American Politics

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2943338]That blurb on Venezuela is dead wrong. A lot of Arab countries are totally dependent on oil and gas and are filthy rich. The difference between those countries and Venezuela is in the Arab countries is if you steal, you get your hand cut off. In Venezuela, unlike any country I have ever been to, theft was applauded. What happened in Venezuela is Chavez filled the national oil company with his unproductive cronies and oil production went nowhere. He then started using foreign companies to produce and then he stole from them and they pulled out. His last resource after that was to print money and by over printing the money, he caused runaway inflation. Without a 4th amendment or other guarantee that your money is your money, a country's economy will go to shit for certain.

It is a lot easier to steal from your people by doubling the money supply than taking half of what they own, but the amount of theft is the same.[/QUOTE]I just pulled M2 (money supply) for Venezuela. It's astounding! It was up 2,051,768% from 1/1/2019 to 9/30/2021. Then the government rejiggered the numbers so that it no longer calculates M2, but rather the "Money Supply of the New Expression Currency. ".

I walked through the museum of the central bank of the Argentina some years ago and was astounded that decade after decade they weren't able to get inflation under control. This created real problems for people. My love interest at the time had an ice cream truck, and had to go to the supplier twice a day for milk and the like so her money wouldn't lose a lot of its value before she sold the product.

This is what intuitively worries me about MMT. In the pursuit of full employment, are the politicians and their appointees in the Fed really going to screw things up? All Argentina had to do was what Volcker did. Raise interest rates, keep them higher than inflation, induce a serious recession and in a few years the country would be in good shape again. But they wouldn't do it.

Now MMT may be different, given a couple of the considerations I threw out in my reply to Goatscrot. But I suspect there's no free lunch.

[QUOTE=Elvis 2008;2943338]
It is a lot easier to steal from your people by doubling the money supply than taking half of what they own, but the amount of theft is the same.[/QUOTE]

This deserves emphasis. The elite don't suffer from high inflation. They find ways around it, through investments and sending their money to bank accounts in other countries and the like. It's the workingman who gets screwed. In Venezuela, if you were in with Chavez or Maduro, you got access to dollars at the official forex rate and then could sell them for bolivares at the black market rate. That's a great business!

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943330]I don't believe Democrats are bigger warmongers than Republicans. My views are much closer to Progressives than, say, Lyndsey Graham's. That was a satirical post to highlight a spurious correlation.

As to the "Trump Pandemic," maybe we better throw in the towel, because you're not going to change my mind and vice versa.

You're starting to sound like the MAGA crowd. American institutions would prevent Trump or anyone else from stealing a presidential election. [B]Harris will probably win but Lichtman's no more clairvoyant than you or me. He was wrong about the popular vote in 2016.[/b][/QUOTE]I don't think Lichtman has ever claimed his predictions are the result of clairvoyance. And neither have I.

Was he wrong about Trump winning the Popular Vote in 2016? I have no idea since I did not read any of his books, including the one for the 2016 election.

But it is clear he (the Keys, actually) didn't only predict Trump would win the Popular Vote and not the Electoral College Vote, if that is what you or others are suggesting. His Keys predicted a Trump "win" in 2016, which is not something that can happen based solely on the Popular Vote.

[B]Historians Prediction: Donald J. Trump to Win 2016 Election.
September 26, 2016[/B]

[URL]https://www.american.edu/media/news/092616-13-keys-prediction.cfm[/URL]

[QUOTE]Editors Note: This story has been updated with a correction. It has been corrected to read that Prof. Lichtmans 13 Keys system predicts the winner of the presidential race, [b]not the outcome of the popular vote.[/b][/QUOTE]Was he misquoted or taken out of context on whatever "Popular Vote" comment he made with regard to his Keys' 2016 prediction and that misquote has taken on a life of its own ever since?

Possible. But, again, I have no idea because I have not researched it that much.

