What Attracts People To Kamala?

[4Waters]

Does this mean the Democrats are responsible for all the woke school shooters?

Yes

 

[17 10 Flat]

Yes

Yes the Democrats support mentally ill humans identifying as what ever they want. When someone won't pretend with them, they act out. They are getting more desperate for attention, hence shooting up schools.

I for one could get on board with my support if only they would identify as say .. superman and prove that by jumping off a 10 story building and flying. I would lead the parade.

 

[500bbc]

Didn't happen.
View attachment 1437692
View attachment 1437693
View attachment 1437694

You're obviously much more observant than me. I can't seem to find President Trump in any of these pictures, Can you point him out?
I did find this though. While cities burned and police were murdered...

Then that fucking cunt posted bail for them...

 

[Sandlord]

You're obviousley much more observant thatn me. I can't seem to find President Trump in any of these pictures, Can you point him out?
I did find this though. While cities burned and police were murdered...

Then that fucking cunt posted bail for them...

Pretzel man said Trump was grabbing the wheel of the get-a-way car.

 

[Sandlord]

Didn't happen.
View attachment 1437692
View attachment 1437693
View attachment 1437694

 

[regor]

 

[2CHILL]

Walking sticks, flags, crutches, That Fning Trump knows how to arm these people to overthrow the government, Shudder whats next Nerf guns, water cannons and ballons, Oh THE HORROR. Pitiful.

Former President Donald Trump pressured his vice president, Mike Pence, to overturn his 2020 election defeat despite being told repeatedly it was illegal to do so, aides to Pence told the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol on Thursday.

Trump continued his pressure campaign even though he knew a violent mob of his supporters was threatening the Capitol as Pence and lawmakers met to formally certify President Joe Biden's victory in the November 2020 election.

"It is breathtaking that these arguments even were conceived, let alone entertained by the president of the United States," former U.S. Appeals Court Judge J. Michael Luttig, an informal Pence adviser, said.

 

[regor]

Former President Donald Trump pressured his vice president, Mike Pence, to overturn his 2020 election defeat despite being told repeatedly it was illegal to do so, aides to Pence told the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol on Thursday.

Trump continued his pressure campaign even though he knew a violent mob of his supporters was threatening the Capitol as Pence and lawmakers met to formally certify President Joe Biden's victory in the November 2020 election.

"It is breathtaking that these arguments even were conceived, let alone entertained by the president of the United States," former U.S. Appeals Court Judge J. Michael Luttig, an informal Pence adviser, said.

You're clueless, that's not what he pressure that faggot ass Pence to do................

 

[was thatguy]

The Fiscal Impact of the Harris and Trump Campaign Plans | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Note: This analysis has been updated to incorporate new proposals announced by the candidates since we initially published on October 7.

www.crfb.org

“Hey, Who ordered the queer eye makeover??”

 

[was thatguy]

View attachment 1437796

I’m

 

[sprintcvx]

Former President Donald Trump pressured his vice president, Mike Pence, to overturn his 2020 election defeat despite being told repeatedly it was illegal to do so, aides to Pence told the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol on Thursday.

Trump continued his pressure campaign even though he knew a violent mob of his supporters was threatening the Capitol as Pence and lawmakers met to formally certify President Joe Biden's victory in the November 2020 election.

"It is breathtaking that these arguments even were conceived, let alone entertained by the president of the United States," former U.S. Appeals Court Judge J. Michael Luttig, an informal Pence adviser, said.

When you have nothing... Double the fuck down.. It's the only way out..

 

[spectra3279]

Because they are to stupid to go and look up the facts for themselves. They listen to and believe the Clinton news network.

 

[TPC]

Harris has adopted Bidens "I get it" campaign slogan. This is how they address their failures. High Taxes, high fuel and grocery costs, high crime, inflation, they ain't rolling back prices, they just say "I get it" and blame everyone else.

Biden waited two years until after the congressional elections to deal with inflation. Now we pay $12.000 more a year to get by.

 

[Runs2rch]

Harris has adopted Bidens "I get it" campaign slogan. This is how they address their failures. High Taxes, high fuel and grocery costs, high crime, inflation, they ain't rolling back prices, they just say "I get it" and blame everyone else.

Biden waited two years until after the congressional elections to deal with inflation. Now we pay $12.000 more a year to get by.

The real number is higher.

 

[sprintcvx]

The real number is higher.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1844356846737633631

 

[Racey]

Former President Donald Trump pressured his vice president, Mike Pence, to overturn his 2020 election defeat despite being told repeatedly it was illegal to do so, aides to Pence told the congressional committee investigating the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol on Thursday.

Trump continued his pressure campaign even though he knew a violent mob of his supporters was threatening the Capitol as Pence and lawmakers met to formally certify President Joe Biden's victory in the November 2020 election.

"It is breathtaking that these arguments even were conceived, let alone entertained by the president of the United States," former U.S. Appeals Court Judge J. Michael Luttig, an informal Pence adviser, said.

Wrong

 

[Wizard29]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1844356846737633631

@2CHILL will just tell you those are lies you are being told...Even though you are the one paying the increased prices.

 

[530RL]

@2CHILL will just tell you those are lies you are being told...Even though you are the one paying the increased prices.

What I have heard 2Chill state is that the prices of goods and services in a Republic with a political system of three equal branches combined with a capitalistic economy, are not set by the President despite some arguing that they are, but are set by market forces of supply and demand.

Leaders in America and even in foreign countries can certainly have some impact on US prices, but for the most part Leaders, like all of us, are subject to the irrefutable laws of supply and demand in a global economy that is inextricably linked.

