off on the market.

There is really bad news in manufacturing, horrible news about the consumer balance sheet, and a bond market still predicting recession. The concept was that it was gong to take a recession to tame inflation. It is under better control. Yes, airlines and hotels are better, but they could not have been much worse after the pandemic. People are going in debt to go on trips.

But the market rally is really based around like a dozen stocks and they all have one thing in common: AI. Keep in mind the AI hype is just as big as the dotcom hype was in 2000. You have Wall Street throwing money into a dozen names fueling the rally. The problem is these names are not the immature names in 2000 but fully mature companies and sustaining the kind of growth needed to justify the valuations is very, very hard.

We have had these talks like we did in 2000 before. He was all big on AOL, and I was super unimpressed with it. Yahoo had everything AOL did and was free. I was right there. He was into Amazon and how it sold books. I thought that was crazy but in that sense he was right for the wrong reasons as Amazon pivoted into more than books, and the rest is history. Google, the big winner, was not even around then, and Facebook was in its infancy. Apple was teetering on the edge.

So here we go again. He thinks and is being told AI is the shit, and I am skeptical. He said AI will take away his sister's job in medical industry research. What took her all day could be done in 5 minutes with AI. For me, the biggest break through was with my gal's daughter's homework. She had gone from 2 hours per night to 30 minutes per night. Apparently, a tutoring stock has crashed as people have been using chatGPT to do their homework. South Park did a hilarious episode on using chatGPT to respond to one's girl friend's texts.

The strike in Hollywood was the writers first. AI cannot replace them but the Hollywood execs were going to use AI to replace some actors, and the actors had a fit. The studios want the actors to sign away their likeness and then use AI and stick their faces on whatever they want, and the actors are not going for it. The writers are not worried about AI taking their jobs yet.

Still, the AI used with so many companies with services suck. The entire AI process is cumbersome and I can usually get what I want with a 30 second discussion with a human. TV does not equate to being at the big football game. No movie can replicate the energy of a great live musical.

Zero Hedge is a notoriously negative news site, and this was their headline today, https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/tsmc-delays-arizona-chip-plants-mass-production-amid-labor-shortage.

Yes, Taiwan semiconductor, the largest chip maker in the world, is saying the AI boom in chips is not all it is being cracked up to be.

Do I expect the news to crater the market? Hell no. The NASDAQ is down 1% today but it will soon shirk off this news and go higher still. This is a full blown mania. And of course, this has jack shit to do with Biden. Hell, Biden's policies have been as pro-inflationary as any president in history.

I am sure you have noticed the dollar tanking lately, very pro-inflationary as well. I think this is in anticipation of interest rate cuts as inflation has come down. My response is so what. Shit is still too fucking expensive. Housing, health insurance, car insurance ETC costs more now in terms of hours of labor than it did in the 1980's. San Francisco just had two of its biggest hotel operators turn their keys back into the bankers. If San Francisco housing was marked to market, the whole economy would crash.

Yes, the yield curve still suggests recession, and the stock market does not. Up to now, Tooms, you have been right, but history shows the credit markets have historically been smarter than the stock markets. I concede you have won this round but the war is not over, and I repeat, Biden has had jack shit to do with this stock market runup.I think we are in agreement that I would not use any stock market prognostication by Jim Cramer as the basis for a strong stock market bet, up, down or indifferent. I was only interested in his overview of what has happened and is happening, not what might happen, with regard to recessionary conditions. And, really, only his because his are easily available to link online, quote and be read without a subscription. LOL. Otherwise, his is just another voice expressing the same unavoidable observations about that.

Thank you for the concession. But the expectation that we would not as yet have seen the Great Recession or the Massive Jobs Destruction or even the Major Bear Market on this Dem POTUS' watch that we see so typically on a Repub's watch was an easy one to call.

Not sure I would say the gains of late in the broad USA stock market as measured by the S&P 500 Index is mostly about AI. Yes, Amazon, Microsoft and others are tech / chip-related industries. But they are gainers because the consumer is buying stuff again, not exactly because Paramount Studios can make Harrison Ford look 40 again. And buying stuff again has to begin somewhere and for some reason. Enter Bidenomics. Inflationary? Yes, as inflationary as any recovery from a 2-year worldwide economic coma and resulting supply-chain destruction would reasonably produce.

And on the USA Dollar tanking, well, no I have not seen it tanking in the sense that it has fallen significantly below the general 110 JPY to the Dollar that it has hovered around since the mid 1990's. Down from the earlier Bidenomics recovery level of 145 or so? Sure. But it has not been tanking as it did so steadily and deeply on GW Bush's watch and in the wake of his Great Repub Recession. Or even the slow but steady decline we saw under Trump:

Tiny 12

07-20-23, 23:18

Quoting Jim Cramer? He got roasted for his banking calls in the 2008 melt down.

I actually talked to a childhood friend who is a broker because this market is a mess. I have never seen such conflicting signals. Also, the expert traders on CNBC who have been on target for so long have been way off on the market.

There is really bad news in manufacturing, horrible news about the consumer balance sheet, and a bond market still predicting recession. The concept was that it was gong to take a recession to tame inflation. It is under better control. Yes, airlines and hotels are better, but they could not have been much worse after the pandemic. People are going in debt to go on trips.

But the market rally is really based around like a dozen stocks and they all have one thing in common: AI. Keep in mind the AI hype is just as big as the dotcom hype was in 2000. You have Wall Street throwing money into a dozen names fueling the rally. The problem is these names are not the immature names in 2000 but fully mature companies and sustaining the kind of growth needed to justify the valuations is very, very hard.

We have had these talks like we did in 2000 before. He was all big on AOL, and I was super unimpressed with it. Yahoo had everything AOL did and was free. I was right there. He was into Amazon and how it sold books. I thought that was crazy but in that sense he was right for the wrong reasons as Amazon pivoted into more than books, and the rest is history. Google, the big winner, was not even around then, and Facebook was in its infancy. Apple was teetering on the edge.

So here we go again. He thinks and is being told AI is the shit, and I am skeptical. He said AI will take away his sister's job in medical industry research. What took her all day could be done in 5 minutes with AI. For me, the biggest break through was with my gal's daughter's homework. She had gone from 2 hours per night to 30 minutes per night. Apparently, a tutoring stock has crashed as people have been using chatGPT to do their homework. South Park did a hilarious episode on using chatGPT to respond to one's girl friend's texts.

The strike in Hollywood was the writers first. AI cannot replace them but the Hollywood execs were going to use AI to replace some actors, and the actors had a fit. The studios want the actors to sign away their likeness and then use AI and stick their faces on whatever they want, and the actors are not going for it. The writers are not worried about AI taking their jobs yet.

Still, the AI used with so many companies with services suck. The entire AI process is cumbersome and I can usually get what I want with a 30 second discussion with a human. TV does not equate to being at the big football game. No movie can replicate the energy of a great live musical.

Zero Hedge is a notoriously negative news site, and this was their headline today, https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/tsmc-delays-arizona-chip-plants-mass-production-amid-labor-shortage.

Yes, Taiwan semiconductor, the largest chip maker in the world, is saying the AI boom in chips is not all it is being cracked up to be.

Do I expect the news to crater the market? Hell no. The NASDAQ is down 1% today but it will soon shirk off this news and go higher still. This is a full blown mania. And of course, this has jack shit to do with Biden. Hell, Biden's policies have been as pro-inflationary as any president in history.

I am sure you have noticed the dollar tanking lately, very pro-inflationary as well. I think this is in anticipation of interest rate cuts as inflation has come down. My response is so what. Shit is still too fucking expensive. Housing, health insurance, car insurance ETC costs more now in terms of hours of labor than it did in the 1980's. San Francisco just had two of its biggest hotel operators turn their keys back into the bankers. If San Francisco housing was marked to market, the whole economy would crash.

Yes, the yield curve still suggests recession, and the stock market does not. Up to now, Tooms, you have been right, but history shows the credit markets have historically been smarter than the stock markets. I concede you have won this round but the war is not over, and I repeat, Biden has had jack shit to do with this stock market runup.Good post Elvis. There's lots of truth in what you wrote.

Cramer's picks have, from time to time, been so bad that the same people who brought us a contra Kathie Woods ETF followed up with a contra Cramer Fund. You can bet against Cramer by buying SJIM, the "Inverse Cramer Tracker ETF. ".

Tiny 12

07-20-23, 23:36

I don't hate anyone. I am comfortable with myself and all others in the universe.Jesus loved sinners. So the least I can do is love Democrats. And I do. All of them. Except for Elizabeth Warren and Paulie. Admittedly though I have a love-hate thing going with AOC. I want her to be the mother of my children, but otherwise can't stand her.

Spent more than a quick minute living in the (Dis) United Staes of America. Lived all over the country. Never made a single decision on where to live in the (Dis) United States based on politics. Now that is just me. But I am welcome to review any article presented as to why the population is moving from blue to red states.

Well, according to Marqui's and Tiny's links, one big reason is a basic Supply and Demand factor. Otherwise known as "affordability":

I already quoted from Marqui's link.

This is from Tiny's link:

It turns out housing prices are high and generally continue to grow higher in States that many people want to live and work in. Then it turns out people who can't cut it in those States have to move to States that rank high on the list of Worst States To Live And Work In.

Also from Tiny's link; they might have to move back to where their presumably better job but, naturally, higher housing cost is anyway when their better job employer demands they come back to the office to work and stop working online from their new Worst State's residence's neighborhood Dipsy-Doodle burger and ice cream joint.True, no one moves based on whether a state is blue or red. They move for reasons like taxes, crime, schools, job opportunities, and as Tooms correctly says, because of cost of living considerations, including the cost of housing.

That's why you see people leaving highly-taxed, high-crime, high-cost blue states and / or blue cities, like Baltimore, Maryland and San Francisco, California. Now yes, many are moving to blue cities within red states, like Austin. And blue cities do have some good schools, although they often miserably fail poor children, in large part because of the Democratic Party's subservience to the teachers' unions. But on the whole, Republicans do better at state and local governance.

I live in a red city in a red state. Trump won by 57 percentage points in the 2020 election. (Aside: I didn't vote for him.) There's no state income tax. We have good schools and good city services. Crime is low. The GDP per capita is the highest in the USA. And lots of people are moving here. Now is that because they want to move to a red city in a red state? No, of course not. But Republican governance is part of the reason this is a desirable place to live and work. Given that the area is more dependent than most on carbon fuels, the Democratic Party platform would decimate the regional economy.