However, it is obvious he predicted a Trump Electoral College win for 2016 before the election because before the election he also predicted Trump would be Impeached. Which, again, can not happen only if he wins the Popular Vote and not the EC vote, right? Without an EC Vote win, Trump could not become president and without becoming president he could not then be Impeached:

[B]In 2016, this prof predicted Trump's presidency and his impeachment.
Allan Lichtman says President Trump has been 'on a path to impeachment' from day 1 of his campaign.[/B]

[URL]https://www.cbc.ca/radio/asithappens/as-it-happens-thursday-edition-1.5307276/in-2016-this-prof-predicted-trump-s-presidency-and-his-impeachment-1.5307665[/URL]

[QUOTE]As It Happens first spoke to the American University professor during the 2016 election when he was sure that Donald Trump would win the presidency. It wasn't a fluke. Professor Lichtman has predicted the last nine U.S. presidential elections correctly.

[B]And even before Donald Trump was elected, the professor came out with another prediction: that Donald Trump would be impeached.[/b][/QUOTE]No, as a historian Lichtman certainly uses his judgement on various issues.

However, he does not use clairvoyance in the same way some wannabe economic "historians" might use hokus-pokus notions of magical business and economic cycles, wild coincidences, a witch's curse and so on to explain away the remarkable 100 year long presidential pattern of Great Repub Crashes, Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions and Massive Repub Jobs Destruction (with no Great Repub Recoveries, Great Repub Expansions and Historic Repub Jobs Creation to their credit) vs Great Dem Recoveries, Great Dem Expansions and Historic Dem Jobs Creation (with no Great Dem Crashes, Great Dem Depressions, Great Dem Recessions and Historic Dem Jobs Destruction to their credit).

Oh, for BONUS MATERIAL, here are a couple of fairly well-known Conservatives who don't think it wise or prudent to rely on American Institutions to rush in and save the day, the republic or American democracy when it comes to determined enemies of America like Donald Trump and his Cult Followers:

[QUOTE=SubCmdr;2943185]One of the beauties of crypto. Allows one to opt out of the fiat money ponzi scheme. Just like buying gold or silver except better because it is digital. [B]The candidate that supports crypto get my vote![/B].[/QUOTE][I][b]1. Gary Gensler Will Be Fired On Day One Of A Trump Presidency[/b].

Over the past three years, through some combination of incompetence and hostility, Chairman Gensler has used his power over the Securities and Exchange Commission to confuse investors, stymie innovation, and attack good-faith actors.

The eruption of cheers from the crowd when President Trump said he would fire Gensler spoke to the anger felt by the entire bitcoin industry about his poor leadership.

[b]2. Operation Choke Point 2.0 Will Be Brought To An End.[/b]

Over the past few years, bitcoin companies have found it increasingly difficult to open bank accounts, process credit cards, and obtain licenses. This misguided effort to demonize an entire industry has damaged American competitiveness, driving software developers, industrial miners, and bitcoin financial service companies overseas.

With this episode finally behind us and bitcoin flourishing in the U.S., individual Americans will also benefit from downstream effects such as increased financial privacy, reduced inflation, and lower energy prices.

[b]3. A Bitcoin Advisory Council To The President Will Be Established.[/b]

As was clear during todays keynote, President Trump still has much to learn about bitcoin. He was refreshingly deferential on this point rather than pretending to know more than he did, he acknowledged the expertise of the audience and pledged to include those who have a stake in the industry in the creation of bitcoin policy.

Digital assets will play an increasingly important role in the U.S. economy, touching everything from energy production to monetary policy to power projection. The chief executive will certainly benefit from a council of advisors who can help think through these complex issues.

[b]4. The U.S. government Will Hodl Bitcoin.[/b]

Currently, the federal government is estimated to own over 200,000 bitcoins that it obtained during various law enforcement operations. Several times in the past, the federal government has sold bitcoin obtained in this way at auction. (Germany recently liquidated $3 billion worth of bitcoin, a move that may one day in retrospect prove catastrophic.)

President Trump has pledged to hold (or hodl in bitcoin parlance) this bitcoin as part of a new strategic bitcoin stockpile. A vocal contingent of bitcoin-friendly lawmakers, led by U.S. Senator Cynthia Lummis, is coalescing, with a total of four U.S. Senators and three Senate candidates speaking at the conference. Today, Lummis announced a proposal to supercharge the U.S. dollar by establishing a program wherein the federal government would acquire one million bitcoins.