The lie is not that prices have gone up, they certainly have around the global economy and gone up much worse in some other markets, the lie is that the President of the United States wether it is Joe Biden or Donald Trump is meaningfully responsible for it.

 

[4Waters]

What I have heard 2Chill state is that the prices of goods and services in a Republic with a political system of three equal branches combined with a capitalistic economy, are not set by the President despite some arguing that they are, but are set by market forces of supply and demand.

Leaders in America and even in foreign countries can certainly have some impact on US prices, but for the most part Leaders, like all of us, are subject to the irrefutable laws of supply and demand in a global economy that is inextricably linked.

The lie is not that prices have gone up, they certainly have around the global economy and gone up much worse in some other markets, the lie is that the President of the United States wether it is Joe Biden or Donald Trump is meaningfully responsible for it.

The president's policies effect prices and you know that's what is being said. Quit trolling kum-ala gobbler

 

[17 10 Flat]

The president's policies effect prices and you know that's what is being said. Quit trolling kum-ala gobbler

Let me help you out here. Don't reply to 529.5 as you noted he just trolls. Similar to a banned member. Regardless of how much sense or logic you produce he will just blabber some troll talk.

 

[wallnutz]

Damn you can paint a picture, probably a scratch and sniff too

 

[Mack]

Boys I sure would take a job in Trumps transition team and make the Chevron case a prime goal. I would help eliminate all the federal agencies and send all the power back to the states dooming the great swamp. If you don't like how your state is using the new power move to one you like. But you would never be forced to live under the power assuming federal government. However that dream will never happen, no way in hell is the swamp going to let Trump take the presidency

 

[wallnutz]

A shot at tongue punching her tuna gravy stench trench?

Damn you can paint a picture, probably a scratch and sniff too

Replied to the wrong post, but still

 

[fast99]

Boys I sure would take a job in Trumps transition team and make the Chevron case a prime goal. I would help eliminate all the federal agencies and send all the power back to the states dooming the great swamp. If you don't like how your state is using the new power move to one you like. But you would never be forced to live under the power assuming federal government. However that dream will never happen, no way in hell is the swamp going to let Trump take the presidency

Unfortunately, I think you are right. A legal or election trick or worse. Country won't do anything about it either, covid is a good example. I firmly believe that was a test to see how far they could push the country.

 

[Wizard29]

What I have heard 2Chill state is that the prices of goods and services in a Republic with a political system of three equal branches combined with a capitalistic economy, are not set by the President despite some arguing that they are, but are set by market forces of supply and demand.

Leaders in America and even in foreign countries can certainly have some impact on US prices, but for the most part Leaders, like all of us, are subject to the irrefutable laws of supply and demand in a global economy that is inextricably linked.

The lie is not that prices have gone up, they certainly have around the global economy and gone up much worse in some other markets, the lie is that the President of the United States wether it is Joe Biden or Donald Trump is meaningfully responsible for it.

You are correct in that the president does not directly control prices. But their policies do. Let's look at energy prices. Biden/Harris policies are exceptionally anti-energy and as a result, the prices went up.

Why did fuel prices shoot up almost immediately after Biden took office? Are we supposed to write that off as coincidence?

And as you well know, as energy prices go, so does the price of just about everything else.

So the President does influence the price of things to a significant degree. My example above disregards any other influences he could have independent of energy, so it gets even better.

While the president can help increase prices, the president can also help lower prices, which leads me to ask, what has the Biden/Harris administration done to lower prices?

Nothing.

 

[530RL]

You are correct in that the president does not directly control prices. But their policies do. Let's look at energy prices. Biden/Harris policies are exceptionally anti-energy and as a result, the prices went up.

Why did fuel prices shoot up almost immediately after Biden took office? Are we supposed to write that off as coincidence?

And as you well know, as energy prices go, so does the price of just about everything else.

So the President does influence the price of things to a significant degree. My example above disregards any other influences he could have independent of energy, so it gets even better.

While the president can help increase prices, the president can also help lower prices, which leads me to ask, what has the Biden/Harris administration done to lower prices?

Nothing.

The facts show that the increase in prices of crude are not in any way as large as the increases in the cost of refined products such as fuels.

So why has the cost of refined products gone up much more significantly than has the price of the direct input crude? I think we should be able to agree that it is due to worldwide demand versus worldwide supply as the world economy improved post Covid coupled with some government policies and private market decisions. Those government policies, not limited to the US include restrictions on certain countries such as Iran and Russia. Private market decisions include the largest consortium of producers which set lower supply production in order to balance supply and demand at higher prices as well as global energy companies that set exploration and refinery production to maximize profits. It is in their interest. Further, America, not as a result of the current government but as a result of private market decisions are producing recored crude and natural gas as well as record crude and natural gas exports out of America. And they are making these investment and production decisions based upon maximizing production given cuts in production by others. And if others jump in to increase supply and lower prices, I guarantee you that domestic production and export activity increases will slow or even reverse. Their incentives are not to produce at lower prices, just as none of us want prices to go down on the products we sell. They are simply responding to supply and demand and maximizing profits.

But to your point, since I admitted above that an administration can somewhat affect prices and inflation lets chat about two topics where government can significantly affect local domestic prices above global prices.

First is tariffs. When governments put on tariffs on foreign made goods, the local made goods go up in price roughly an equal amount of the tariff. That is what we have done in our construction supply businesses. The government raised prices via tariffs and although not subject to the tariffs, we raised our prices to the new price pocketing that additional margin. As would any good capitalist. Who pays that? The consumer in higher prices and a lower standard of living. Now to be fair and to your point, as an example this administrations continuation and increase in tariffs have affected the costs of inputs, particularly soft woods and most building materials impacting the cost of housing construction, housing repair, and housing improvements as well as the cost of commercial buildings used for manufacturing and distribution. And with those higher costs come pressure on other costs further increasing Inflation, an effect you pointed out with higher fuel costs. Now what Administration of the two is proposing a 25% tariff on every single imported good? And rationally and fairly, would you admit that those tariffs would lead to exactly what is being discussed here, higher costs and higher inflation.