And yes Tooms, you're absolutely correct. When people were allowed to work from home, some must have fled higher-taxed blue states, and now are being called back to the office. In some cases though, the companies they work for have migrated to red states where they're more welcome. Better job opportunities in business-friendly red states may be the #1 reason for the migration out of blue states. And yes, too much regulation and taxation, zoning restrictions, and burdensome taxation have driven up the cost of housing in California. Of course the fact that they're not making any more land close to beaches is a big reason too.

Tiny 12

07-20-23, 23:45

File this one under "Hey, No Kidding".

Larry Summers Was Wrong About Inflation.

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2023/06/larry-summers-was-wrong-about-inflation.html#text=It%20 is%20 now%20 clear%20 that, has%20 remained%20 near%20 historic%20 lows.

BTW, below is arguably what Transitory Inflation looks like. And note that the current rate of inflation is only a fraction of one percentage point higher than it was at the beginning of 2020, right before Trump's horrific classic Repub stewardship plunged the world into his Trump's Pandemic. Whereupon he and his Repub cult followers could and did crow about how low their brilliant policies and stewardship results place the rate of inflation. LOL.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/inflation-cpiI can't read your link. But your post, about Democratic Party economist Larry Summers, may not age well. Core CPI was up 4. 8% YoY in June, and the core PCE, closely watched by the Fed, was up 4. 6% in May, the most recent month available. Two more interest rate hikes are anticipated. We're a long way from 2%. And some economists are still forecasting a recession for 2024. Barclays, Nomura, BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, and Fannie Mae all forecast negative GDP growth for 2024.

Democratic-Party-Economist Summers may have the last laugh, just as he did after the Biden Administration's American Rescue Plan.

Tiny 12

07-21-23, 00:18

This just in.That and Trump are the reasons the Republicans may become a permanent minority at the federal level.

Elvis 2008

07-21-23, 01:14

That and Trump are the reasons the Republicans may become a permanent minority at the federal level.Nah, I think they are all distractions and PVM keeps buying into it. I care a lot more about economic issues, and I think most people do as well. FDA has been co-opted by drug companies. DOJ may as well be a wing of the Democratic party. The big Wall Street donors want all eyes not fixed on how much they are making for how little they are doing, and they want everyone distracted while they continue to play the game of private gains and public losses.

I think most Americans are willing to let the executive branch do whatever it wants as long as they get their check, their "free" health insurance ETC. At this point, Trump is a last gasp for an out of control executive branch. Desantis stands a much better chance of beating whatever Dem comes along. The problem is the Republicans / working people are so mad at how corrupt the executive branch has become and want to vote for Trump for that reason, a big middle finger to the neocons, the P4P government, and the insanely partisan DOJ. The problem with Trump is that he will get more votes for him that any other Republican candidate but he also is probably going to get more people than that to vote against him.

Tiny 12

07-21-23, 05:15

Nah, I think they are all distractions and PVM keeps buying into it. I care a lot more about economic issues, and I think most people do as well. FDA has been co-opted by drug companies. DOJ may as well be a wing of the Democratic party. The big Wall Street donors want all eyes not fixed on how much they are making for how little they are doing, and they want everyone distracted while they continue to play the game of private gains and public losses.

I think most Americans are willing to let the executive branch do whatever it wants as long as they get their check, their "free" health insurance ETC. At this point, Trump is a last gasp for an out of control executive branch. Desantis stands a much better chance of beating whatever Dem comes along. The problem is the Republicans / working people are so mad at how corrupt the executive branch has become and want to vote for Trump for that reason, a big middle finger to the neocons, the P4P government, and the insanely partisan DOJ. The problem with Trump is that he will get more votes for him that any other Republican candidate but he also is probably going to get more people than that to vote against him.Another good post. I mostly agree.

Many Democrats and Democrat leaning independents are mad as hell at Trump, for trying to steal the 2020 election. They're going to be very motivated to go to the polls. Republicans won't be as motivated. Republican turnout will be further reduced because Trump convinced a lot of them not to vote by mail.

While I recognize that Trump's economic policies are better for the USA and for me than the Democrats', I won't vote for him. I'll vote for the Libertarian candidate instead, unless he or she is someone nutty like John McAfee (the runner up in 2016 Libertarian primary.) Many Republican leaning independents likewise won't vote for Trump.

If Trump makes it to the general election, he'll lose, unless the new outfit, No Labels, nominates a reasonable Democrat like Joe Manchin or Kyrsten Sinema, who would split the Democratic vote. Then Trump wins.

As to the drug companies, I put the blame on the politicians more than the FDA. The big problem is that drug prices are out of control because of an absence of competition and too much patent protection. Congress should do something about that. And yes, the FDA and doctors, who prescribe more expensive drugs pushed by the drug companies, are at fault too.

Tiny 12

07-21-23, 05:31

And on the USA Dollar tanking, well, no I have not seen it tanking in the sense that it has fallen significantly below the general 110 JPY to the Dollar that it has hovered around since the mid 1990's. Down from the earlier Bidenomics recovery level of 145 or so? Sure. But it has not been tanking as it did so steadily and deeply on GW Bush's watch and in the wake of his Great Repub Recession. Or even the slow but steady decline we saw under Trump:If you're going to measure the strength of the dollar just against the JPY, the dollar was weakest in 2011 and 2012 during the Obama administration. The broader US Dollar index reached a record high during the Reagan administration. But that's coincidence. Like GDP growth, recessions, and the number of deaths of young Americans in foreign wars, the party of the President has little to do with forex rates.

SubCmdr

07-21-23, 05:51

Don't get it twisted Mr. Tiny. I don't go for that red state, blue state bullshit. And I never did. It is just an attempt to refight the war over economics that the South lost. But now it is being done by means other than guns and bullets.

Although some members of the red party have a lot of hate in their hearts for certain people. You got guys quoting individuals saying: "It is your right as an American to hate anyone you want". Talk about appealing to base desires. Neither the donkey or the elephant has my interests in mind. Both parties are interested in keeping their cushy jobs. That's it!

I'm countin' down to the day deservin', fittin' for a king; I'm waitin' for the time when I can get to Arizona; Cause my money is spent for the goddamn rent; Neither party is mine, not the donkey or the elephant - Public Enemy, By the time I get to Arizona.

https://rockthebells.com/articles/public-enemy-by-the-time-i-get-to-arizona/

All of this political bullshit is designed to distract the people from living in the country with the greatest wealth inequality on earth.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/imperialinsights/2023/03/24/the-rich-are-getting-richer--but-is-the-wealth-gap-worse-in-europe-or-the-us/?sh=1c8be7f42154

And by the way, I have made some good money on Cramer picks. You do your own due diligence, pays your money and takes your chances. This is one of the reasons I love the stock market and crypto markets. No one is able to tell me I am only 3/5 of a person and therefore I only get 3/5 of my profits. I'm getting mine now. And I worked my fucking ass off for the money I earned and then did without and saved to develop to capital to enter the markets. I was not born into privilege! My people built the wealth that others are sitting on in the (Dis) United States of America, and they are continuing to build on it today.

There is only one color. And that is the color of money.

Jesus loved sinners. So the least I can do is love Democrats. And I do. All of them. Except for Elizabeth Warren and Paulie. Admittedly though I have a love-hate thing going with AOC. I want her to be the mother of my children, but otherwise can't stand her.

EihTooms

07-21-23, 06:02

Jesus loved sinners. So the least I can do is love Democrats. And I do. All of them. Except for Elizabeth Warren and Paulie. Admittedly though I have a love-hate thing going with AOC. I want her to be the mother of my children, but otherwise can't stand her.I have re-read your link for where people moved from and to. Several reasons are given for the moves. Repeatedly, cheaper and more affordable housing costs is cited.

But I did not read one word or mention about it being due to taxes or crime rates. Not one. Not even a passing mention of them.

Unless you want to infer into the one mention of a "better neighborhood" along with repeated mentions of more affordable living spaces as code for "lower taxes and fewer per capita murders" or something.

Yes, I know, someday a Dem POTUS will trip up or get side tracked from his or her Economic and National Security Stewardship duties by some unpredictable event and a Great Recession, perhaps even along with Massive Job Losses will occur. And when it does, Repubs and stealth Pro Repub Bothsiders / Neithersiders will rejoice in their 100 years long prediction finally and at long last coming true rather than the exact polar opposite coming true over and over and over again.

But, ya' know, I submit such an occurrence would then fit the very definition of a "once in a hundred years disaster. " Hell, it might come down to a "once in a hundred and fifty years disaster" by the time such a thing comes around.

Which is a damn sight less often than what typically Pro Repub Mainstream Media has had to pawn off as one "once in a hundred years disaster" after another and another and another on virtually every Repub so-called potus' watch since the Repub Party began in order to maintain their desperate mission to convince a distracted and less data-oriented American electorate that Repubs handle the economy better than Dems. LOL.

The poor dears are simply victims of wild coincidences and a witch's curse. If not for that, MSM seems to be intent on convincing us, Repubs really really really would have produced and presided over better than a minimal net gain in jobs creation since the late 1920's instead of either a mathematically certain net loss or very, very close to one. Really.

Xpartan

07-21-23, 07:49

As to the drug companies, I put the blame on the politicians more than the FDA. The big problem is that drug prices are out of control because of an absence of competition and too much patent protection. Congress should do something about that. And yes, the FDA and doctors, who prescribe more expensive drugs pushed by the drug companies, are at fault too.Didn't you miss another thing Congress could do something about? Something you, as a libertarian, might not like? Why drug prices are not out of control in Europe? Japan? Australia? And pretty much the rest of the world?

EihTooms

07-21-23, 13:03

If you're going to measure the strength of the dollar just against the JPY, the dollar was weakest in 2011 and 2012 during the Obama administration. The broader US Dollar index reached a record high during the Reagan administration. But that's coincidence. Like GDP growth, recessions, and the number of deaths of young Americans in foreign wars, the party of the President has little to do with forex rates.Oh, then since you vaguely appear to be correcting me on my reply to Elvis' comment about the Dollar "tanking", please list all the important currencies of the world against which the Dollar IS currently tanking.

The JPY measure matters to me because it also matters to the Thai baht.

