American Politics

[Tiny 12]

With at least a Million American Deaths from Repub Trump's Pandemic added to Repub Lincoln's Civil War, Repub Eisenhower's Vietnam War, Repub GW Bush's Iraq War, Afghanistan War, etc, I didn't think anyone would want to keep tally of the number of American Deaths due to Repub vs Dem (mostly elective and not forced upon us) policies and stewardship as some bizarre slam on Dem results and outcomes.

But there it is.

If only the number of American jobs created vs LOST due to Repub presidents' policies and stewardship remotely matched the impressive number of American Deaths due to those Repub presidents' policies and stewardship, you might have something on your side worth arguing.

All as the result of a remarkable, some would say impossible, series of wild coincidences, magical economic cycles, bad luck for Repub potuses vs good luck for Dem potuses, that rumored witch's curse and all that over the past 170+ years, of course.

Here is another non spurious Mainstream Media report that has been largely ignored since we and they knew about it more than four critical years and now 3 critical election seasons ago:

Under Fire For Coronavirus Response, Trump Officials Defend Disbanding Pandemic Team.
March 18, 2020

https://time.com/5806558/administrat...ght-criticism/

That's a real stretch Tooms. You're blaming a pandemic that started in a Chinese city on Trump. The Vietnam war on Ike, when only ten servicemen died there on his watch. And considering Abraham Lincoln and his Democratic counterparts during that era emblematic of the modern day parties. And what do pandemic deaths, or deaths from cancer and heart disease for that matter, have to do with warmongering Democratic presidents anyway? Please stay on topic.

Lincoln is the most interesting. Democrats, except you, believe Lincoln would be a member of their party if he were alive today.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/ne...mocrat-390846/
https://www.historynewsnetwork.org/a...-be-a-democrat
https://lithub.com/president-lincoln...ig-government/

Congrats for thinking out of the box on that one. It takes some balls to say slavery wasn't worth fighting over. If you're going that far back, I guess you must also must think highly of these fine men, mostly Democrats:

https://www.gettyimages.com/photos/kkk-cross

And Jim Crow laws, suppressing the black vote and racism practiced by Democrats up until the 1960's must go hand in hand with good economic policy.

The preceding is satirical Tooms, as you should well know. I honestly do not believe you have a racist bone in your body.

However, you must play by the rules. You ignored my explanations of why your correlations between modern day economic performance and the party of the president are spurious. So now I shall ignore your criticisms of my spurious correlation between the Democrat presidents and American military deaths.

This gentleman has it approximately correct, 626,761 soldiers killed under Democrat presidents and 26,895 killed under Republican presidents.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/opi...ties/81845842/

He should have allocated 10 more military deaths during Vietnam to Ike and maybe another 5,000 to 10,000 to him during the first year of his presidency when the Korean war was winding down. And we should update his figures to include deaths under Trump and Biden. (Kudos to Biden by the way for taking us out of Afghanistan.) Anyway you end up with almost 20X more military deaths under Democratic Presidents than Republican Presidents during the 20th and 21st centuries.

And all that is mostly the luck of the draw. I'm not seriously going down your road and proclaiming the Democratic Party as the Party of War. The USA probably would have been drawn into World War II under a Republican president. And USA Employment and GDP damn sure would have plummeted under a president Hillary Clinton in 2020.

[Elvis 2008]

You are in some of your points. The United States government does not need to tax for what it spends. Is the sole source of currency and the only thing that limits the amount of currency that can be placed into the system is productive capacity, ie. Natural resources and labor. The federal government is a currency issuer not a currency user. When Congress passes a bill the money is appropriated and then it goes on the balance sheets. When it is taxed back it comes off the balance sheets. Simple as that. Fiat currency is nothing but a system of debits and credits, which is a wonderful thing. The problem is what Congress appropriates money for. The deficit myth by Dr Stephanie Kelton is an excellent read, as is anything by Dr Randall Wray.