Secondly a driver of inflation and cost increases that permeate the economy is a growth in government spending made even worse when it is deficit spending. Increased spending, especially deficit spending by government crowds out private consumers raising prices as well as devalues the currency of the local economy. How were the deficits in the last administration? The facts point out no different than now. And rationally and fairly, which administration is proposing higher deficit spending in the future with their proposed economic policies of the two candidates?

The Fiscal Impact of the Harris and Trump Campaign Plans | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Note: This analysis has been updated to incorporate new proposals announced by the candidates since we initially published on October 7.

www.crfb.org

My point being, if one wants to blame price pressure predominantly on government policy and not supply and demand, it isn’t just the current administration.

Now I’m not voting for either of these two big spending liberal candidates. Conservatives believe in smaller government, lower spending, balanced budgets and free markets over government intervention in markets. And neither of these two candidates are proposing that.

But if a majority of the states elect Trump and give me a nice juicy tax cut that will be paid for by their children and grandchildren they are free to do so. Now the same goes if they elect the D ticket although I probably will not get a juicy tax cut. But I will be fine regardless of the outcome. And my job is to make sure our group engages in private market activities consistent with an objective understanding of economics and win in the marketplace over those that believe their candidate is smarter than the laws of supply and demand and will save them. No candidate and no president is a panacea.

 

[4Waters]

The facts show that the increase in prices of crude are not in any way as large as the increases in the cost of refined products such as fuels.

So why has the cost of refined products gone up much more significantly than has the price of the direct input crude? I think we should be able to agree that it is due to worldwide demand versus worldwide supply as the world economy improved post Covid coupled with some government policies and private market decisions. Those government policies, not limited to the US include restrictions on certain countries such as Iran and Russia. Private market decisions include the largest consortium of producers which set lower supply production in order to balance supply and demand at higher prices as well as global energy companies that set exploration and refinery production to maximize profits. It is in their interest. Further, America, not as a result of the current government but as a result of private market decisions are producing recored crude and natural gas as well as record crude and natural gas exports out of America. And they are making these investment and production decisions based upon maximizing production given cuts in production by others. And if others jump in to increase supply and lower prices, I guarantee you that domestic production and export activity increases will slow or even reverse. Their incentives are not to produce at lower prices, just as none of us want prices to go down on the products we sell. They are simply responding to supply and demand and maximizing profits.

But to your point, since I admitted above that an administration can somewhat affect prices and inflation lets chat about two topics where government can significantly affect local domestic prices above global prices.

First is tariffs. When governments put on tariffs on foreign made goods, the local made goods go up in price roughly an equal amount of the tariff. That is what we have done in our construction supply businesses. The government raised prices via tariffs and although not subject to the tariffs, we raised our prices to the new price pocketing that additional margin. As would any good capitalist. Who pays that? The consumer in higher prices and a lower standard of living. Now to be fair and to your point, as an example this administrations continuation and increase in tariffs have affected the costs of inputs, particularly soft woods and most building materials impacting the cost of housing construction, housing repair, and housing improvements as well as the cost of commercial buildings used for manufacturing and distribution. And with those higher costs come pressure on other costs further increasing Inflation, an effect you pointed out with higher fuel costs. Now what Administration of the two is proposing a 25% tariff on every single imported good? And rationally and fairly, would you admit that those tariffs would lead to exactly what is being discussed here, higher costs and higher inflation.

Secondly a driver of inflation and cost increases that permeate the economy is a growth in government spending made even worse when it is deficit spending. Increased spending, especially deficit spending by government crowds out private consumers raising prices as well as devalues the currency of the local economy. How were the deficits in the last administration? The facts point out no different than now. And rationally and fairly, which administration is proposing higher deficit spending in the future with their proposed economic policies of the two candidates?

The Fiscal Impact of the Harris and Trump Campaign Plans | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Note: This analysis has been updated to incorporate new proposals announced by the candidates since we initially published on October 7.

www.crfb.org

My point being, if one wants to blame price pressure predominantly on government policy and not supply and demand, it isn’t just the current administration.

Now I’m not voting for either of these two big spending liberal candidates. Conservatives believe in smaller government, lower spending, balanced budgets and free markets over government intervention in markets. And neither of these two candidates are proposing that.

But if a majority of the states elect Trump and give me a nice juicy tax cut that will be paid for by their children and grandchildren they are free to do so. Now the same goes if they elect the D ticket although I probably will not get a juicy tax cut. But I will be fine regardless of the outcome. And my job is to make sure our group engages in private market activities consistent with an objective understanding of economics and win in the marketplace over those that believe their candidate is smarter than the laws of supply and demand and will save them. No candidate and no president is a panacea.

I know the answer but I don't want to give it to you because then you won't learn anything. Keep researching

 

[rmarion]

she/he/it does

 

[regor]

The facts show that the increase in prices of crude are not in any way as large as the increases in the cost of refined products such as fuels.