I wasn't retired and living overseas during the Reagan years. I was too busy scrounging around for a decent job with decent pay during the Great Repub / Reagan Recession along with millions upon millions of other American while his 10%+ Unemployment Rate extended into a whopping ten consecutive months over his second and third year in office, ultimately resulting in his Jobs Creation record being dwarfed by that of the Dem POTUS immediately before his presidency by average gains per year as well as the Dem POTUS after his and his VP's presidency, 12 full years for those Repubs to try but fail to get it right, by every measure that matters.

But I am delighted to hear expats and tourists in France might have gotten a better deal on French Fries and French Toast during the Reagan years.

Tiny 12

07-21-23, 18:04

The JPY measure matters to me because it also matters to the Thai baht.Yes, I figured that.

I have re-read your link for where people moved from and to. Several reasons are given for the moves. Repeatedly, cheaper and more affordable housing costs is cited.

But I did not read one word or mention about it being due to taxes or crime rates. Not one. Not even a passing mention of them.I didn't read my link. I just looked at the table showing net migration in and out of various states. The National Association of Realtors isn't going to point out that higher taxes are one of the main reasons some people leave California. Or crime is the reason some black families leave Baltimore. They don't want to piss off Democrats.

I wasn't retired and living overseas during the Reagan years. I was too busy scrounging around for a decent job with decent pay during the Great Repub / Reagan Recession along with millions upon millions of other American while his 10%+ Unemployment Rate extended into a whopping ten consecutive months over his second and third year in office, ultimately resulting in his Jobs Creation record being dwarfed by that of the Dem POTUS immediately before his presidency by average gains per year as well as the Dem POTUS after his and his VP's presidency, 12 full years for those Repubs to try but fail to get it right, by every measure that matters.

The Fed's interest rate policy, which caused the 1981/1982 recession and high unemployment, was a response to high inflation which kicked off in the Carter administration. It's not reasonable to blame Reagan or Carter. OPEC, which increased oil prices several fold, was responsible.

Tiny 12

07-21-23, 18:09

Didn't you miss another thing Congress could do something about? Something you, as a libertarian, might not like? Why drug prices are not out of control in Europe? Japan? Australia? And pretty much the rest of the world?When the free market system isn't working, government should step in and fix it. And it isn't working for prescription drugs, and health care in general. As such I have no problem with price controls on or the government negotiating with the drug companies to assure we're not raped. Looking at the bigger picture, I favor a universal coverage system like Singapore, which allows for competition for most outpatient care while providing a backstop with insurance for major medical costs.

Republicans don't appear inclined to try to fix the problem. Neither does your party. It had its chance in 2009 to 2010 and 2021 to 2022, when Democrats controlled the House, Senate and Presidency. The best they could do was double down on a failed, high cost system with Obamacare, and control the price of insulin. Democrats never will fix the system, because they will not increase payroll contributions or otherwise fund healthcare with higher payments from the middle class. That would conflict with their fiction that just taxing the rich more will cure all the nation's ills. Well, the rich don't have enough money to pay for everyone's health care.

Infant and under 5 mortality in the USA is higher than Cuba. And life expectancy is comparable to or lower than Algeria, Sri Lanka, Albania and Costa Rica. Yet we spend much more as a % of GDP than any developed country in the world on health care and drugs. The system's not working.

Tiny 12

07-21-23, 18:17

Don't get it twisted Mr. Tiny. I don't go for that red state, blue state bullshit. And I never did. It is just an attempt to refight the war over economics that the South lost. But now it is being done by means other than guns and bullets.

Although some members of the red party have a lot of hate in their hearts for certain people. You got guys quoting individuals saying: "It is your right as an American to hate anyone you want". Talk about appealing to base desires. Neither the donkey or the elephant has my interests in mind. Both parties are interested in keeping their cushy jobs. That's it!

I'm countin' down to the day deservin', fittin' for a king; I'm waitin' for the time when I can get to Arizona; Cause my money is spent for the goddamn rent; Neither party is mine, not the donkey or the elephant - Public Enemy, By the time I get to Arizona.

https://rockthebells.com/articles/public-enemy-by-the-time-i-get-to-arizona/

All of this political bullshit is designed to distract the people from living in the country with the greatest wealth inequality on earth.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/imperialinsights/2023/03/24/the-rich-are-getting-richer--but-is-the-wealth-gap-worse-in-europe-or-the-us/?sh=1c8be7f42154

And by the way, I have made some good money on Cramer picks. You do your own due diligence, pays your money and takes your chances. This is one of the reasons I love the stock market and crypto markets. No one is able to tell me I am only 3/5 of a person and therefore I only get 3/5 of my profits. I'm getting mine now. And I worked my fucking ass off for the money I earned and then did without and saved to develop to capital to enter the markets. I was not born into privilege! My people built the wealth that others are sitting on in the (Dis) United States of America, and they are continuing to build on it today.

There is only one color. And that is the color of money.I still have to work "my fucking ass off," as you put it. I can't sit on a Caribbean beach all day and drink pina coladas.

Good luck with the crypto. Cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes. Most people will end up losers. The big winners will be those who created the cryptocurrencies. I'd say the crypto exchanges too, but their owners, like Sam Bankman Fried and Changpeng Zhao, appear to be destined for jail cells.

EihTooms

07-21-23, 20:01

Yes, I figured that.

I didn't read my link. I just looked at the table showing net migration in and out of various states. The National Association of Realtors isn't going to point out that higher taxes are one of the main reasons some people leave California. Or crime is the reason some black families leave Baltimore. They don't want to piss off Democrats.

The Fed's interest rate policy, which caused the 1981/1982 recession and high unemployment, was a response to high inflation which kicked off in the Carter administration. It's not reasonable to blame Reagan or Carter. OPEC, which increased oil prices several fold, was responsible.So you were just guessing about taxes and the crime rate being among the top reasons people move from one state to another.

Ok.

Oh, and the Fed Funds Rates began trending downward fairly steadily as the inflation rate began trending downward fairly steadily month over month beginning in early 1980, almost a full year before Reagan took office.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/federal-reserve/history-of-federal-funds-rate/

The fed funds rate began the decade at a target level of 14 percent in January 1980. By the time officials concluded a conference call on Dec. 5, 1980, they hiked the target range by 2 percentage points to 19-20 percent, its highest ever.

Rates began drifting downward sharply, falling first to a target range of 13-14 percent on Nov. 2, 1982, then down to 11.5-12 percent on July 20, 1982.If inflation and / or rising Fed Funds Rates caused unemployment to skyrocket, surely that would have happened under Carter and especially all through 1980.

But it didn't.

Instead, the Unemployment Rate also steadily trended downward after a single month spike up to 7. 8% in July 1980 and then it steadily trended downward for the remainder of 1980 and on through most of 1981, Reagan's first year in office.

Reagan's whopping ten consecutive months of a 10%+ Unemployment Rate didn't even begin until late 1982, Reagan's third year in office. And BTW it happened in the midst of one announcement after another of a reduction in the rate of inflation along with a reduction in the Fed Funds Rate, generally regarded as good news for the economy and jobs creation, no?

Obviously, this was another wild coincidence of a mystical magical economic cycle that only punishes Repub economies along with one of those dreadful witch's curses on Repub economic policies.

Xpartan

07-21-23, 20:17

When the free market system isn't working, government should step in and fix it. And it isn't working for prescription drugs, and health care in general. As such I have no problem with price controls on or the government negotiating with the drug companies to assure we're not raped. Looking at the bigger picture, I favor a universal coverage system like Singapore, which allows for competition for most outpatient care while providing a backstop with insurance for major medical costs.OK, that's good enough for me. I don't know about Singapore, but I'll be happy to read about it. Thank you.

Republicans don't appear inclined to try to fix the problem. Neither does your party. What party is that? For the umpteenth time, I'm not a Democrat. I'm a left-leaning centrist. If there was a Centrist Party in America, I would be there in a heartbeat, alone with likeminded Democrats and Republicans.

It had its chance in 2009 to 2010 and 2021 to 2022, when Democrats controlled the House, Senate and Presidency. The best they could do was double down on a failed, high cost system with Obamacare, and control the price of insulin. This is an absolutely unfair assumption, and you know that. In 2009 Obama was too busy fixing the economic catastrophe brought on by his predecessor. In 2021 Biden had no control of his own party.

Democrats never will fix the system, because they will not increase payroll contributions or otherwise fund healthcare with higher payments from the middle class. That would conflict with their fiction that just taxing the rich more will cure all the nation's ills. Well, the rich don't have enough money to pay for everyone's health care. This is just pure nonsense. It's Republicans who weaponized Healthcare, and not the other way around. Dead panels, socialism, totalitarian tyranny. . . Shish!

Democrats at least tried. What did their opponents do? The went to war.

Infant and under 5 mortality in the USA is higher than Cuba. And life expectancy is comparable to or lower than Algeria, Sri Lanka, Albania and Costa Rica. Yet we spend much more as a % of GDP than any developed country in the world on health care and drugs. The system's not working.Agreed. The question is whether Republicans will ever try to do anything about it. And the answer is nope. As long as their favorite donors are happy, they have no interest in changing the status quo.

CenTexCrash

07-21-23, 21:20

People talking about either US Dollar cratering or currency in popular monger destinations rallying (Mexican Peso, Philippine Peso, Brazilian Real, Euro).

https://www.fxstreet.com/news/usd-mxn-drops-to-new-ytd-lows-past-168000-amid-slowing-us-inflation-mxn-eyes-163000-202307141641

CheckMate1

07-21-23, 21:41

Good luck with the crypto. Cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes. Most people will end up losers. The big winners will be those who created the cryptocurrencies. I'd say the crypto exchanges too, but their owners, like Sam Bankman Fried and Changpeng Zhao, appear to be destined for jail cells.Not all cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes. Since it is a relative young technology, there will be a shit ton of bad actors within the industry. Similar to the dot com at the turn of the century. Most of this is driven by greed of "investors". At some point in the future, bad actors will be shaken out, and what's left will be useful technological advancements and innovations that will be beneficial to the masses. Until then, do be careful.

SubCmdr

07-21-23, 21:48

I still have to work "my fucking ass off," as you put it. I can't sit on a Caribbean beach all day and drink pina coladas.I take it that you are still a wage slave. Emancipate yourself and become a capitalist like myself. The image that you project of life on a Caribbean Island are fantasies in your own mind. I wrote this from Colombia where I am here doing business. Working on my own business not working for someone else. I have to pay my taxes so that individuals living in the (Dis) United States of America can live on them. While I receive zero benefit other than consulate services on the occasional basis.