[b]5. Ross Ulbricht Will Be Pardoned.[/b]

It has been eleven years since Ross Ulbricht was arrested for operating Silk Road, a website where drugs, fraudulent documents, and other illegal items (alongside legal ones) were freely bought and sold using bitcoin. Ulbricht received a double life sentence plus 40 years, which many feel was excessive. A commutation or pardon has long been a cause clbre for liberty activists. President Trump reaffirmed his intention to pardon Ulbricht, recognizing that the time he has already served is enough to ensure justice was done.

Whether President Trump carries out these promises remains to be seen. However, making them was a savvy political move that will pick up support from voters who view bitcoin as important and see only one viable candidate who recognizes its significance.[/I]

[URL]https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidbirnbaum/2024/07/27/the-5-most-important-promises-trump-made-at-bitcoin-2024/[/URL]

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943344]If you take a look at North Korean missile launches after Trump's rapprochement with Kim, you'll see they went way, way down, [b]then rebounded when Biden came to office. Kissing ass works, especially when it's the President of the United States doing the ass kissing.[/b] I don't think Russia would have moved into Ukraine if Trump had been president. If it started to, I bet Trump would have done what Bernie Sanders wanted to do.

[URL]https://jacobin.com/2022/07/bernie-sanders-joe-biden-ukraine-russia-putin[/URL][/QUOTE][B]Timeline: Threats and stalemate one year after Trump last met North Korea's Kim.
June 26, 2020[/B]

[URL]https://www.reuters.com/article/world/timeline-threats-and-stalemate-one-year-after-trump-last-met-north-koreas-kim-idUSKBN23X09P/[/URL]

[QUOTE]WASHINGTON/SEOUL (Reuters) - Nearly one year after U.S. President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un last met, [b]North Korea has returned to conducting short-range missile tests and issuing harsh rhetoric, while Washington shows little interest in easing sanctions.[/b]

The two leaders' last meeting - at the Demilitarised Zone between the two Koreas - did little to break the deadlock in denuclearisation talks.
This has led to bouts of increased tension, though Trump - who once derided Kim as Little Rocket Man - has largely downplayed Pyongyangs actions.
Here is a timeline of those developments:

June 12, 2018: A summit in Singapore represented the first time a sitting American president met with a North Korean leader, but the statement that came out of the meeting was light on specifics, opting instead for general commitments.

[B]Since the summit, North Korea has shown no tangible signs of a willingness to abandon its nuclear weapons, and experts have said it is believed to have continued development of its arsenal. Washington, at the same time, has sought to keep sanctions intact, leading North Korea to accuse the United States of clinging to hostile policies.[/b]

Feb. 28, 2019: A second summit between Trump and Kim in Vietnam collapsed over sanctions relief, raising questions about the future of denuclearisation diplomacy.

(And more)[/QUOTE]I forget. Was Joe Biden president in June 2020?

Maybe Kim's launches went "way, way down" later in 2020 at the height of Trump's Pandemic. If so, perhaps a Million American Deaths is a tad more "Ass-Kissing" to please our stated enemies than a Love-Sick so-called potus ought to engage in.

[QUOTE=Goatscrot;2943169]And again mmt does not advocate for an endless source of dollars. That is a myth. And speaking of you really should read the deficit myth. The problems we have in the United States are a result of poor fiscal policy. [/QUOTE] Correct!

[QUOTE=Goatscrot;2943168]One of your points is correct and any mmt economist would agree with you. You cannot inject currency into the system if supply cannot keep up. Which is exactly what happened during covid. But of course now that supply has caught up, well except for companies who are artificially keeping their supplies low in order to drive prices higher, inflation should be coming down, but it's not simply because of corporate greed. Doesn't help that so many sectors in the United States are controlled by a few corporate giants, but that's the end result of corporate capitalism.

If you put more money into a system and that money is directed at employment in the production of more goods, you do not have inflation. You are forgetting the key element of inflation and that is scarcity. You mentioned wanting demand to go down? Why in the world would you want that? Do you want demand to increase and supply to increase.

Another tenant of mmt is keeping interest rates at their natural level which is zero. Additionally there is absolutely no need for the government to sell bonds if it doesn't want to.

The government doesn't spend your money. It never does. Well your state and local governments do because they are not currency issuers, their currency users. When Congress passes a bill that money is appropriated and it goes on the balance sheets, and when it is taxed back it comes off the balance sheets, it doesn't go into a pot to get spent again. That's a myth. [/QUOTE]

I like your thinking, on MMT and good administrative economic policies that matter!