So why has the cost of refined products gone up much more significantly than has the price of the direct input crude? I think we should be able to agree that it is due to worldwide demand versus worldwide supply as the world economy improved post Covid coupled with some government policies and private market decisions. Those government policies, not limited to the US include restrictions on certain countries such as Iran and Russia. Private market decisions include the largest consortium of producers which set lower supply production in order to balance supply and demand at higher prices as well as global energy companies that set exploration and refinery production to maximize profits. It is in their interest. Further, America, not as a result of the current government but as a result of private market decisions are producing recored crude and natural gas as well as record crude and natural gas exports out of America. And they are making these investment and production decisions based upon maximizing production given cuts in production by others. And if others jump in to increase supply and lower prices, I guarantee you that domestic production and export activity increases will slow or even reverse. Their incentives are not to produce at lower prices, just as none of us want prices to go down on the products we sell. They are simply responding to supply and demand and maximizing profits.

But to your point, since I admitted above that an administration can somewhat affect prices and inflation lets chat about two topics where government can significantly affect local domestic prices above global prices.

First is tariffs. When governments put on tariffs on foreign made goods, the local made goods go up in price roughly an equal amount of the tariff. That is what we have done in our construction supply businesses. The government raised prices via tariffs and although not subject to the tariffs, we raised our prices to the new price pocketing that additional margin. As would any good capitalist. Who pays that? The consumer in higher prices and a lower standard of living. Now to be fair and to your point, as an example this administrations continuation and increase in tariffs have affected the costs of inputs, particularly soft woods and most building materials impacting the cost of housing construction, housing repair, and housing improvements as well as the cost of commercial buildings used for manufacturing and distribution. And with those higher costs come pressure on other costs further increasing Inflation, an effect you pointed out with higher fuel costs. Now what Administration of the two is proposing a 25% tariff on every single imported good? And rationally and fairly, would you admit that those tariffs would lead to exactly what is being discussed here, higher costs and higher inflation.

Secondly a driver of inflation and cost increases that permeate the economy is a growth in government spending made even worse when it is deficit spending. Increased spending, especially deficit spending by government crowds out private consumers raising prices as well as devalues the currency of the local economy. How were the deficits in the last administration? The facts point out no different than now. And rationally and fairly, which administration is proposing higher deficit spending in the future with their proposed economic policies of the two candidates?

The Fiscal Impact of the Harris and Trump Campaign Plans | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Note: This analysis has been updated to incorporate new proposals announced by the candidates since we initially published on October 7.

www.crfb.org

My point being, if one wants to blame price pressure predominantly on government policy and not supply and demand, it isn’t just the current administration.

Now I’m not voting for either of these two big spending liberal candidates. Conservatives believe in smaller government, lower spending, balanced budgets and free markets over government intervention in markets. And neither of these two candidates are proposing that.

But if a majority of the states elect Trump and give me a nice juicy tax cut that will be paid for by their children and grandchildren they are free to do so. Now the same goes if they elect the D ticket although I probably will not get a juicy tax cut. But I will be fine regardless of the outcome. And my job is to make sure our group engages in private market activities consistent with an objective understanding of economics and win in the marketplace over those that believe their candidate is smarter than the laws of supply and demand and will save them. No candidate and no president is a panacea.

Did Dave hurt yore feelings?

 

[Wizard29]

The facts show that the increase in prices of crude are not in any way as large as the increases in the cost of refined products such as fuels.

So why has the cost of refined products gone up much more significantly than has the price of the direct input crude? I think we should be able to agree that it is due to worldwide demand versus worldwide supply as the world economy improved post Covid coupled with some government policies and private market decisions. Those government policies, not limited to the US include restrictions on certain countries such as Iran and Russia. Private market decisions include the largest consortium of producers which set lower supply production in order to balance supply and demand at higher prices as well as global energy companies that set exploration and refinery production to maximize profits. It is in their interest. Further, America, not as a result of the current government but as a result of private market decisions are producing recored crude and natural gas as well as record crude and natural gas exports out of America. And they are making these investment and production decisions based upon maximizing production given cuts in production by others. And if others jump in to increase supply and lower prices, I guarantee you that domestic production and export activity increases will slow or even reverse. Their incentives are not to produce at lower prices, just as none of us want prices to go down on the products we sell. They are simply responding to supply and demand and maximizing profits.

But to your point, since I admitted above that an administration can somewhat affect prices and inflation lets chat about two topics where government can significantly affect local domestic prices above global prices.

First is tariffs. When governments put on tariffs on foreign made goods, the local made goods go up in price roughly an equal amount of the tariff. That is what we have done in our construction supply businesses. The government raised prices via tariffs and although not subject to the tariffs, we raised our prices to the new price pocketing that additional margin. As would any good capitalist. Who pays that? The consumer in higher prices and a lower standard of living. Now to be fair and to your point, as an example this administrations continuation and increase in tariffs have affected the costs of inputs, particularly soft woods and most building materials impacting the cost of housing construction, housing repair, and housing improvements as well as the cost of commercial buildings used for manufacturing and distribution. And with those higher costs come pressure on other costs further increasing Inflation, an effect you pointed out with higher fuel costs. Now what Administration of the two is proposing a 25% tariff on every single imported good? And rationally and fairly, would you admit that those tariffs would lead to exactly what is being discussed here, higher costs and higher inflation.

Secondly a driver of inflation and cost increases that permeate the economy is a growth in government spending made even worse when it is deficit spending. Increased spending, especially deficit spending by government crowds out private consumers raising prices as well as devalues the currency of the local economy. How were the deficits in the last administration? The facts point out no different than now. And rationally and fairly, which administration is proposing higher deficit spending in the future with their proposed economic policies of the two candidates?

The Fiscal Impact of the Harris and Trump Campaign Plans | Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget

Note: This analysis has been updated to incorporate new proposals announced by the candidates since we initially published on October 7.

www.crfb.org

My point being, if one wants to blame price pressure predominantly on government policy and not supply and demand, it isn’t just the current administration.