Good luck with the crypto. Cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes. Most people will end up losers. The big winners will be those who created the cryptocurrencies. I'd say the crypto exchanges too, but their owners, like Sam Bankman Fried and Changpeng Zhao, appear to be destined for jail cells.I do not need luck!

The Ponzi schemes have been created by the Central Bankers around the world with the fiat currency system. It is going to come down around everyone heads. And unless they own hard currency of some type they are going be in bad shape when it happens. I actually am surprised to read something like that from someone I would consider fairly educated. If you understood the "Proof of work" system and that Bitcoin (BTC) was created and given away with no group of founders the profit from the creation of BTC then you would understand that there is BTC and everything else. LTC is strong a strong contender also.

My orange pill moment was when I need to send money to invest in Colombia and neither my bank nor Pay Pal would allow it. Those mother fuckers in the (Dis) United States of America were going to decide for me where I could invest my hard earned money. And I was not sitting on a beach making this investment decision. It was a Friday night about 7 PM and I was working the problem in my head. I explained what happened to me to my business partner and I was told to use BTC. WTF?

Use BTC for what? Was the question I had in my head. I was told they would accept it and change over to COP in order to make the transactions we needed to start up.

That was my Orange pill moment. All this time I was buying BTC like it was a stock, waiting for it go up. All of a sudden it became a medium of exchange for me. Another person was willing to accept BTC. I could send BTC directly to them. Without asking for permission from some corporate mother fucker in the (DIS) United States of America in order to use my own money. So I bought the BTC I needed for the investment at spot price. Sent it to my business partner. They had the BTC in less than 10 minutes (just 2 actually) and it cost me 97 cents USD. WTF? It was a that moment I realized I was done with the mother fuckers holding my money hostage in the fiat currency system. Deflating my money each year and turning it into nothing.

Anybody up in here got more than 250,000 USD in a bank in the (Dis) United States of America? Better hope the USDGOV makes you whole. You are only projected up to the level FDIC insurance in play. They are coming for your cash people. CBDCs. Grab the lube!

MarquisdeSade1

07-22-23, 04:21

You're right. California does not appear in your list of Top Ten Worst States To Live And Work In.

With Indiana coming in at #7, here is the list in your link for The Top Ten Worst States To Live And Work In:

Notice a pattern there? I sure do. LOL.

I haven't heard Ron DeSantis crowing about his State making the Top Ten on your list yet. Maybe he is waiting for his horrific governance of that State to boost it to #1 before that first GOP Primary so-called potus Nomination debate so he can really impress the GOP base with the goal he hopes to achieve for the rest of America.I was being sarcastic seeing how great you say it was lololol before all the white flight including you lolol.

What I was not too subtlety pointing out is, I don't even see that shithole in the top 10 let alone #1 LMAO.

MarquisdeSade1

07-22-23, 04:38

Jesus loved sinners. So the least I can do is love Democrats. And I do. All of them. Except for Elizabeth Warren and Paulie. Admittedly though I have a love-hate thing going with AOC. I want her to be the mother of my children, but otherwise can't stand her.

True, no one moves based on whether a state is blue or red. They move for reasons like taxes, crime, schools, job opportunities, and as Tooms correctly says, because of cost of living considerations, including the cost of housing.

That's why you see people leaving highly-taxed, high-crime, high-cost blue states and / or blue cities, like Baltimore, Maryland and San Francisco, California. Now yes, many are moving to blue cities within red states, like Austin. And blue cities do have some good schools, although they often miserably fail poor children, in large part because of the Democratic Party's subservience to the teachers' unions. But on the whole, Republicans do better at state and local governance.

I live in a red city in a red state. Trump won by 57 percentage points in the 2020 election. (Aside: I didn't vote for him.) There's no state income tax. We have good schools and good city services. Crime is low. The GDP per capita is the highest in the USA. And lots of people are moving here. Now is that because they want to move to a red city in a red state? No, of course not. But Republican governance is part of the reason this is a desirable place to live and work. Given that the area is more dependent than most on carbon fuels, the Democratic Party platform would decimate the regional economy.

And yes Tooms, you're absolutely correct. When people were allowed to work from home, some must have fled higher-taxed blue states, and now are being called back to the office. In some cases though, the companies they work for have migrated to red states where they're more welcome. Better job opportunities in business-friendly red states may be the #1 reason for the migration out of blue states. And yes, too much regulation and taxation, zoning restrictions, and burdensome taxation have driven up the cost of housing in California. Of course the fact that they're not making any more land close to beaches is a big reason too."Admittedly though I have a love-hate thing going with AOC. I want her to be the mother of my children, but otherwise can't stand her".

I love latina pussy more than most, but she's hideous, you almost made me vomit lololol.

Ok Ill admit she's not as bad as K Harris Hillary or Michelle O but cmon.

Keep comments like these to yourself LMAO.

Democrats attract the most vile "females".

True beauty skews RIGHT!

"Of course the fact that they're not making any more land close to beaches is a big reason too".

BTW ever drive north of LOS Angeles you can go all the way to Vancouver BC.

And there is a shitload of undeveloped ocean front property, sure the better beaches are south but I'm sure many wouldn't mind building there.

MarquisdeSade1

07-22-23, 06:16

CheckMate1

07-22-23, 18:53

That was my Orange pill moment. All this time I was buying BTC like it was a stock, waiting for it go up. All of a sudden it became a medium of exchange for me. Another person was willing to accept BTC. I could send BTC directly to them. Without asking for permission from some corporate mother fucker in the (DIS) United States of America in order to use my own money. So I bought the BTC I needed for the investment at spot price. Sent it to my business partner. They had the BTC in less than 10 minutes (just 2 actually) and it cost me 97 cents USD. WTF? It was a that moment I realized I was done with the mother fuckers holding my money hostage in the fiat currency system. Deflating my money each year and turning it into nothing.

Anybody up in here got more than 250,000 USD in a bank in the (Dis) United States of America? Better hope the USDGOV makes you whole. You are only projected up to the level FDIC insurance in play. They are coming for your cash people. CBDCs. Grab the lube!I agree with you on the privacy, simplicity, and costs of moving funds through POW. I do think crypto, BTC in particular, is the future of money. USD will continue to dominate the landscape in the foreseeable future.

However:

Since formation in 1933, almost 100 years (rounding up), FDIC has withstood countless numbers of banks gone under. It has saved countless accounts over the years, and the FUD around it being insolvent has being pushed for decades. Could it happen? Sure, it could. But, it would take a catastrophic event where some significant banks all going down at the same time, drawing down the insurance too fast, and thereby depleting the balance. I'd say the odds are pretty good that FDIC will continue to exist long after us.

CheckMate1

07-22-23, 19:04

BTW ever drive north of LOS Angeles you can go all the way to Vancouver BC.

And there is a shitload of undeveloped ocean front property, sure the better beaches are south but I'm sure many wouldn't mind building there.LA to BC is a very long drive. Only done SF to BC, so add another 5 hrs.

BTW, why northern coast of CA and southern coast of OR are underdeveloped:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOoFsehit6U

PVMonger

07-22-23, 23:53

Nah, I think they are all distractions and PVM keeps buying into it. I care a lot more about economic issues, and I think most people do as well. FDA has been co-opted by drug companies. DOJ may as well be a wing of the Democratic party. The big Wall Street donors want all eyes not fixed on how much they are making for how little they are doing, and they want everyone distracted while they continue to play the game of private gains and public losses.

I think most Americans are willing to let the executive branch do whatever it wants as long as they get their check, their "free" health insurance ETC. At this point, Trump is a last gasp for an out of control executive branch. Desantis stands a much better chance of beating whatever Dem comes along. The problem is the Republicans / working people are so mad at how corrupt the executive branch has become and want to vote for Trump for that reason, a big middle finger to the neocons, the P4P government, and the insanely partisan DOJ. The problem with Trump is that he will get more votes for him that any other Republican candidate but he also is probably going to get more people than that to vote against him.If "economic issues" are important to people, then why has the Repub Party. Who has control of the House. Not sent one bill to the floor that combats inflation or betters the economy? They vote against every measure that the Democrats have passed but are quite willing to tell the folks back home how much those bills are going to do for them. If what is on the "MAGA Wheel of Outrage" are "distractions", why are Repub politicians like Rhonda Santis pandering to their "base" with many of these "distractions"? Why are other Repub politicians, like Ted "I deserted my state and went to Cancun" Cruz fuming over Barbie? Or the other Repub politicians fuming over the President wearing tennis shoes. At least it wasn't. Horror of all horrors. A tan suit.

Maybe you're right, though. Repub politicians, who campaigned on inflation and the economy in 2022 bring up these "distractions" instead of actually governing. Cold it be that they actually can't govern? After all, in the world according to the one-term, twice-impeached, soon-to-be-thrice-indicted, former-guy, people who support Repubs are so uneducated (and Donnie loves THEM) that they are happy to be fed BS by their politicians as long as that BS contains stuff on the MAGA Wheel of Outrage.

MarquisdeSade1

07-23-23, 00:03

I agree with you on the privacy, simplicity, and costs of moving funds through POW. I do think crypto, BTC in particular, is the future of money. USD will continue to dominate the landscape in the foreseeable future.

However:

Since formation in 1933, almost 100 years (rounding up), FDIC has withstood countless numbers of banks gone under. It has saved countless accounts over the years, and the FUD around it being insolvent has being pushed for decades. Could it happen? Sure, it could. But, it would take a catastrophic event where some significant banks all going down at the same time, drawing down the insurance too fast, and thereby depleting the balance. I'd say the odds are pretty good that FDIC will continue to exist long after us.Yes we rented a car in Scottsdale AZ drove to San Diego all the way north hugging the shoreline to Vancouver BC includ a car ferry ride over to Victoria.

Some very nice / steep hiking down to the shore near the Oregon Cal border, lots of deer etc.

Its incredibly beautiful, easily on par with Hawaii.

EihTooms

07-23-23, 02:49

I was being sarcastic seeing how great you say it was lololol before all the white flight including you lolol.

What I was not too subtlety pointing out is, I don't even see that shithole in the top 10 let alone #1 LMAO.Um. Did you miss that the link you provided was for "The Top Ten Worst States To Live And Work In" and not the "The Top Ten Best" or anything like it?

So I don't quite get why you were and apparently still are gloating about California not making it on your link's Top Ten Worst list while almost every state on that list is a Trump Red State.