Thanks, Goatscort for the link. Now I know where the trash of current economic thinking is coming from. I last saw this nonsense with oil and the peak oil nuts. They claimed that the usual law of supply and demand had been interrupted with oil. Oil supply had peaked, and demand was inelastic. Market forces were irrelevant. Hell, we had to go to war to Iraq to steal their oil because the usual law of supply and demand was not working. I even remember Rush Limbaugh asking what was wrong with going to war over oil in what in my eyes was the second dumbest thing he said. The worst was saying he did not want to be seen as a hero when checking into drug rehab. Sigh.

Anyway, what happened is demand from China stunned oil markets and oil producers. The producers were caught off guard and did not have capacity for the excessive demand. The one country thought to have had spare capacity was Saudi Arabia but even they were running at full capacity. What happened is what always happens. The demand for a product spurred innovation and shale oil came on board and production in the USA soared, and oil prices cratered. The Iraqi war then was a complete clusterfuck, a total waste of money and human life.

I guess the lunatic Dr. Kelton would have been okay with this if this pathetic excuse of the Iraqi war were run by a Dem, and Dems seem to forget that HRC and Biden were as gung ho as GW Bush for the Iraq war. Let's also not forget that Obama did Libya and Syria just as badly as GW Bush did Iraq. If not for Trump, the Dems could have gone with being the less warfare party. To be sure an accurate Democratic slogan pre-Trump may have been our war clusterfucks have cost less than Republican ones.

It is funny the one time Donald Trump was most presidential in the lamestream media was when he was lobbing billions of dollars of cruise missiles at Syria, a complete waste of money. Beyond that, Trump tried often in vain to keep defense costs down. He looked at NATO as the gluttonous pig that it is and tried pulling us out of it. The pushback on the the idea of Europe paying for its own defense was Trump not understanding how things worked. Again, I am sure this "doctor" Kelton would argue that NATO spending is worthwhile. And while Biden has not tempered the military industrial complexes insatiable need for money, he has scaled back the human life cost at least on the American side. We are still running deficits blowing shit up but at least now the lives being lost are Ukrainian versus American. That is quite the legacy for the warmonger Biden to leave behind. Gee thanks, Joe.

And keep in mind, "defense" I. E. War is one of if not the biggest part of the federal budget. Some have said defense is getting two or three times what the official amount is. We do not know because the Defense Department will not audit its own books.

And then Trump comes along and he is not owned by the military industrial complex and questions the wisdom of going into debt to blow shit up and have taxpayers foot the bill at the later date. By questioning the value of the MIC, the MIC went on a war path with Trump like we have never seen before. Yes, the QAnon / MAGA fools are so stupid for questioning the wisdom of using tax dollars to blow shit up. How stupid are they? Don't they get the federal government can just print up all the money it wants? It is only after the government wisely spends your money on these stupid fucking wars that you have to pay taxes later.

So again, supply and demand do not matter anymore. You can just print up all the money you want, and the demand will never go down. I used to wonder as a kid why wouldn't the government just print up all this money and give it to we the people so I could buy all the candy I wanted. I think I was ten when I realized why would the candy manufacturer take my money when they could just grab their own. Apparently, "doctor" Kelton does not get what I realized at age 10.

If you print up more money, demand for said money goes down as does its value. The way that manifests itself is with higher interest rates. That is the law of supply and demand and now we have another bonehead with some title behind her name saying there once more there is an exception to supply and demand, and we are seeing its effects. The first consequence of overproduction of money is inflation. The second is the federal reserve to raise interest rates. Third, once the consumer is tapped out from inflation and higher rates, there is a decrease in consumer demand that leads to a recession or depression, https://www.ft.com/content/121ee349-...a-a1a4d7564bb0.

In fact, some are saying we are in recession now, https://mishtalk.com/economics/key-r...nal-in-august/.

And so the peak oil nuts have joined the never mind club, and my prediction is so will the MMT folks. Of course, this took a decade to see the peak oil nuts had no clothes, and it will take time here too. And so we have guys like Spidy telling me that I have been wrong about the coming crash. You just do not get how we can print up $10 trillion and shut down the economy for two years with a virus with a 0. 2% mortality and move on from it unscathed, Elvis. You do not get how brilliant Democratic economists like this "doctor" Kelton are, Elvis. We can print our way to prosperity. Yeah, right.