Now I’m not voting for either of these two big spending liberal candidates. Conservatives believe in smaller government, lower spending, balanced budgets and free markets over government intervention in markets. And neither of these two candidates are proposing that.

But if a majority of the states elect Trump and give me a nice juicy tax cut that will be paid for by their children and grandchildren they are free to do so. Now the same goes if they elect the D ticket although I probably will not get a juicy tax cut. But I will be fine regardless of the outcome. And my job is to make sure our group engages in private market activities consistent with an objective understanding of economics and win in the marketplace over those that believe their candidate is smarter than the laws of supply and demand and will save them. No candidate and no president is a panacea.

As far as tariffs go, yes, they are likely to increase the price of certain things temporarily. It will take a while for companies to ramp up production here to enough of a level that will offset what was being imported. And because the product is then "made in the USA" it may very well cost more because our labor costs more. However, combine this strategy with reduced regulatory restrictions, and the prices will stabilize. But overall, our economy and, in turn, our citizens will be better off. There should be exemptions for things that simply cannot be produced here, and I'd be surprised if that wasn't part of the plan.

The whole tariff situation is only one part of several strategies coming together to produce results that are good for all of us. Produce here = more jobs. Reduce regulation = easier to produce here. Reduce energy costs = cheaper to produce here. Close the border = more jobs for US citizens and less drain on our social systems.

We need to consider the alternative...just do nothing and keep letting other countries take advantage of us economically. How is that working out? Temporarily beneficial in terms of lower prices, but not good for our economy. Biden/Harris seem to want us to keep going down that path and have no strategy for meaningful change. Running on a platform of "joy" doesn't get things done.

As far as government spending, I'll agree both candidates spend far too much. But once again, Trump has a multi-faceted strategy that would ideally result in less spending or at least a balance between income and expenses eventually. Boost the economy, get most people working, increase that GDP, and now we can have a government that doesn't have to operate on a deficit, nor spend much money on citizens that don't produce because most of them are producing and taking care of themselves.

All Biden/Harris suggest is increasing taxes to try and increase their revenue when doing so will have the exact opposite effect. The more tax burden you put on businesses, the less likely they are to expand, less of them end up successful, less people end up being productive, and more government intervention (spending) is required to keep things afloat. It's baffling they do not see the destructive cycle. Or maybe they do?

You seem to suggest we have to choose the lesser of two evils. I'd agree with that. Trump isn't perfect by any means, but he is the lesser of the two evils. If you get that juicy tax cut, what will you do with it? I'd hope you reinvest it into your business and expand, thus creating jobs for the children and grandchildren to have. If you don't get that tax cut and your taxes go up, you won't be likely to expand and then the children and grandchildren may very well be unemployed.

Bottom line here is we saw fantastic results when Trump was in office. With Biden/Harris, things went into severe decline and now we're paying more for everything. We've had a taste of both flavors and I just can't see why anybody would want to continue the last 4 years.

Trump has far more business/economic experience and understands the ins and outs. He has the ability to turn things around. Harris has none of that experience and no plan. What attracts people to Harris? If they really understand the issues, nothing should.

 

[Chili Palmer]

Obama is out campaigning for KaMaLa saying she is change, but everything she says and does says she is more of Joe Biden, but in a pantsuit. If the people want change vote for Trump.

 

[530RL]

Bottom line here is we saw fantastic results when Trump was in office. With Biden/Harris, things went into severe decline and now we're paying more for everything. We've had a taste of both flavors and I just can't see why anybody would want to continue the last 4 years.

I understand your point that you are willing to trade higher prices and expanding deficits for hopeful better social outcomes under a second Trump administration. Your defense of higher prices and higher deficits above to achieve a desired political parties policies are certainly well explained trade-offs and those that different political parties argue all the time.

You are very good with data and with being rational so I wanted to focus on a part of your post.

Could you post the data that depicts this “steep decline”. Was it a steep reduction in GDP? A steep reduction in total jobs? A severe increase in unemployment? A severe drop in energy production? A severe drop in other economic activity?

I keep hearing this phrase “severe decline”. Can you depict the economic data that backs up this point.

I certainly understand that people don’t, as you say, ”feel” like the economy is doing as well. But can you point to the data showing this severe decline as an objective fact as opposed to a “feeling”?

 

[Wizard29]

I understand your point that you are willing to trade higher prices and expanding deficits for hopeful better social outcomes under a second Trump administration. Your defense of higher prices and higher deficits above to achieve a desired political parties policies are certainly well explained trade-offs and those that different political parties argue all the time.

Temporarily. There is a period of time required for correction of the path we've been on.

You are very good with data and with being rational so I wanted to focus on a part of your post.

Could you post the data that depicts this “steep decline”. Was it a steep reduction in GDP? A steep reduction in total jobs? A severe increase in unemployment? A severe drop in energy production? A severe drop in other economic activity?

I keep hearing this phrase “severe decline”. Can you depict the economic data that backs up this point.

I certainly understand that people don’t, as you say, ”feel” like the economy is doing as well. But can you point to the data showing this severe decline as an objective fact as opposed to a “feeling”?

Post number 15. Families are having a tough time because of that data. I'd call that severe.

 

[530RL]

Temporarily. There is a period of time required for correction of the path we've been on.



Post number 15. Families are having a tough time because of that data. I'd call that severe.

Inflation is down back to around 2.5%. I thought your view was that higher prices as a trade off are fine?

Economists have repeatedly agreed that these higher prices were a direct result of excess stimulus from both administrations response to Covid as well as supply disruptions as a result of the economic shutdown during the last administration, one that Biden was not in.