SubCmdr

07-23-23, 04:52

I agree with you on the privacy, simplicity, and costs of moving funds through POW. I do think crypto, BTC in particular, is the future of money. USD will continue to dominate the landscape in the foreseeable future.In a perfect world, my wallet could hold USD (or a another handful of the strongest fiat currencies from around the world in digital form), BTC and LTC. That would allow the greatest flexibility for me to use the money that I have earned in the manner that I best see fit.

Right now BTC is a store of value. Like gold and silver. But the speed to make settlements have caught up with the speed to make transactions with BTC and LTC. That is the biggest difference. Try to send gold or silver across the country or the world. It does not work out so well. Try to send USD across the country or the world. You got to ask permission from corporate mother fuckers in the (Dis) United States of America for permission to use your own money and then pay them exorbitant fees to do so. Try to sent BTC or LTC across the country or the world. You don't need to ask permission from anyone. It is a peer to peer transaction with settlement within 10 minutes on the main BTC blockchain and 4 minutes on the main LTC blockchain. Move to lighting to send BTC and it is instantaneous. And there is a LTC version in beta testing.

However:

Since formation in 1933, almost 100 years (rounding up), FDIC has withstood countless numbers of banks gone under. It has saved countless accounts over the years, and the FUD around it being insolvent has being pushed for decades. Could it happen? Sure, it could. But, it would take a catastrophic event where some significant banks all going down at the same time, drawing down the insurance too fast, and thereby depleting the balance. I'd say the odds are pretty good that FDIC will continue to exist long after us.I am good with your however. But you might have missed my point. FDIC has limits. And I pointed that out in the post you responded to.

COVERAGE LIMITS
The standard insurance amount is $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category.
The FDIC provides separate coverage for deposits held in different account ownership categories. Depositors may qualify for coverage over $250,000 if they have funds in different ownership categories and all FDIC requirements are met.
All deposits that an accountholder has in the same ownership category at the same bank are added together and insured up to the standard insurance amount.

https://www.fdic.gov/resources/deposit-insurance/brochures/deposits-at-a-glance/

Failure of Silicon Valley Bank would have been devastating to the confidence in the banking system if the Fed had not stepped in made all depositors whole even the ones that had deposits over 250,000 USD.

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/mar/12/silicon-valley-bank-collapse-no-bailout-janet-yellen

Is that going to happen every time in every bank failure?

Not FUD, facts!

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 17:06

"Admittedly though I have a love-hate thing going with AOC. I want her to be the mother of my children, but otherwise can't stand her".

I love latina pussy more than most, but she's hideous, you almost made me vomit lololol.

Ok Ill admit she's not as bad as K Harris Hillary or Michelle O but cmon.

Keep comments like these to yourself LMAO.

Democrats attract the most vile "females".

True beauty skews RIGHT!

"Of course the fact that they're not making any more land close to beaches is a big reason too".

BTW ever drive north of LOS Angeles you can go all the way to Vancouver BC.

And there is a shitload of undeveloped ocean front property, sure the better beaches are south but I'm sure many wouldn't mind building there.Come on man. Tell me you wouldn't tap that:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMCzuWB4bwQ

And she's got a brain. In between banging you could discuss the predictions of Milton Keynes!

Economics degree holder AOC confuses Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/economics-degree-holder-aoc-confuses-milton-friedman-and-john-maynard-keynes

The Examiner article doesn't mention it, but I bet AOC actually confused the English city, Milton Keynes, with two of the best known economists of all time! And she has a university degree in economics! But that's good. Ditzy, bat shit crazy women are better in bed.

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 17:25

Don't like you attitude Mr. Tiny. Two middle fingers up to ya!You appeared to accuse me of hating Democrats, wanting to ban MLK day, and being born into privilege and not working for what I've got. I responded in kind.

Sincerely, thanks for the comments on making payments by bitcoin, it was enlightening. I can see how it could be cheaper sometimes to use bitcoin instead of paying banks higher fees for forex and wire transfers. Certainly it would work better than banks for criminal enterprises and possibly tax evaders. It might be a viable savings alternative for people in places like Venezuela and Zimbabwe, where there's high inflation and they can't otherwise get their money out of the country.

As to other cryptos, besides bitcoin, I'd question what's in that orange pill that the crypto believers are taking. Is it legal outside of Oregon?

For savings and investment, which is what you use crypto for, I'd far prefer stocks and real estate and the like, investments that produce cash flow.

Not FUD, facts!

People accused Harry Markopolos of promoting FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). He was right about Bernie Madoff.

https://fortune.com/2023/01/09/crypto-bubble-ponzi-scheme-fraud-history-shocking-financial-historian-says/

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 17:38

If "economic issues" are important to people, then why has the Repub Party. Who has control of the House. Not sent one bill to the floor that combats inflation or betters the economy? They vote against every measure that the Democrats have passed but are quite willing to tell the folks back home how much those bills are going to do for them. If what is on the "MAGA Wheel of Outrage" are "distractions", why are Repub politicians like Rhonda Santis pandering to their "base" with many of these "distractions"? Why are other Repub politicians, like Ted "I deserted my state and went to Cancun" Cruz fuming over Barbie? Or the other Repub politicians fuming over the President wearing tennis shoes. At least it wasn't. Horror of all horrors. A tan suit.

Maybe you're right, though. Repub politicians, who campaigned on inflation and the economy in 2022 bring up these "distractions" instead of actually governing. Cold it be that they actually can't govern? After all, in the world according to the one-term, twice-impeached, soon-to-be-thrice-indicted, former-guy, people who support Repubs are so uneducated (and Donnie loves THEM) that they are happy to be fed BS by their politicians as long as that BS contains stuff on the MAGA Wheel of Outrage.Any bill the House passes must meet muster with the Senate and the President to become law. I believe the Republican House did a great job, bettering the economy and combatting inflation, with H.R. 3746, the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which was signed into law by President Biden.

Biden and a Democratic Congress passed legislation that would result in over $5 trillion in unfunded spending during 2021 and 2022. The legislation included the highly inflationary American Rescue Plan, which didn't receive a single Republican vote, as well as various bills that largely were pork for special interests and Democratic Party donors, like green energy companies, semiconductor manufacturers, and contractors. H.R. 3746 clawed back $1. 5 trillion of that $5 trillion. And if you look at the clawbacks, the majority of reasonable people wouldn't disagree them. Manchin and other moderate Democrats largely favored the clawbacks.

In recent times, the combination of a Democratic President and a Republican House has worked best for reducing deficits. You saw this during Clinton's 2nd term and Obama's 2nd term. And things are looking good right now for Biden and McCarthy, based on H.R. 3746.

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 18:04

OK, that's good enough for me. I don't know about Singapore, but I'll be happy to read about it. Thank you.

What party is that? For the umpteenth time, I'm not a Democrat. I'm a left-leaning centrist. If there was a Centrist Party in America, I would be there in a heartbeat, alone with likeminded Democrats and Republicans.

This is an absolutely unfair assumption, and you know that. In 2009 Obama was too busy fixing the economic catastrophe brought on by his predecessor. In 2021 Biden had no control of his own party.

This is just pure nonsense. It's Republicans who weaponized Healthcare, and not the other way around. Dead panels, socialism, totalitarian tyranny. . . Shish!

Democrats at least tried. What did their opponents do? The went to war

Agreed. The question is whether Republicans will ever try to do anything about it. And the answer is nope. As long as their favorite donors are happy, they have no interest in changing the status quo.You sure sound like a Democrat to me. I've never read anything you've written that's counter to the Democratic Party platform. You should wear the badge with pride.

I'm pro-choice, don't care which bathroom a trans person uses, in favor of decriminalization of drug possession, criminal justice reform, lower military spending, universal healthcare, better education and financial support for poor children, and lower levels of military aid. I usually vote for Democrats for judges for criminal courts. And I don't mind if you call me a Republican. I will wear that badge with pride. The greatest president of our lifetimes, Ronald Reagan, was a Republican. Except for Tooms, that would be George Washington. Just kidding Tooms.

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 18:11

Not all cryptocurrencies are Ponzi schemes. Since it is a relative young technology, there will be a shit ton of bad actors within the industry. Similar to the dot com at the turn of the century. Most of this is driven by greed of "investors". At some point in the future, bad actors will be shaken out, and what's left will be useful technological advancements and innovations that will be beneficial to the masses. Until then, do be careful.Look at what's going on with FTX and Binance. Also outfits that offer interest income on crypto deposits. I think they've gone bankrupt or are in regulatory trouble. And hackers have stolen lots of cryptocurrency from others. I don't understand why crypto has underlying value and it doesn't produce an income stream. So I won't invest in it. But I said the same thing in 2012, and obviously I wish I'd loaded up on Bitcoin then.

I know two people who made a butt load in crypto. When they were in their 20's, they went to work for firms that created cryptocurrencies and got paid mostly in coin. That would be the way to do it. Whoever created Amway made a whole lot more money than the people at the bottom of that pyramidal marketing scheme.

PVMonger

07-23-23, 18:19

Any bill the House passes must meet muster with the Senate and the President to become law. I believe the Republican House did a great job, bettering the economy and combatting inflation, with H.R. 3746, the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which was signed into law by President Biden.

Biden and a Democratic Congress passed legislation that would result in over $5 trillion in unfunded spending during 2021 and 2022. The legislation included the highly inflationary American Rescue Plan, which didn't receive a single Republican vote, as well as various bills that largely were pork for special interests and Democratic Party donors, like green energy companies, semiconductor manufacturers, and contractors. H.R. 3746 clawed back $1. 5 trillion of that $5 trillion. And if you look at the clawbacks, the majority of reasonable people wouldn't disagree them. Manchin and other moderate Democrats largely favored the clawbacks.

In recent times, the combination of a Democratic President and a Republican House has worked best for reducing deficits. You saw this during Clinton's 2nd term and Obama's 2nd term. And things are looking good right now for Biden and McCarthy, based on H.R. 3746.HR 3746 is the debt ceiling. You can do better than that, right? Name the bills that Repubs in the House have put forward that actually benefit the economy. Raising the debt ceiling doesn't do that, except, of course, that if you take the position that not raising the debt ceiling would have caused the economy to fall off a cliff. Clawbacks? So what?

Again, name the bills that Repubs in the House have put forward that actually benefit the economy. After all, if Repubs can govern. They ought to at least try to do it as opposed to railing on-and-on about Hunter's laptop or the President wearing tennis shoes.

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 18:25

So you were just guessing about taxes and the crime rate being among the top reasons people move from one state to another.

Ok.