As F Scott Fitzgerald said, you go broke in two ways, first slowly and then quickly. We are in the slow phase now.

[Spidy]

Backpedal my ass. "Remember what Barrack Obama told the American businessman, You didn't create that job, the government did" is a good, succinct summary of the complete quote Tooms provided in the ABC link. Elvis, who I was replying to, probably has no problem with that. Given that you saw it, I owe you an apology though. You don't say bad things about Mohammed to a Moslem, the Pope to a Catholic, or Satan to devil worshippers, even if they're true. You're Democrats and this is a public forum. So belated apologies.

I'm not sure if you really want to know how us nonbelievers feel, so please stop reading now if that's something you'd rather not hear. You've been warned.

Here's an excerpt from a contemporaneous piece in the WSJ about this.
...
https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001...33300916053684

Here's the video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fu2Ni0x4hJ8

The sanctimonious prick's words drip with arrogance, superiority and self righteousness: If you've got a business you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen.

https://www.wsj.com/video/american-f...3-93B9F34480CB

"Dreams are built on hard work, not government."

First things first! Let just say, I know, "backpedaling" or "sarcastically paraphrased" backpedaling, when I see it.

Second, Obama like Trump is a public figure, they are all fair game. If I'm not mistaken, you yourself, had reminded me of this, just recently. In fact knock yourself out with all the sanctimonious prick's superlatives you want. I couldn't careless! Obama's record speaks for itself. Can you say the same about your Loud and Save-ior dumbass, Trump?

BTW, I'm not sure what the hell you're apologizing for. So if that's guilt you're experiencing...take it confession.

Third, the myriad of contemporaneous articles that debunked those false narratives Repubs and Romney were trying to push (in your WSJ article/link), were swift in their response to the political nonsense and spin on Obama's words, taken out of context.

• Obama Ad Accuses Romney Of Twisting 'You Didn't Build That' Line
  https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallp...uild-that-line
  
  "Earlier today Gov. Romney was at it again, knowingly twisting my words around to suggest that I don't value small businesses," he said. "In politics we all tolerate a certain amount of spin. I understand these are the games that get played in political campaigns. But when folks omit entire sentences of what I said, they start splicing and dicing, you may have gone a little over the edge."

Here is my favorite part. Where Obama calls out the "economically backward looking" Repubs, that want to go back to Reaganomics "tickle-down" foolery. It is any wonder Mitt Romney is mercilessly mocked by Trump (and our esteemed MDS1), for losing to Obama (...kkkk!)

• In context: Obama's you didn't build that' comment
  https://www.politifact.com/article/2...-build-comment
  
  "He also blamed Republicans for sticking to their "uncompromising view" that the only path forward is to go back to top down economics that contributed to the poor economy in the first place."

But I get it Tiny 12, it seems you, Elvis 2008 and your other esteemed Rebubs who are very perplexed, and haven't yet come to grips with the fact Repubs aren't the economic "juggernauts" you thought they were. And Repubs, sound more like "juggheads", having created ONLY 1 million jobs in the last 35 years verses 50 million for Dems. Quite the shock, I know!

Feel free and take a moment! I'm confident you'll figure it out!

PS: They use to say the same shit, about Muhammad Ali, until he famously said, It's not bragging if you can back it up!

[Tiny 12]

You are in some of your points. The United States government does not need to tax for what it spends. Is the sole source of currency and the only thing that limits the amount of currency that can be placed into the system is productive capacity, ie. Natural resources and labor. The federal government is a currency issuer not a currency user. When Congress passes a bill the money is appropriated and then it goes on the balance sheets. When it is taxed back it comes off the balance sheets. Simple as that. Fiat currency is nothing but a system of debits and credits, which is a wonderful thing. The problem is what Congress appropriates money for. The deficit myth by Dr Stephanie Kelton is an excellent read, as is anything by Dr Randall Wray.

First thanks for the first thought provoking post in this thread in a long time.

As I understand it, Modern Monetary Theory, as promoted by Stephanie Kelton and Randall Wray, calls for massive deficit spending and injection of large amounts of base money into the economy by the central bank.