Going back to your original point, how is the price increases depicted in Post 15 solely a result of this administration and not a result of the response by both of the last two administrations as well global supply disruptions?

Further if the current administration is solely responsible, real wage growth has exceeded inflation for the last 12 months. Would that not be a positive indication?

Average wages have surpassed inflation for 12 straight months

Average hourly wage growth has exceeded inflation for 12 straight months, according to new Bureau of Labor Statistics data released this morning. This real (or inflation-adjusted) wage growth is a key indicator of how well the average worker’s wage can improve their standard of living. As...

www.epi.org

And if one wants to compare one to the other, both of which I think have delivered sub-par results, should we not look at all their economic outcomes equally, not just price increases?

Trump's Final Numbers - FactCheck.org

Statistical indicators of President Trump's four years in office.

www.factcheck.org

 

[regor]

Inflation is down back to around 2.5%. I thought your view was that higher prices as a trade off are fine?

Economists have repeatedly agreed that these higher prices were a direct result of excess stimulus from both administrations response to Covid as well as supply disruptions as a result of the economic shutdown during the last administration, one that Biden was not in.

Going back to your original point, how is the price increases depicted in Post 15 solely a result of this administration and not a result of the response by both of the last two administrations as well global supply disruptions?

Further if the current administration is solely responsible, real wage growth has exceeded inflation for the last 12 months. Would that not be a positive indication?

Average wages have surpassed inflation for 12 straight months

Average hourly wage growth has exceeded inflation for 12 straight months, according to new Bureau of Labor Statistics data released this morning. This real (or inflation-adjusted) wage growth is a key indicator of how well the average worker’s wage can improve their standard of living. As...

www.epi.org

And if one wants to compare one to the other, both of which I think have delivered sub-par results, should we not look at all their economic outcomes equally, not just price increases?

Trump's Final Numbers - FactCheck.org

Statistical indicators of President Trump's four years in office.

www.factcheck.org

hahahahahaha quoting BLS numbers are we?!!!!!!

The Bureau of Labor Statistics announced a preliminary downward revision of 818,000 jobs for 2024 on August 21, 2024. BLS published the draft results of its annual benchmarking exercise, which stated that employment gains were previously overstated by 818,000 through March of 2024.


This preliminary revision, should it hold up to the final revision announcement in February 2025, means that the estimates for job gains between March 2023 and March 2024 will be lowered, as will all the months since then for which BLS published employment numbers.


This is the biggest revision since 2009, when the Bureau reduced non-farm employment by 902,000.


Yore numbers are, were and always will be BULLSHIT!!!!!!

 

[Angler]

Maybe Dave can say 529.4 still has TDS.

 

[Racey]

Lol look who's back to write paragraphs of bullshit so that he can circle around his TDS....

"President doesn't have any control over that stuff" Then tells you it's all Trump's fault.... wait i thought the president doesn't have any control over it?

Economists say, economist say, economists say.... same economists that haven't gotten fuck all correct in the last 30 years

 

[Smitty7]

hahahahahaha quoting BLS numbers are we?!!!!!!

The Bureau of Labor Statistics announced a preliminary downward revision of 818,000 jobs for 2024 on August 21, 2024. BLS published the draft results of its annual benchmarking exercise, which stated that employment gains were previously overstated by 818,000 through March of 2024.


This preliminary revision, should it hold up to the final revision announcement in February 2025, means that the estimates for job gains between March 2023 and March 2024 will be lowered, as will all the months since then for which BLS published employment numbers.


This is the biggest revision since 2009, when the Bureau reduced non-farm employment by 902,000.


Yore numbers are, were and always will be BULLSHIT!!!!!!


View attachment 1438360

Stop. You're gonna make her cry. Remember these people don't have a sense of humor .

 

[Wizard29]

Inflation is down back to around 2.5%. I thought your view was that higher prices as a trade off are fine?

Economists have repeatedly agreed that these higher prices were a direct result of excess stimulus from both administrations response to Covid as well as supply disruptions as a result of the economic shutdown during the last administration, one that Biden was not in.

Going back to your original point, how is the price increases depicted in Post 15 solely a result of this administration and not a result of the response by both of the last two administrations as well global supply disruptions?

Further if the current administration is solely responsible, real wage growth has exceeded inflation for the last 12 months. Would that not be a positive indication?

Average wages have surpassed inflation for 12 straight months

Average hourly wage growth has exceeded inflation for 12 straight months, according to new Bureau of Labor Statistics data released this morning. This real (or inflation-adjusted) wage growth is a key indicator of how well the average worker’s wage can improve their standard of living. As...

www.epi.org

And if one wants to compare one to the other, both of which I think have delivered sub-par results, should we not look at all their economic outcomes equally, not just price increases?

Trump's Final Numbers - FactCheck.org

Statistical indicators of President Trump's four years in office.

www.factcheck.org

You are missing the point when I say price increases are fine. Temporary. Say you own a business that imports a product from China. Tariffs come along and make that no longer a great option. Restrictions here are also reduced, making it more attractive to produce the product here. It will take you time to adjust your operation to produce the product here, and in the meantime the product may run in shorter supply and/or you may have to pay the tariff until operations here are ready. Short term pain for long term prosperity. Chess, not checkers.

We are in a position where there is no easy and painless option. Unfortunately, that's the only kind of option people want any more and they don't understand why it's not possible.

For the rest of it, why do we see higher energy prices under Democrat administrations? Coincidence again? As energy goes, so the rest of prices go...