Oh, and the Fed Funds Rates began trending downward fairly steadily as the inflation rate began trending downward fairly steadily month over month beginning in early 1980, almost a full year before Reagan took office.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/interest-rate

https://www.bankrate.com/banking/federal-reserve/history-of-federal-funds-rate/

If inflation and / or rising Fed Funds Rates caused unemployment to skyrocket, surely that would have happened under Carter and especially all through 1980.

But it didn't.

Instead, the Unemployment Rate also steadily trended downward after a single month spike up to 7. 8% in July 1980 and then it steadily trended downward for the remainder of 1980 and on through most of 1981, Reagan's first year in office.

Reagan's whopping ten consecutive months of a 10%+ Unemployment Rate didn't even begin until late 1982, Reagan's third year in office. And BTW it happened in the midst of one announcement after another of a reduction in the rate of inflation along with a reduction in the Fed Funds Rate, generally regarded as good news for the economy and jobs creation, no?

Obviously, this was another wild coincidence of a mystical magical economic cycle that only punishes Repub economies along with one of those dreadful witch's curses on Repub economic policies.If you compare the fed funds rate to the CPI, you'll see they were at about the same level during 1978 and 1979. In May, 1980, the Fed cut rates sharply, so that inflation was much higher than interest rates, before starting to raise rates again. In November, 1980, two months before Carter left office, real interest rates (fed funds rate minus CPI inflation) went from negative to positive. Interest rates remained very high relative to inflation throughout the Reagan administration. That was what it took to bring down inflation, and it put a damper on employment and the economy in general. I'd suspect that this period was part of the reason that Summers said what he did about unemployment and inflation. CPI inflation didn't sustainably fall below 5% until 1991.

Reagan doesn't own this, Fed Chairman Volcker does. And Volcker's a hero. He and the Fed slayed the inflation dragon. We didn't go the way of Argentina.

As to people moving from high tax states to low tax states and out of high crime cities, please start watching more main stream media and less MSNBC. Or use Google.

https://www.google.com/search?q=migration+from+high+tax+to+low+tax+cities&rlz=1C1YTUH_enUS995US995&oq=migration+from+high+tax+to+low+tax+cities&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i160.903541287j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.google.com/search?q=migration+out+of+high+crime+cities&rlz=1C1YTUH_enUS995US995&ei=XGq9ZNDyK7KrqtsPgP6_8AE&ved=0ahUKEwjQkNWBtKWAAxWylWoFHQD_Dx4Q4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=migration+out+of+high+crime+cities&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiIm1pZ3JhdGlvbiBvdXQgb2YgaGlnaCBjcmltZSBjaXRpZXMyBRAhGKABMgUQIRirAjIFECEYqwIyBRAhGKsCMgUQIRiSAzIFECEYkgMyBRAhGJIDMgUQIRiSAzIFECEYkgMyBRAhGJIDSPBBUP0GWNRAcAR4AZABAZgBjgGgAbsnqgEFNDkuMTC4AQPIAQD4AQHCAgoQABhHGNYEGLADwgILEC4YgAQYsQMYgwHCAgQQABgDwgIFEAAYgATCAhoQLhiABBixAxiDARiXBRjcBBjeBBjgBNgBAcICCBAAGIoFGJECwgILEC4YgwEYsQMYgATCAgsQABiABBixAxiDAcICCBAAGIAEGLEDwgILEAAYigUYsQMYgwHCAgsQLhiABBjHARjRA8ICBhAAGBYYHsICCBAAGBYYHhgPwgIIEAAYigUYhgPCAggQIRgWGB4YHcICChAhGBYYHhgPGB3CAgcQIRigARgKwgIHECEYqwIYCuIDBBgAIEGIBgGQBgi6BgYIARABGBQ&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

Tiny 12

07-23-23, 22:34

HR 3746 is the debt ceiling. You can do better than that, right? Name the bills that Repubs in the House have put forward that actually benefit the economy. Raising the debt ceiling doesn't do that, except, of course, that if you take the position that not raising the debt ceiling would have caused the economy to fall off a cliff. Clawbacks? So what?

Again, name the bills that Repubs in the House have put forward that actually benefit the economy. After all, if Repubs can govern. They ought to at least try to do it as opposed to railing on-and-on about Hunter's laptop or the President wearing tennis shoes.

Why dont you list the bills Democrats have put forward in the current Congressional session that actually benefit the economy.

So how do you define "benefitting the economy"? A short term sugar fix like the American Rescue Plan that comes back to bite us in the long term? Or something longer term, like the Inflation Reduction Act that passed out tons of pork? And apparently you want me to come up with a list of bills that Republicans passed for show that would have no chance of passing the Senate?

This sounds like Tooms little research project to come up with beloved, earth shaking bills passed by Republicans, like the ones that Democrats passed. Most of Tooms' bills passed by a Democratic president, House and Senate were two edged swords. Some were negative. The only that was undeniably positive was the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Republicans haven't simultaneously controlled the House, the Senate and the Presidency much for almost a century, so they haven't had much of a chance to pass bills like the ones on Tooms list. Which is probably a good thing, as Republicans have shown they can be almost as wasteful as Democrats when they control all the levers of power.

And yeah, I agree with you that the obsession with Hunter Biden is mostly a dead end. The fact that Joe took Hunter on a business trip to China on the Vice Presidential jet and the IRS's very preferential treatment of Hunter deserve attention. But they're wasting too much time on the alleged Biden Family Crime Syndicate.

The most important function of the Republican House at this point in time is to prevent Democrats from wasting more money on an inefficient federal government and running our national debt up to even more stratospheric levels, like they did in 2021 and 2022.

EihTooms

07-24-23, 04:06

If you compare the fed funds rate to the CPI, you'll see they were at about the same level during 1978 and 1979. In May, 1980, the Fed cut rates sharply, so that inflation was much higher than interest rates, before starting to raise rates again. In November, 1980, two months before Carter left office, real interest rates (fed funds rate minus CPI inflation) went from negative to positive. Interest rates remained very high relative to inflation throughout the Reagan administration. That was what it took to bring down inflation, and it put a damper on employment and the economy in general. I'd suspect that this period was part of the reason that Summers said what he did about unemployment and inflation. CPI inflation didn't sustainably fall below 5% until 1991.

Reagan doesn't own this, Fed Chairman Volcker does. And Volcker's a hero. He and the Fed slayed the inflation dragon. We didn't go the way of Argentina.

As to people moving from high tax states to low tax states and out of high crime cities, please start watching more main stream media and less MSNBC. Or use Google.

https://www.google.com/search?q=migration+from+high+tax+to+low+tax+cities&rlz=1C1YTUH_enUS995US995&oq=migration+from+high+tax+to+low+tax+cities&aqs=chrome..69i57j33i160.903541287j0j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

https://www.google.com/search?q=migration+out+of+high+crime+cities&rlz=1C1YTUH_enUS995US995&ei=XGq9ZNDyK7KrqtsPgP6_8AE&ved=0ahUKEwjQkNWBtKWAAxWylWoFHQD_Dx4Q4dUDCBA&uact=5&oq=migration+out+of+high+crime+cities&gs_lp=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&sclient=gws-wiz-serpYour links only take me to sites asserting THAT people moved from higher tax states to lower tax states, not that it was a major or even decisive reason for it. Duh. MSNBC has not made a secret of that. Of course, the Worst States To Live And Work In, mostly Trumpster Red States, CAN'T charge anyone to come live and work there, silly. They ought to be handing out thousand dollar bills to every Allied Van Lines truck and trailer migrator dumb and ill informed enough to show up.

And, yes, MSNBC has also not made a secret of the fact that people move away from higher crime cities to lower crime areas. Often just spitting distance away from the big Blue cities they want to stay near anyway. One of your other links that you probably didn't bother to read explained that too.

EihTooms

07-24-23, 04:22

I guess those partisan lefties over at Morgan Stanley either forgot or refused to mention the real or at least primary reason for this historic recovery from Trump's Pandemic, its resulting 2-years long worldwide economic paralysis and near total supply-chain destruction with the current historic economic success and record high jobs creation was actually that repatriating of corporate profits thingy that Trump and his Repubs legislated in order for corporate CEOs to buy back their own loser stocks and give themselves huge bonuses back in 2018 and 2019.

That is so unfair to brilliant businessman and greatest jobs potus of all time Trump and his equally brilliant Repubs in the House and Senate. And, please, don't anybody tell Larry Summers about this.

Morgan Stanley credits Bidenomics for much stronger than expected GDP growth.
July 21, 2023

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/07/21/bidenomics-spurred-stronger-gdp-growth-morgan-stanley.html#text=Washington%20%E2%80%94%20 Morgan%20 Stanley%20 is%20 crediting, for%20 USA %20 gross%20 domestic%20 product.

President Joe Bidens economic policies drove an unexpected economic surge that has forced Morgan Stanley to make a sizable upward revision in its GDP forecasts.
Bidens 2021 infrastructure bill has created a boom in large-scale infrastructure, wrote MS analysts, while domestic business investment is rebounding, led by manufacturing.

WASHINGTON Morgan Stanley
is crediting President Joe Bidens economic policies with driving an unexpected surge in the U.S. economy that is so significant that the bank was forced to make a sizable upward revision to its estimates for U.S. gross domestic product.

Bidens Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is driving a boom in large-scale infrastructure, wrote Ellen Zentner, chief U.S. economist for Morgan Stanley, in a research note released Thursday. In addition to infrastructure, manufacturing construction has shown broad strength, she wrote.

As a result of these unexpected swells, Morgan Stanley now projects 1.9% GDP growth for the first half of this year. Thats nearly four times higher than the banks previous forecast of 0.5%.

The economy in the first half of the year is growing much stronger than we had anticipated, putting a more comfortable cushion under our long-held soft landing view, Zentner wrote.

The analysts also doubled their original estimate for GDP growth in the fourth quarter, to 1.3% from 0.6%. Looking into next year, they raised their forecast for real GDP in 2024 by a tenth of a percent, to 1.4%.

The narrative behind the numbers tells the story of industrial strength in the U.S, Zentner wrote.

Morgan Stanleys revision came at a pivotal time for the Biden White House. The president has spent the summer crisscrossing the country, touting his economic achievements. Together we are transforming the country, not just through jobs, not just through manufacturing, but also by rebuilding our infrastructure, Biden said Thursday during a visit to a Philadelphia shipyard.

The White House has dubbed this brick-and-mortar economic growth formula Bidenomics, a phrase originally used by Republicans to jab the president, who co-opted the term as a badge of honor.