If a country implements MMT, why do you believe it wouldn't end up like Venezuela, Argentina, Zimbabwe and other countries that effectively printed money to pay for government expenditures? That is, why do you believe inflation wouldn't get out of control and the currency wouldn't be massively devalued?

And most importantly, why wouldn't SubComdr move to Monaco and start banging the same Colombianas for $1000 a hour that he's paying $50 an hour for now, with all the coin he'll be making from crypto when the world loses faith in paper currencies?

The standard answer by MMT proponents might be you'll increase taxes to reduce demand, and inflation, but not enough so that you create unemployment. So presumably you keep spending all out on government programs, and drain money from the private sector (from individuals and businesses through taxation) to control inflation.

I don't think that's practically doable. With a few exceptions like Bernie Sanders, politicians aren't willing to raise taxes enough to make that work. And what if they did? You'd crowd out the private sector, which is what grows the economy. That's not to say it wouldn't look good in the early years. Venezuela and Argentina did very well when they were initially goosing the economy. But eventually you pay the piper, and perhaps not only end up with high inflation but high unemployment too.

Undoubtedly Kelton and Wray have addressed this. Your thoughts on why I'm wrong would be interesting.

[EihTooms]

I do agree with clapping for nonsense is LOL

A little push back. There are some republicans, who are as you described, mainly (mega donors, ALL MAGA cult members), but I do not lump ever Republicans in this category. I watched the following video in which I found quite interesting on how taking one side or another without being critical when "my side" is wrong, or lumping everything together because explaining nuances is boring (intellectually healthy).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFq7BELzSHE

The video is 25 minutes, first 9 minutes sums up everything about the video, but at 21:17, a question regarding who's the left is then hotly debated and I found it to be very insightful / interesting.

Yeah, the lady host putting so much weight on the side of some supposedly "left-wing" individual loudmouth streamer on xitter vs the overwhelming majority of elected Democrats is similar to the "Defund the Police" phenomenon. One or two no-name loudmouths with no real legislative power do not represent even the beginning of a political Party movement. Not anything close to one Party voting unanimously in Congress to cut law enforcement budgets or deny necessary increases in law enforcement budgets or its iconic leader demanding his Party to defund and abolish the national police force and the Department of Justice.

In this case I don't understand what the controversy is. Are Wingers claiming the Aurora police are illegal immigrant-loving "lefties" who choose to ignore purported Venezuealan Immigrant-on-Venezuelan Immigrant crime?

And what crimes are the Aurora police ignoring? I heard that Venezuelan Immigrants and the apartment landlord are "saying" they have been threatened by violence. Ok. If the cops are refusing to respond to or investigate those accusations then does that make them "soft on crime lefties" who care too much about Venezuelan gangs or dismissive "anti-immigrant Wingers" who don't give a shit about the safety of those immigrants?

Bullet holes in cars? Yeah, should be investigated. But from where and from whom? Cars move. They don't just stay parked at apartment complexes.

I see a CC video of 4-5 guys walking up the stairs to an apartment door. One is on a cell phone. One is carrying a long gun of some kind. Is that the best evidence of a crime being committed by gangs in that apartment complex? Maybe the Aurora police are not rushing over to that apartment based on that video because it does not show a crime being committed. Colorado is an Open Carry gun state. That video simply does not show a crime being committed in the state of Colorado unless it is showing the long gun to be of an illegal type and I have not heard that it does.

[Huacho]

"Maybe there's an aunt or uncle that wants to help out a little bit more," Vance told host Charlie Kirk.

Yeah, like Donald took care of his nephew's kid.

[Goatscrot]

I do agree with clapping for nonsense is LOL

A little push back. There are some republicans, who are as you described, mainly (mega donors, ALL MAGA cult members), but I do not lump ever Republicans in this category. I watched the following video in which I found quite interesting on how taking one side or another without being critical when "my side" is wrong, or lumping everything together because explaining nuances is boring (intellectually healthy).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFq7BELzSHE

The video is 25 minutes, first 9 minutes sums up everything about the video, but at 21:17, a question regarding who's the left is then hotly debated and I found it to be very insightful / interesting.