The D likes to tout Trump's 4 year total numbers as failure while leaving Covid out of the picture. Imagine if Covid hadn't happened. We were on a majorly positive track pre-Covid. It's really too bad that wasn't able to continue. And by the way, the economic shutdowns you mention were primarily Democrat driven. See CA versus Florida during that time. Most Republicans recognized Covid as the joke it was and wanted to keep things open. Democrats were the ones that wanted to mandate everybody run and hide, but that's a whole other debate.

So inflation is down, wages are up. Why are prices not coming down? Why are families still struggling to make it? What has this current administration done to solve the problem aside from making promises about what they will do if elected again, but apparently won't do now? Nothing. And with the current policies in place, there is no end in sight.

The positive indication we need to see is things being made affordable again and families seeing less financial struggles. That hasn't happened with this administration and we can blame Covid for that all we like, but it has been four years.

So we've looked at the data and know what happened...economic prosperity, then Covid, then economic difficulty...even long after Covid has ended. But what will happen now? What does Harris propose to change the course? Trump has a plan and it makes sense. Does Harris? All I see out of her plans are tax increases on corporations and the rich. We should know by now that trying to tax people into prosperity never works.

 

[Racey]

You are missing the point when I say price increases are fine. Temporary. Say you own a business that imports a product from China. Tariffs come along and make that no longer a great option. Restrictions here are also reduced, making it more attractive to produce the product here. It will take you time to adjust your operation to produce the product here, and in the meantime the product may run in shorter supply and/or you may have to pay the tariff until operations here are ready. Short term pain for long term prosperity. Chess, not checkers.

We are in a position where there is no easy and painless option. Unfortunately, that's the only kind of option people want any more and they don't understand why it's not possible.

For the rest of it, why do we see higher energy prices under Democrat administrations? Coincidence again? As energy goes, so the rest of prices go...

The D likes to tout Trump's 4 year total numbers as failure while leaving Covid out of the picture. Imagine if Covid hadn't happened. We were on a majorly positive track pre-Covid. It's really too bad that wasn't able to continue. And by the way, the economic shutdowns you mention were primarily Democrat driven. See CA versus Florida during that time. Most Republicans recognized Covid as the joke it was and wanted to keep things open. Democrats were the ones that wanted to mandate everybody run and hide, but that's a whole other debate.

So inflation is down, wages are up. Why are prices not coming down? Why are families still struggling to make it? What has this current administration done to solve the problem aside from making promises about what they will do if elected again, but apparently won't do now? Nothing. And with the current policies in place, there is no end in sight.

The positive indication we need to see is things being made affordable again and families seeing less financial struggles. That hasn't happened with this administration and we can blame Covid for that all we like, but it has been four years.

So we've looked at the data and know what happened...economic prosperity, then Covid, then economic difficulty...even long after Covid has ended. But what will happen now? What does Harris propose to change the course? Trump has a plan and it makes sense. Does Harris? All I see out of her plans are tax increases on corporations and the rich. We should know by now that trying to tax people into prosperity never works.

Lol don't get sucked into his bullshit, all of these points have been explained dozens of times over the last 8 years to this doofus. He just ignores it and posts some big pretzel.

He is a guy that only cares about extracting the absolute maximum amount of dollars and cents out of anything. It's just straight numbers. Doesn't matter if the long term effect of outsourcing all your manufacturing is to absolutely crush your nation and leave you with a population with no skills, and no ability to move forward and upward, if it makes a profit today, screw tomorrow, not my problem.

 

[17 10 Flat]

Lol don't get sucked into his bullshit, all of these points have been explained dozens of times over the last 8 years to this doofus. He just ignores it and posts some big pretzel.

He is a guy that only cares about extracting the absolute maximum amount of dollars and cents out of anything. It's just straight numbers. Doesn't matter if the long term effect of outsourcing all your manufacturing is to absolutely crush your nation and leave you with a population with no skills, and no ability to move forward and upward, if it makes a profit today, screw tomorrow, not my problem.

Here Here right the F on...

 

[530RL]

You are missing the point when I say price increases are fine. Temporary. Say you own a business that imports a product from China. Tariffs come along and make that no longer a great option. Restrictions here are also reduced, making it more attractive to produce the product here. It will take you time to adjust your operation to produce the product here, and in the meantime the product may run in shorter supply and/or you may have to pay the tariff until operations here are ready. Short term pain for long term prosperity. Chess, not checkers.

We are in a position where there is no easy and painless option. Unfortunately, that's the only kind of option people want any more and they don't understand why it's not possible.

For the rest of it, why do we see higher energy prices under Democrat administrations? Coincidence again? As energy goes, so the rest of prices go...

The D likes to tout Trump's 4 year total numbers as failure while leaving Covid out of the picture. Imagine if Covid hadn't happened. We were on a majorly positive track pre-Covid. It's really too bad that wasn't able to continue. And by the way, the economic shutdowns you mention were primarily Democrat driven. See CA versus Florida during that time. Most Republicans recognized Covid as the joke it was and wanted to keep things open. Democrats were the ones that wanted to mandate everybody run and hide, but that's a whole other debate.

So inflation is down, wages are up. Why are prices not coming down? Why are families still struggling to make it? What has this current administration done to solve the problem aside from making promises about what they will do if elected again, but apparently won't do now? Nothing. And with the current policies in place, there is no end in sight.

The positive indication we need to see is things being made affordable again and families seeing less financial struggles. That hasn't happened with this administration and we can blame Covid for that all we like, but it has been four years.

So we've looked at the data and know what happened...economic prosperity, then Covid, then economic difficulty...even long after Covid has ended. But what will happen now? What does Harris propose to change the course? Trump has a plan and it makes sense. Does Harris? All I see out of her plans are tax increases on corporations and the rich. We should know by now that trying to tax people into prosperity never works.