In addition to his legacy, Biden has also staked his 2024 reelection bid on Bidenomics, betting that strong economic growth and a campaign built around kitchen table issues will ultimately drown out Republicans culture war outrage.

This could be a risky wager, however. The latest CNBC All-America Economic Survey, released Thursday, found that just 37% of respondents approved of Bidens handling of the economy, while 58% disapproved. Only 20% of Americans agreed that the economy was excellent or good, while a whopping 79% said it was just fair or poor, CNBCs poll found.

Republicans have seized on voters economic pessimism to argue that Biden is ignoring everyday Americans ongoing challenges with high interest rates and inflation that has fallen some, but still sits above pre-pandemic levels.

Bidenomics is about blind faith in government spending and regulation, GOP House Speaker Kevin McCarthy said in a statement Friday. Its an economic disaster where government causes decades-high inflation, high gas prices, lower paychecks and crippling uncertainty that leaves America worse off.

With 16 months to go before Americans cast their ballots for president, Bidens political fortunes, for the moment, appear to be improving along with the economy.

This report confirms what weve long said: Our strong and resilient economy is Bidenomics in action, White House assistant press secretary Mike Kikukawa said in an email to CNBC.

The presidents economic agenda is spurring investments in manufacturing and infrastructure that are creating jobs and supporting workers.

PVMonger

07-24-23, 04:34

Why dont you list the bills Democrats have put forward in the current Congressional session that actually benefit the economy.

So how do you define "benefitting the economy"? A short term sugar fix like the American Rescue Plan that comes back to bite us in the long term? Or something longer term, like the Inflation Reduction Act that passed out tons of pork? And apparently you want me to come up with a list of bills that Republicans passed for show that would have no chance of passing the Senate?

This sounds like Tooms little research project to come up with beloved, earth shaking bills passed by Republicans, like the ones that Democrats passed. Most of Tooms' bills passed by a Democratic president, House and Senate were two edged swords. Some were negative. The only that was undeniably positive was the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Republicans haven't simultaneously controlled the House, the Senate and the Presidency much for almost a century, so they haven't had much of a chance to pass bills like the ones on Tooms list. Which is probably a good thing, as Republicans have shown they can be almost as wasteful as Democrats when they control all the levers of power.

And yeah, I agree with you that the obsession with Hunter Biden is mostly a dead end. The fact that Joe took Hunter on a business trip to China on the Vice Presidential jet and the IRS's very preferential treatment of Hunter deserve attention. But they're wasting too much time on the alleged Biden Family Crime Syndicate.

The most important function of the Republican House at this point in time is to prevent Democrats from wasting more money on an inefficient federal government and running our national debt up to even more stratospheric levels, like they did in 2021 and 2022.First of all, the Repubs were the ones who campaigned on "the economy" in the 2022 midterm elections. So far they have submitted exactly [be]zero[ / and] bills that further the US economy. They have, however, spend millions of dollars on things that don't benefit the economy. One would almost think that Repubs don't have a clue on how to govern, unless of course, governing useless committees that don't present evidence, but rather try to say the [I]post hoc ergo propter hoc[ / I] is good enough for evidence.

So yes, let's claw back money from the IRS to replace retiring agents and catch tax cheats who, by and large, are Repubs.

So, the function of the US HoR is to say NO when it comes to spending. I wonder where all of that NO was when the one-term, twice-impeached, soo-to-be-thrice-indicted, former-guy was king (I mean president*.

SubCmdr

07-24-23, 06:57

You appeared to accuse me of hating Democrats, wanting to ban MLK day, and being born into privilege and not working for what I've got. I responded in kind.I accused you of nothing. You read all of that into my post. I dealt strictly with the issues. And you are still living of my tax dollars while I receive very few benefits from them. I should not have to pay them.

Sincerely, thanks for the comments on making payments by bitcoin, it was enlightening. I can see how it could be cheaper sometimes to use bitcoin instead of paying banks higher fees for forex and wire transfers. Certainly it would work better than banks for criminal enterprises and possibly tax evaders. It might be a viable savings alternative for people in places like Venezuela and Zimbabwe, where there's high inflation and they can't otherwise get their money out of the country. Are you familiar with KYC and AML statutes. I suggest you educate yourself on them because you are once again speaking from a lack of knowledge.

https://cointelegraph.com/news/secret-service-praise-blockchain-reddit-ama/amp

Let me cut right to the chase: The Secret Service says cash (fiat) is easier to use when the desire is to hide your financial dealings. OH SHIT!. On the basketball court, I just went hard in the paint and put the rock in the hole right in your mother fucking face!

As to other cryptos, besides bitcoin, I'd question what's in that orange pill that the crypto believers are taking. Is it legal outside of Oregon?The orange pill refers strictly to BTC. The moment that you realize the potential of BTC.

For savings and investment, which is what you use crypto for, I'd far prefer stocks and real estate and the like, investments that produce cash flow.Life must be good for you Mr. Tiny. You have time to talk shit. But what do you do with all that cash flow that you are getting from your investments?

You see I have cash flow from businesses. And I use the tax law available to shield them as much as possible from taxes legally. Then I put them in to appreciating BTC. After it hits a certain level I will be able to go get a loan against the BTC pay interest only until I die. My heirs will use my life insurance to pay off my debts and still get all of my assets. Taking a loan is not a taxable event.

People accused Harry Markopolos of promoting FUD (fear, uncertainty, doubt). He was right about Bernie Madoff.

https://fortune.com/2023/01/09/crypto-bubble-ponzi-scheme-fraud-history-shocking-financial-historian-says/Stipulated.

Let's see who is right on this issue over the next 10 years. BTC has doubled over the last 8 months. My stock portfolio has not done that. My real estate portfolio has not done that. And my business investments have not done that (although cash flow continues to grow). I plan to die broke anyway. So if my crypto blows up in my face it will just take me closer to my goal much faster.

Don't get it twisted Mr. Tiny. I don't give a fuck about your political views. I only pay attention to the politics in the (Dis) United States of America in regards to debt defaults, understanding how they are undermining the value or the USD and policy and laws regarding crypto. And support of Crypto in Congress comes from both the red and the blue.

CheckMate1

07-24-23, 21:45

Look at what's going on with FTX and Binance. Also outfits that offer interest income on crypto deposits. I think they've gone bankrupt or are in regulatory trouble. And hackers have stolen lots of cryptocurrency from others. I don't understand why crypto has underlying value and it doesn't produce an income stream. So I won't invest in it. But I said the same thing in 2012, and obviously I wish I'd loaded up on Bitcoin then.

I know two people who made a butt load in crypto. When they were in their 20's, they went to work for firms that created cryptocurrencies and got paid mostly in coin. That would be the way to do it. Whoever created Amway made a whole lot more money than the people at the bottom of that pyramidal marketing scheme.1. It is cheaper and more secure to move BTC from your wallet to another wallet (friends, vendors, etc). Cost of transaction is a fraction of the existing systems.

2. It is more private considering, unless you know who the wallet belongs to, wallets don't have names. I do believe that ALL public entity should publish their wallet, ie Goverments, publicly traded companies, etc. We will see on this hope.

3. It is traceable from one wallet to the next, and the next, like a chain: **A BLOCKCHAIN** This will be the answer to eliminating counterfeiting and money laundering. All dollar bills have serial numbers that can be tracked, theoretically. But not practically because there is not a system to verify where it has been.

4. Blockchain applications go farther than just coins. Coin is easy to understand, but the technology behind it is the real value.

As mentioned before, there are bad actors in the industry currently and probably in the future as well. However, none of it, at least on BTC, has been a breach of the blockchain itself. Most are of the Ponzi scheme types, eg. I'll give you 15% if you deposit your coins here. If I give you 15%, I better be making 30% to justify it. Desire to get high yields without being a little curious on how it makes the money to pay you the promised yield, and is it sustainable. FTX, LUNA, others, usually stable coin type.

Another type of scheme, which is far more sophisticated, is finding the interoperability cracks. Each blockchain is its own universe. They can't talk to each other, so there are players within each blockchain universe that try to bridge two chains together by holding onto deposit of Coin A, confirming with Coin be for a conversion promising security checks, and then transfer the 2 coins seamlessly. Problem is there are security cracks with "middleman" chains, and that's how hundred of millions are stolen from time to time. Not too dissimilar in the normal world, it's too hard to rob a bank, so people go after the brink truck. Difference is that the millions that are stolen on the blockchain is trackable, and brink truck money is poof.

SubCmdr

07-24-23, 23:01

Neither party is mine, not the ******* or the Elephant

https://www.businessinsider.com/house-republicans-seek-8k-pay-rise-themselves-oppose-other-spending-2023-7#text=House%20 Republicans%20 want%20 to%20 give%20 themselves%20 pay%20 rises%20 of%20 at,%22 raise%20 hell%20 over%20 this. %22.

All while cutting programs for low income people. Being the resident party that is comfortable harboring racists. And the Democrats say nothing. Because they get the money also.

By the time I get to Arizona!

Paulie97

07-24-23, 23:49

I accused you of nothing. You read all of that into my post. I dealt strictly with the issues. And you are still living of my tax dollars while I receive very few benefits from them. I should not have to pay them.Scrub Cmdr calm down. It's not all about you. Tiny types up a novel a day here with his views and he'll interact with anyone. And no one cares about all your reported wealth. It's irrelevant while true financial tycoons aren't online bragging about it every day in a hooker forum. You can take that one to the bank.

Xpartan

07-25-23, 04:15

You sure sound like a Democrat to me. I've never read anything you've written that's counter to the Democratic Party platform. You should wear the badge with pride.

I'm pro-choice, don't care which bathroom a trans person uses, in favor of decriminalization of drug possession, criminal justice reform, lower military spending, universal healthcare, better education and financial support for poor children, and lower levels of military aid. I usually vote for Democrats for judges for criminal courts. And I don't mind if you call me a Republican. I will wear that badge with pride. The greatest president of our lifetimes, Ronald Reagan, was a Republican. Except for Tooms, that would be George Washington. Just kidding Tooms.Here is a slight correction: Reagan was the greatest Republican president of our lifetimes. Both Clinton and Obama beat him with a long stick in terms of the economy. Actually, 2. 5 years into his presidency, Biden beats him too.