Neither the Democrats nor the Republicans are economically left when looked upon with an international viewpoint. The Republicans scream deregulation in the Democrats counter with mild regulation as opposed to nationalization. If they didn't count her with nationalization perhaps we would end up with proper regulation in the United States and enjoy things like universal health care, four weeks paid vacation, maternity leave, and excellent pensions at a reasonable age. The Democrats have not even pretended to be left leaning since the defeat of Michael Dukakis. Go back and look at FDR's second Bill of Rights speech. That wasn't even considered extremely left at the time as FDR was making proposals to counter the socialist movement in the United States.

[Woodman09]

Is this the beginning of the RedWave?

[The Cane]

Dick Cheney to vote for Kamala Harris: https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/06/polit...ent/index.html.

[CheckMate1]

The worst part of that incident was the people in that room, supposedly "business" leaders or some such nonsense, actually applauded that utterly incoherent, total gobbledygook non answer to the question asked of the severely cognitively impaired Donald Trump.

LOL. And that is what typically pro Repub Mainstream Media allows to be passed off as "taking questions" and "sitting for an interview" as long as it is Trump or some other blithering Repub numbskull.

That is not an answer to any question, least of all the question Trump was asked.

If Joe Biden had ever, ever given as blithering blathering nonsensical a response as that to any question at any debate, press conference or interview even I would have demanded he resign from the presidency this very minute and everyone in his circle of staff and acquaintances indicted for reckless endangerment of the American people.

But Biden never has. And neither has Harris.

Trump has. Often.

I do agree with clapping for nonsense is LOL

A little push back. There are some republicans, who are as you described, mainly (mega donors, ALL MAGA cult members), but I do not lump ever Republicans in this category. I watched the following video in which I found quite interesting on how taking one side or another without being critical when "my side" is wrong, or lumping everything together because explaining nuances is boring (intellectually healthy).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFq7BELzSHE

The video is 25 minutes, first 9 minutes sums up everything about the video, but at 21:17, a question regarding who's the left is then hotly debated and I found it to be very insightful / interesting.

[EihTooms]

Question: "If you win in November, can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make childcare affordable, and if so, what specific piece of legislation would you advance?

Genius:

[B]"Well, I would do that, and we're sitting down, and I was, somebody, we had Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It's a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I'm talking about, that, because, look, child care is child care is. It's, couldn't, you know, there's something, you have to have it. In this country you have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I'm talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they're not used to but they'll get used to it very quickly and it's not going to stop them from doing business with us, but they'll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country..

The worst part of that incident was the people in that room, supposedly "business" leaders or some such nonsense, actually applauded that utterly incoherent, total gobbledygook non answer to the question asked of the severely cognitively impaired Donald Trump.

LOL. And that is what typically pro Repub Mainstream Media allows to be passed off as "taking questions" and "sitting for an interview" as long as it is Trump or some other blithering Repub numbskull.

That is not an answer to any question, least of all the question Trump was asked.

If Joe Biden had ever, ever given as blithering blathering nonsensical a response as that to any question at any debate, press conference or interview even I would have demanded he resign from the presidency this very minute and everyone in his circle of staff and acquaintances indicted for reckless endangerment of the American people.

But Biden never has. And neither has Harris.

Trump has. Often.

[CheckMate1]

Question: "If you win in November, can you commit to prioritizing legislation to make childcare affordable, and if so, what specific piece of legislation would you advance?

Genius:

"Well, I would do that, and we're sitting down, and I was, somebody, we had Senator Marco Rubio, and my daughter Ivanka was so impactful on that issue. It's a very important issue. But I think when you talk about the kind of numbers that I'm talking about, that, because, look, child care is child care is. It's, couldn't, you know, there's something, you have to have it. In this country you have to have it. But when you talk about those numbers compared to the kind of numbers that I'm talking about by taxing foreign nations at levels that they're not used to — but they'll get used to it very quickly – and it's not going to stop them from doing business with us, but they'll have a very substantial tax when they send product into our country. Those numbers are so much bigger than any numbers that we're talking about, including child care, that it's going to take care. We're going to have — I, I look forward to having no deficits within a fairly short period of time, coupled with the reductions that I told you about on waste and fraud and all of the other things that are going on in our country, because I have to stay with child care. I want to stay with child care, but those numbers are small relative to the kind of economic numbers that I'm talking about, including growth, but growth also headed up by what the plan is that I just, that I just told you about. We're going to be taking in trillions of dollars, and as much as child care is talked about as being expensive, it's relatively speaking not very expensive compared to the kind of numbers we'll be taking in. We're going to make this into an incredible country that can afford to take care of its people, and then we'll worry about the rest of the world. Let's help other people. But we're going to take care of our country first. This is about America first. It's about Make America Great Again. We have to do it because right now we're a failing nation, so we'll take care of it. ".