Hey, I'm still waiting for the self-appointed ISG Repub economists, to tell me how, [i][b]50:1 million jobs created by Dems, since 1989[/b] and the other 100 years of job creation have come with Democrats having been in at the helm of the American economy, here: [URL]http://www.internationalsexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?2467-American-Politics&p=2939183&viewfull=1#post2939183[/URL][/i]

So when it comes to matters of the economy, I'm NOT buying the Repub mantra and fallacy of [i][b]"...we know best when it comes to the economy..."[/b][/i] bullshit.

Those same self-appointed ISG Repub economists, like Elvis 2008, have been telling us and droning on, like dogs in heat, for almost four (4) years now, about how the markets, the economy, the job numbers, all are going into a recession type crush and how [i][b]"the economy has been performing so very badly, even worse than when Trump was...blah, blah, blah".[/b][/i] Basically, just parroting the latest QAnon/MAGA Foxy Muse economic, talking points.

Which we all know, the great Biden economy of almost four (4) solid years of growth, has proven them wrong.

[u]A Dog's Ass:[/u]

So to be clear, I've always reminded Elvis 2008, of the following:
[LIST][i][b]"Even the sun shines up a dog's ass some days".[/b] But in YOUR case, you've been calling for a market crash and economic recession, for almost the last 4 years now. And you've been WRONG every time! So the sun hasn't exactly shone much up your ass for four (4) years.

But I'm sure, if you say it long enough and often enough...that sun will surely shine some day! (...kkkk!)[/i][/LIST][u]MMT:[/u]

I too, like the MMT model, and I'm happy to see that Biden has adopted MMT, and has the record to prove it. So it does appear to be working IMHO and proving there's merit to the theory, despite its Republican detractors.

Now lets be crystal clear, markets go on cycles and runs, but ultimately are forced to follow the prevailing business cycles. And as such Elvis 2008, my very well get his market crash and/or economic recession. As it is all part of the business cycle.

No doubt, wherein, you'll get all the economic doomsayers, crawl out from their rocks and say [i]"...told you so".[/i]

What they often fail to realize, is that when this happens, they better thank their lucky stars, if a Dem administration, happens to be at the helm, to weather the storm. Because if it isn't and it's the Repubs, their [b]abysmal record[/b], shows them only creating 1 million jobs in the last 35 years.

[u]Economic Mansplaining:[/u]

So while the self-appointed ISG Repub economists, twist themselves into pretzels, rabbiting on about [i][b]"economic mansplaining"[/b][/i], most rational, common sense economists, meaning your average American, should be able to figure out such easy, [i][b]"kitchen table"[/b][/i] economic math, as to whose economic polices are REALLY WORKING.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943330]I don't believe Democrats are bigger warmongers than Republicans. My views are much closer to Progressives than, say, Lyndsey Graham's. That was a satirical post to highlight a spurious correlation.

As to the "Trump Pandemic," maybe we better throw in the towel, because you're not going to change my mind and vice versa.

You're starting to sound like the MAGA crowd. American institutions would prevent Trump or anyone else from stealing a presidential election. Harris will probably win but Lichtman's no more clairvoyant than you or me. He was wrong about the popular vote in 2016.[/QUOTE][URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/04/opinion/trump-win-election-harris.html[/URL]

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/06/opinion/trump-victory.html[/URL]

[URL]https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-nyt-siena-poll-hammers-home-the-reality-that-harris-is-running-out-of-gas/[/URL]

MMT sounds like some bullshit the [B]Plutocracy[/B] of the United States of America came up with.

[B]Stack Sats![/B]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2943403]I too, like the MMT model, and I'm happy to see that Biden has adopted MMT, and has the record to prove it. So it does appear to be working IMHO and proving there's merit to the theory, despite its Republican detractors.[/QUOTE]Interesting. I know that Treasury Secretary Yellen would disagree with your belief that Biden has adopted MMT. And suspect Goatscrot would disagree. But you're right on the same page with economists Art Laffer and Stephen Moore.