SubCmdr

07-25-23, 16:56

Here is a slight correction: Reagan was the greatest Republican president of our lifetimes. Both Clinton and Obama beat him with a long stick in terms of the economy. Actually, 2. 5 years into his presidency, Biden beats him too.I agree with you Xpartan.. I bought my SUV in the Dominican Republic with profits earned in the stock market after Obama was sworn into office. I needed a bank to transfer the money from the (Dis) United States of America to the Dominican Republic. But it has been many years since I stepped into one in the (Dis) United State of America. There is this thing called the internet that allows for online banking. So I rarely have to take anything to the bank in the (Dis) United States of America anymore. I do go there to physically get cash. New large Federal Reserve Notes. Those are the kind that the money changers like. And it pays to stack a little cash. Cause they are coming for it! Watch out for CBDCs. Don't get caught sleeping on that issue.

EihTooms

07-26-23, 05:08

Here is a slight correction: Reagan was the greatest Republican president of our lifetimes. Both Clinton and Obama beat him with a long stick in terms of the economy. Actually, 2. 5 years into his presidency, Biden beats him too.Well, my lifetime might go back further than that. And the historical data and record of results go back even further, of course.

So on at least major factors like average annual GDP Growth combined with average annual Jobs Creation, Carter also beats Reagan with a long stick in terms of the economy. Carter's far superior average annual Jobs Creation record has been well documented here and everywhere many times. And in terms of average annual GDP Growth there is no meaningful difference between Carter's and Reagan's. The big difference being, unlike Reagan, Carter didn't have to Triple the National Debt to get there.

But, yeah, Reagan probably produced the best "Republican" presidential economic stewardship results. However, when you combine average annual GDP Growth and average annual Jobs Gains and, very important, the economic conditions handed to the incoming Dems from the outgoing Repubs vs the economic conditions handed to the incoming Repubs from the outgoing Dems, just about every Dem beats every Repub with a long stick in terms of the economy going back as far as data and records are kept.

Hell, every incoming Dem POTUS since the Repub Party's beginning in 1858 would have felt blessed by good fortune to have been handed the economic trajectory conditions Reagan was handed by Carter instead of the typically horrific crap they got from the outgoing Repub.

It is only the Repubs' brilliance at selling their bullshit Supply-Side / Trickle-Down + No Attention To Regulations religion, that has always produced crap results, that puts that idiotic and unsubstantiated bit about "Repubs Handling The Economy Better Than Dems" in the heads of ill informed believers in ghosts and the occult. It sure isn't the inarguable historic and current facts.

https://www.thebalancemoney.com/gdp-growth-by-president-highs-lows-averages-4801102

SubCmdr

07-27-23, 02:27

I have decided to put this post in novel form. That way most will not read it let alone understand it. You have been warned.

SubCmdr calm down.I just took my blood pressure and it is 120/75. Excellent numbers. It shows how calm I am. And demonstrates that you don't now shit about me Poosy97 and you need to STFU. Spell my handle right the next time you decide to engage in a Ad Hominium attack (look it up).

I find your posts to be less than eloquent. Tiny knows how to write. You do not. Your one line / one paragraph posts do not provide any information nor insight into the subjects of the threads that you post in. If you doubt my bonifides brother, take a look at my 9 year body of post on ISG. Or better yet, get on a mother fucking plane to SDQ. I will pick you up in the airport and show you how I roll in the Dominican Republic. Until then, you need to STFU and enjoy living on my tax dollars in the (Dis) United States of America.

It actually shows how fucked up the (Dis) United States of America is. Millions of my fellow Americans are working abroad paying their taxes and yet even with less people USAGOV cannot run a effective government because of legislators that ignore the will of the people. And the government is currently being held hostage by the minority party. The constitution was designed to force cooperation and spread the power of government among three branches. Yeah, I read that shit! When I took an oath to protect it I figured I better know what was in that * I doubt the founders thought it would come to this. After all they had just fought a war to prevent one mother fucker from controlling everything. The idea that the minority party would choose to grandstand instead of govern probably was not even considered.

It's not all about you.You are dead wrong with this statement. It is all about me. This is a mother fucking opinion thread on American Politics. Who's opinions am I suppose to express other than my own. I am fine if you don't agree with my opinions. But lay off the personal attacks you DMF! Do you have anything to add on the actual subject of the thread? For your information it is called: American Politics.

Take whatever issue you have with me and put it in the refrigerator. You should not be dragging your personal problems through the entire forum. It displays a general lack of emotional control on your part. Bro I have reviewed your body of work and you be on some serious girly man shit. This is the second time in the second different thread that you have come after me on a personal attack. I'll meet you in the Dominican Republic or Colomba if you wish to have man to man discussion with me. If not, stick to subjects of the threads, instead your man crush on me. LOL!

And no one cares about all your reported wealth. It's irrelevant while true financial tycoons aren't online bragging about it every day in a hooker forum.No one cares about your opinions about me or other people in this forum. Take a look at your last 20 posts. The majority are simply your opinions and attacking others. On occasion you might give a tidbit about handling prostitutes in Medellin. Show me a post in this entire forum where I am bragging about my wealth. I got nearly 10 years of posts for you to review. I am certain that if you are not simply talking out of the side of your mouth that you will be able to find one and misquote me quite quickly.

I am not a wage slave. I am time rich, cash poor. But everyday I get up and decide my own schedule unless I have a medical appointment, financial, business, fuck date or flight. And those I scheduled on my own terms. Soy heje. And I do not have anyone pulling on my strings like a puppet. Tell me you are in the same position in life and we will have a base of commonality to work from. So goto work mother fucker and stop wasting your employers time writing useless posts on ISG. One of the things l like doing is taking tine to put DMFs such as yourself in check!

Tiny and I have had a very active discussion on crypto. I commented on it and he has been asking questions. I have been answering them. If you find this is above your head and you think I am somehow bragging about my wealth, that is in your own mind.

Tiny and I are discussing financial strategies and tactics. These can be conducted at any income level above basic survival. Tiny stated over in the Dominican Republic forum that he has resolved not to reply to my posts anymore. Did he ask you to pick up the slack?.

Finally, I would not be paying prostitutes if I was wealthy. There would be plenty of girls throwing their panties at me in that case. Girls love power, money and bad men. Prostitutes would be unneeded except for special fetish cases. The prostitutes I pay, well I stay on the low end (2000 DOP and 200000 COP) because I simply do not have money to blow on high priced prostitutes like individuals such as yourself. Does that sound like a wealthy man to you? A man has to know his limitations. And I know mine.

The purpose of this forum is to share information on having sex with girls. If you actually read the Colombian forum you will find posts from me and Mr. E there that confirm this. Interpret what the founder of this forum wrote however you like. It is written in bold read letters in the FAQ section. Pull out your dictionary if you need any help with the meaning of the words.

You can take that one to the bank.Who goes to the bank anymore? Except for DMFs like yourself. Especially in the (Dis) United States of America. Except when I need large sums of high denominated Federal Reserve Notes. That is the type of cash the money changers like. Don't be trying to pass off that wrinkled up shit (like your dick) that works in the (Dis) United States of America. Brand spanking, new crisp Federal Reserve Notes is the standard that is sought overseas.

FYI, Tiny rolled up in my spot and tried to dis me. It didn't go well for him. But there were no personal attacks. Just a lively exchange of information. Grown men can agree to disagree. Those who are intellectually bankrupt, they attack. I will not be showing up in court for your case. I hope this clears the air between us. If you have not figured it out by now, I don't give a fuck what you think of me.

Now once again, do you have anything to add about American Politics?

MarquisdeSade1

08-04-23, 05:11

https://dailystormer.in/the-cia-is-running-wikipedia-wow-what-a-shocker/

CrowExplorer

08-04-23, 13:24

I see a lot of posts on American politics from users who like to virtue signal how far left they are. They come on here, talk how they "care about the poor", how "conservatives don't" do the obligatory dunk on "drumpf" or whatever clever nickname they choose to parrot.

Their lack of self awareness baffles me.

You know that they hate you, right?

Don't believe me? Next time you're in a group of socialist / commies protesting something bold, edgy and new, like a womans right to "keel muh baybee", converse with the folx who can't figure out what gender they are, and tell them a bit about yourself.

Let them know you are a man (god forbid a WHYT MAN! Who has made a hobby of traveling abroad in order to enjoy prostitutes.

See how they react to that.

You see, that whole "Sex work is real work" slogan they like to throw around applies to women, not to us.

The men who hire sex workers are "sick" or "pathetic". And men who visit poorer countries to pay for sex are "predators".

They call us "LBH" (loser back home), and say things like "all prostitutes are sex slaves" doncha know?

If they had it their way, and perhaps one day they will, we would all be in prison for our "crimes" of paying women for sex.

The group of "tolerance" could possible tolerate us, if all we did was pay American cam girls on OnlyFans or something, but even then they would mock us and call us all incel losers.

But I digress, you're never going to be in their little club, no matter how much you support TheCurrentThing TM, parrot all their slogans, dunk on all the celebrities they say are evil (remember when Elon Musk and J. K Rowling were ADORED by the left? LOL), etc. PLEASE REALIZE THAT THEY FUCKING HATE YOU AND WOULD REJOICE AT THE NEWS OF YOUR DEATH OR IMPISONMENT.

Xpartan

08-05-23, 05:48

I see a lot of posts on American politics from users who like to virtue signal how far left they are. Really? I've followed this thread for quite a long time and don't remember any members advertising themselves as "far left". Unless you consider everyone to the left of Trump a "far left", I would really like to know who these people are.

MarquisdeSade1

08-05-23, 06:03

SubCmdr

08-05-23, 06:26

CheckMate1

08-05-23, 17:07

Is your point that conservatives are more open minded and you can speak about your desire to hire prostitutes and that you happen to travel overseas to do it and still remain an accepted member of their club?

If that was the case Trump paying to fuck a porn star or importing his main girl from overseas would have been no big deal. You see with conservatives immigrants are good if your are bringing them into the country for sex. LOL! That way they do not have to travel to fuck. They import their pussy using the immigration laws to give their favorite meat USDA stamp of approval.By his (crow) research, all red states are pro sex workers and all blue states are not. It's not blue or red, commies or capitalists, religious zealots or heatheans. All participates, none will admit to it. We (All of ISG) do not engage in communicating with the vast majority of the population of earth that believes this is a taboo, and it's a discomforting subject matter. We are a minority. We believe that prostitution should be legal and safe, for us and "workers".

And I hope he writes a report to contribute to ISG one day.

Elvis 2008

08-06-23, 14:39