His running mate did offer a more substantive answer:

"One of the ways that you might be able to relieve a little bit of pressure on people who are paying so much for daycare is, maybe grandma or grandpa wants to help out a little bit more, or maybe there's an aunt or uncle that wants to help out a little bit more," Vance told host Charlie Kirk.

[Goatscrot]

The most powerful thing about crypto is not the amount of money it has made me. It is that I have been able to take a portion of my wealth and opt out of the fiat currency system. The same way that precious metals allow one to do that. Except digitally. It is worldwide and permisionless. That is the power that crypto ownership has given me!

Of course none of the Presidents are responsible for GDP growth or increases of decrease of the stock market. It is the workers on the wage slave plantations that increase production because their overseers are flailing the fuck out of them.. NVDA was started by a guy who used to wash dishes in Dennys. He managed to be upwardly mobile. I have also, just on a lower level.

Presidents need to use tax dollars to build good infrastructure then get out of the way. And they should use a few of them as possible and lower the burden of the tax system on the wage slaves of the country. But has anyone ever asked: if the USA GOV is allowed to print money. And that money is the reserve currency of the world, why do they need to collect taxes in the first place? Why don't they just print the money the want to pay for what they need?

Look, my purchases of stocks are not genius. It is luck. I decided when I was young man I was going to get a piece of the American Pie. The genius part was busting my ass as a wage slave, doing without out and then putting that capital to work. A self taught financial education is what did that. Not the President of the United States of America. The Plutocracy will allow you to have a few crumbs that fall off the table. But they are not interested in inviting you to said table no matter what the political party.

You are in some of your points. The United States government does not need to tax for what it spends. Is the sole source of currency and the only thing that limits the amount of currency that can be placed into the system is productive capacity, ie. Natural resources and labor. The federal government is a currency issuer not a currency user. When Congress passes a bill the money is appropriated and then it goes on the balance sheets. When it is taxed back it comes off the balance sheets. Simple as that. Fiat currency is nothing but a system of debits and credits, which is a wonderful thing. The problem is what Congress appropriates money for. The deficit myth by Dr Stephanie Kelton is an excellent read, as is anything by Dr Randall Wray.

[Tiny 12]

Outside of politics, in your life, have you met people like this or keep them as friends, or even hold them in high regard?

Personally, I detest this type of people. So for me, he hasn't even met the basic threshold, let alone for me to vote for him.

Leaders do their jobs, not say how great they are ad nauseam. They don't look for excuses and don't have a victim's mentality.

What is your threshold?

The "R" party has gone down a path that enables CHARACTERS like Trump, to devolve into a CULT of personality and voting for people who has no interest in governing and are unserious. Lawmakers who are voted into office who haven't written a single legislation are rewarded with second / multiple terms, who moonlight in other jobs while not doing the primary one.

This is what I see on the Federal level. The party needs to "check yourself before you wreck yourself" I just hope it is not too late.

If I'm able to vote, it won't vote for him because of his character. Because I've worked with two people who are like him, and it was a living hell. However, I can understand how intelligent people, like Elvis and some of our other esteemed posters, might after looking at the alternative.

[Tiny 12]

The most powerful thing about crypto is not the amount of money it has made me. It is that I have been able to take a portion of my wealth and opt out of the fiat currency system. The same way that precious metals allow one to do that. Except digitally. It is worldwide and permisionless. That is the power that crypto ownership has given me!

I'm a rube with crypto, but a less sophisticated way of saying that is that it takes money out of the hands of government. That may not be a huge deal for those of us in western countries, yet, but it darn sure is in places like Venezuela.