[URL]https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidenomics-also-known-as-mmt-modern-monetary-theory-spending-ccadee9c[/URL]

[QUOTE=Spidy;2943403]So while the self-appointed ISG Repub economists, twist themselves into pretzels, rabbiting on about "economic mansplaining", most rational, common sense economists, meaning your [i][b]average American,[/b][/i] should be able to figure out such easy, "kitchen table" economic math, as to whose economic polices are REALLY WORKING.[/QUOTE]And the average American likes Trumponomics a lot more than Bidenomics.

[URL]https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/issues/economy[/URL]

[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval_economy-6182.html[/URL]

So the "most rational, common sense economists," as you put it, disapproved of Biden's handling of the economy by a 20% margin. And they approved of Trump's performance by an 8% margin.

That said, Trump's come up with some ideas on the economy lately that don't make much sense. But Harris seems intent on matching or exceeding every stupid proposal he makes.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943353]I just pulled M2 (money supply) for Venezuela. It's astounding! It was up 2,051,768% from 1/1/2019 to 9/30/2021. Then the government rejiggered the numbers so that it no longer calculates M2, but rather the "Money Supply of the New Expression Currency. ".

I walked through the museum of the central bank of the Argentina some years ago and was astounded that decade after decade they weren't able to get inflation under control. This created real problems for people. My love interest at the time had an ice cream truck, and had to go to the supplier twice a day for milk and the like so her money wouldn't lose a lot of its value before she sold the product.

This is what intuitively worries me about MMT. In the pursuit of full employment, are the politicians and their appointees in the Fed really going to screw things up? All Argentina had to do was what Volcker did. Raise interest rates, keep them higher than inflation, induce a serious recession and in a few years the country would be in good shape again. But they wouldn't do it.

Now MMT may be different, given a couple of the considerations I threw out in my reply to Goatscrot. But I suspect there's no free lunch.



This deserves emphasis. The elite don't suffer from high inflation. They find ways around it, through investments and sending their money to bank accounts in other countries and the like. It's the workingman who gets screwed. In Venezuela, if you were in with Chavez or Maduro, you got access to dollars at the official forex rate and then could sell them for bolivares at the black market rate. That's a great business![/QUOTE]Whenever I see the no free lunch blurb I think of Dr Kelton's quote, "The government can give everybody a pony as long as it can make enough ponies. ".

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943341]You're right, I'm debating with one hand tied behind my back without reading her book. Yes, sanctions probably were a factor in inflation in Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

I've followed a number of developing country economies through the years. Countries that continually run government budget deficits and run up national debt and set interest rates at low levels have problems. That's true of developed countries too. The only exception that comes to mind is Japan, and that may be because of the declining population. And its massive run up in the national debt hasn't been accompanied by good economic performance.

So what would the MMT proponents do differently? Two things that I'm aware of. First, they would only have governments borrowing in their own currency. And that's admittedly true of Japan, but not true of the other examples I've thrown out. I don't know if your example, Weimar Germany, borrowed in foreign currencies, but it certainly had a lot of foreign debt.

Second, they would jack up taxes to reduce demand.

Intuitively, I don't think this would work well. At some point people would get antsy about the debt and start moving to gold, crypto, stock, real estate, etc. , and abandon government debt. Interest rates go up, which makes it difficult for the private sector to raise capital. Or perhaps the central bank keeps rates at low levels, which results in high inflation. Foreign exchange controls are enacted to prevent money from leaving the country.

But that and $5 will buy you a cup of coffee at Starbucks. I need to take a look at the book and come back with you.

I actually am a believer in supply side economics. There's a correlation among developed countries between lower government revenues / expenditures and GDP per capita adjusted for purchasing power. The countries with smaller government as a % of GDP, like the USA, Switzerland, Singapore and Ireland, outperform the ones with larger government. That doesn't mean that there's no place for the Keynesians. I hope Tooms doesn't read this, but I'd give FDR the edge over Herbert Hoover in his willingness to pump lots of money into the economy when it needed it. And I think that's what we have had in recent years, without MMT, and we've even gone overboard at times, like with the American Rescue Plan and other excessive spending legislated during 2021/2022. The Fed has a dual mandate to maximize employment and minimize inflation, and our politicians are not shy at all at using fiscal stimulus. We've been at full employment since 2018, except when COVID intervened.[/QUOTE]Jacking up taxes to reduce demand is really an emergency step. Spending to increase production and ensuring full employment is the key.

When we look at Venezuela how much was invested in infrastructure, job creation, developing new marketable technologies, etc? Absolutely none. It was all stolen by an incredibly corrupt government.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943431]Interesting. I know that Treasury Secretary Yellen would disagree with your belief that Biden has adopted MMT. And suspect Goatscrot would disagree. But you're right on the same page with economists Art Laffer and Stephen Moore.

[URL]https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidenomics-also-known-as-mmt-modern-monetary-theory-spending-ccadee9c[/URL]

And the average American likes Trumponomics a lot more than Bidenomics.

[URL]https://www.realclearpolling.com/polls/approval/joe-biden/issues/economy[/URL]

[URL]https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_trump_job_approval_economy-6182.html[/URL]

So the "most rational, common sense economists," as you put it, disapproved of Biden's handling of the economy by a 20% margin. And they approved of Trump's performance by an 8% margin.

That said, Trump's come up with some ideas on the economy lately that don't make much sense. But Harris seems intent on matching or exceeding every stupid proposal he makes.[/QUOTE]When it comes to mmt the American government has used deficit spending for decades. MMT is simply an explanation of how fiat currencies work.

And when it comes to polls I'm not sure real clear politics is one of our more middle of the road ones is they tend to lean quite far to the right.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2943344]If you take a look at North Korean missile launches after Trump's rapprochement with Kim, you'll see they went way, way down, then rebounded when Biden came to office. Kissing ass works, especially when it's the President of the United States doing the ass kissing. I don't think Russia would have moved into Ukraine if Trump had been president. If it started to, I bet Trump would have done what Bernie Sanders wanted to do.

[URL]https://jacobin.com/2022/07/bernie-sanders-joe-biden-ukraine-russia-putin[/URL][/QUOTE]Putin was going to move until Ukraine no matter what. The question is what type of resistance would he face. There had been an ongoing conflict in eastern Ukraine for years.

[QUOTE=Goatscrot;2943456]Whenever I see the no free lunch blurb I think of Dr Kelton's quote, "The government can give everybody a pony as long as it can make enough ponies. ".[/QUOTE]LOL! Touche.

[QUOTE=MarquisdeSade1;2943408]
[b]In your dreams but by all means please vote for her & let us know how that works out[/b]

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/04/opinion/trump-win-election-harris.html[/URL]

[URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2024/09/06/opinion/trump-victory.html[/URL]

[URL]https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/the-nyt-siena-poll-hammers-home-the-reality-that-harris-is-running-out-of-gas/[/URL][/QUOTE]I read the first one earlier today. The best part, which I agree with, is this. The writer is a moderate Democrat.

People like the red model more than the blue model. The fastest-growing states by population are mostly governed by Republicans, including Florida, Texas, Idaho and Montana. The fastest-shrinking or -stagnating states are mostly governed by Democrats, including New York, Illinois, California, Pennsylvania and Hawaii. The red model gives you low housing costs, lower taxes and business vitality. The blue model gives you high housing costs, high taxes and high inequality.

Democrats want to expand the welfare state so that our social insurance system would look more like Europe's. But Europe is economically stagnant and falling behind. In 2021, households in the European Union enjoyed, on average, only 61 percent of the disposable income Americans enjoyed. By this measure, rich European countries like Norway are behind poor American states like Mississippi. According to the McKinsey Global Institute, large European corporations invested 60 percent less than American corporations in 2022 and grew at two-thirds the pace. For a decade, Europe has been falling behind on capital development, research and development, and productivity growth. Even the vaunted German economy has basically flatlined since 2018.

Many American voters might envy the long European vacations, but they want economic dynamism more. For years voters in swing states had been telling pollsters that the economy and inflation were their top issues. They looked around the country and concluded that the Republican approach seemed better at generating dynamism and growth, or at least better than Harris's pitch for and defense of Bidenomics.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2943403]Correct!

I like your thinking, on MMT and good administrative economic policies that matter!

Hey, I'm still waiting for the self-appointed ISG Repub economists, to tell me how, [i][b]50:1 million jobs created by Dems, since 1989[/b] and the other 100 years of job creation have come with Democrats having been in at the helm of the American economy, here: [URL]http://www.internationalsexguide.nl/forum/showthread.php?2467-American-Politics&p=2939183&viewfull=1#post2939183[/URL][/i]

So when it comes to matters of the economy, I'm NOT buying the Repub mantra and fallacy of [i][b]"...we know best when it comes to the economy..."[/b][/i] bullshit.

Those same self-appointed ISG Repub economists, like Elvis 2008, have been telling us and droning on, like dogs in heat, for almost four (4) years now, about how the markets, the economy, the job numbers, all are going into a recession type crush and how [i][b]"the economy has been performing so very badly, even worse than when Trump was...blah, blah, blah".[/b][/i] Basically, just parroting the latest QAnon/MAGA Foxy Muse economic, talking points.

Which we all know, the great Biden economy of almost four (4) solid years of growth, has proven them wrong.

[u]A Dog's Ass:[/u]

So to be clear, I've always reminded Elvis 2008, of the following:
[LIST][i][b]"Even the sun shines up a dog's ass some days".[/b] But in YOUR case, you've been calling for a market crash and economic recession, for almost the last 4 years now. And you've been WRONG every time! So the sun hasn't exactly shone much up your ass for four (4) years.

But I'm sure, if you say it long enough and often enough...that sun will surely shine some day! (...kkkk!)[/i][/LIST][u]MMT:[/u]

I too, like the MMT model, and I'm happy to see that Biden has adopted MMT, and has the record to prove it. So it does appear to be working IMHO and proving there's merit to the theory, despite its Republican detractors.

Now lets be crystal clear, markets go on cycles and runs, but ultimately are forced to follow the prevailing business cycles. And as such Elvis 2008, my very well get his market crash and/or economic recession. As it is all part of the business cycle.

No doubt, wherein, you'll get all the economic doomsayers, crawl out from their rocks and say [i]"...told you so".[/i]

What they often fail to realize, is that when this happens, they better thank their lucky stars, if a Dem administration, happens to be at the helm, to weather the storm. Because if it isn't and it's the Repubs, their [b]abysmal record[/b], shows them only creating 1 million jobs in the last 35 years.

[u]Economic Mansplaining:[/u]

So while the self-appointed ISG Repub economists, twist themselves into pretzels, rabbiting on about [i][b]"economic mansplaining"[/b][/i], most rational, common sense economists, meaning your average American, should be able to figure out such easy, [i][b]"kitchen table"[/b][/i] economic math, as to whose economic polices are REALLY WORKING.[/QUOTE]You know, given that proven [B]50:1 million jobs created by Dems since 1989[/B] figure and my proven [B]100,000,000: 37,000,0000 jobs created by Dems over the past 100 years[/B] you alluded to here, it occurs to me President Clinton and I have unfairly grossly understated true Dem Jobs Creation numbers and overstated true Repub jobs destruction numbers.

We both neglected to factor in the typical overhang of continued jobs creation for the following months or year after a Repub takes over from a Dem until that incoming Repub gets his way on policy and stewardship adjustment as well as the continued jobs destruction for the following months or year after a Dem takes over from a Repub and before that incoming Dem gets his way on policy and stewardship adjustment.

So the understandable and unavoidable months of continued jobs destruction or weak jobs creation after the incoming Dem takes over from the outgoing Repub as in Hoover to FDR, Eisenhower to JFK, Nixon / Ford to Carter, Bush1 to Clinton, Bush2 to Obama and Trump to Biden at least until those incoming Dems got their first Great Dem Recovery Legislation passed and heading into the system should not be counted against that incoming Dem. Even though it is unfairly counted against them in the typical historical data overview.

By the same token, the months or year of continued jobs creation after an incoming Repub takes over from an outgoing Dem at least until that incoming Repub gets his first economic "stimulus" legislation passed and headed into the system should not be unjustifiably credited to the incoming Repub. Even though it is unjustifiably credit to them in the typical historical data overview.

Therefore, taking that unforgivable oversight and reality into account, and admittedly I have not done the full research on it to know more exact figures, it would not be an unrealistic assertion to suggest an estimate that [B]Dem policy and stewardship is responsible for perhaps 130,000,000 of the jobs created since 1925 while Repub policy and stewardship has been responsible for a likely far too generous estimate of 7,000,000 of them.[/B].