If inflation goes to zero, prices will not come down, they quit going up. In order for prices to come down, you need deflation. I think anyone with a basic economic understanding can agree that deflation would be very bad for the American economy.

With respect to tariffs on China, if one puts tariffs on China, it does not mean private organizations move manufacturing to the US, they move it to the next cheapest total cost place which may or may not be the US. That is what the consumer demands, lower prices. Walmart didn't get big because everyone want to shop at Max Retail. You will see tons of threads on here looking for the best deal, a hookup, the cheapest price. But I have never seen a thread where people say they want to pay the maximum amount they possibly can, to support their fellow American workers. One of the biggest threads in here is how to get media programming without paying; one can reasonably argue that is much worse than outsourcing for those workers. Companies move production wherever they can to lower their costs and satisfy the customer. Moving production is a total pain as I have done it, and no one wants to do it. But if we do not, we go out of business as our competitors beat us. The thought that the government should control production decisions of private enterprises via punitive taxes is antithetical to everything conservatives believe. It is right out of the Marxist playbook and a recipe for shortages, inflation and lack of choice for the consumer.

But I think we have beaten that to death and can agree to disagree that Trump is a Panacea and that a government under Trump will reverse the historical economic lessons that government intervention leads to worse outcomes than capitalism and free markets.

But you said something I would like to understand. You have indicated the Harris as Vice President is equally responsible and determinate for the severe economic collapse during this administration. Consistent with that, Pence would have been equally responsible and determinate for the outstanding economic results during the last administration. But this brings up a conundrum.

If the Vice President is equally responsible and determinate, why isn't Pence still on the ticket? How can the same results be delivered without a major part of the team? When Brady went to Tampa, Belicheck was exposed. Why will the loss of Pence not expose Trump? Or is one man the answer and we just need to sit back and let him fix it all?

 

[Racey]

If inflation goes to zero, prices will not come down, they quit going up. In order for prices to come down, you need deflation. I think anyone with a basic economic understanding can agree that deflation would be very bad for the American economy.

With respect to tariffs on China, if one puts tariffs on China, it does not mean private organizations move manufacturing to the US, they move it to the next cheapest total cost place which may or may not be the US. That is what the consumer demands, lower prices. Walmart didn't get big because everyone want to shop at Max Retail. You will see tons of threads on here looking for the best deal, a hookup, the cheapest price. But I have never seen a thread where people say they want to pay the maximum amount they possibly can, to support their fellow American workers. One of the biggest threads in here is how to get media programming without paying; one can reasonably argue that is much worse than outsourcing for those workers. Companies move production wherever they can to lower their costs and satisfy the customer. Moving production is a total pain as I have done it, and no one wants to do it. But if we do not, we go out of business as our competitors beat us. The thought that the government should control production decisions of private enterprises via punitive taxes is antithetical to everything conservatives believe. It is right out of the Marxist playbook and a recipe for shortages, inflation and lack of choice for the consumer.

But I think we have beaten that to death and can agree to disagree that Trump is a Panacea and that a government under Trump will reverse the historical economic lessons that government intervention leads to worse outcomes than capitalism and free markets.

But you said something I would like to understand. You have indicated the Harris as Vice President is equally responsible and determinate for the severe economic collapse during this administration. Consistent with that, Pence would have been equally responsible and determinate for the outstanding economic results during the last administration. But this brings up a conundrum.

If the Vice President is equally responsible and determinate, why isn't Pence still on the ticket? How can the same results be delivered without a major part of the team? When Brady went to Tampa, Belicheck was exposed. Why will the loss of Pence not expose Trump? Or is one man the answer and we just need to sit back and let him fix it all?

"This brings up a conundrum" no it doesn't.

It's only a conundrum to a feeble minded that can't understand the difference in the structure between the two administrations.

 

[17 10 Flat]

"This brings up a conundrum" no it doesn't.

It's only a conundrum to a feeble minded that can't understand the difference in the structure between the two administrations.

Just stop....529.5's moral compass if so F...ed up. Like you pointed out earlier if money continues to flow into his accounts, he cares not if children, the infirm or homeless people/slaves are creating his wealth. There is never enough.

 

[530RL]

"This brings up a conundrum" no it doesn't.

It's only a conundrum to a feeble minded that can't understand the difference in the structure between the two administrations.

LOL

You mean.......

Harris is completely responsible but Pence was a potted plant.

How so very convenient.

 

[Smitty7]

LOL

You mean.......

Harris is completely responsible but Pence was a potted plant.

How so very convenient.

So you went back to your boss and said even the owner knows you're full of shit but they told you to come back and try again ? Man, how much money they pay you to take a thrashing ?

 

[Racey]

LOL

You mean.......

Harris is completely responsible but Pence was a potted plant.

How so very convenient.

Lol your reductio ad absurdum and strawmen arguments might actually work if you didn't have a track record of being completely fucking wrong over and over and over again for the last 8 years.....

 

[530RL]

Lol your reductio ad absurdum and strawmen arguments might actually work if you didn't have a track record of being completely fucking wrong over and over and over again for the last 8 years.....

lol

Who is the duly elected President right now? Who controls the Senate right now?
Did your god repeal the ACA, build a wall, make Mexico pay for it, balance a budget, pay off the entire debt, increase manufacturing jobs, win re-election, deliver election victories in 18, 20 or 22?

Denial is the wrong river to be boating at there Abrie Krueger.

 

[thetub]

530 should change his username to "Nasdaq" friggin money before anything else....

 

[Racey]

lol

Who is the duly elected President right now? Who controls the Senate right now?
Did your god repeal the ACA, build a wall, make Mexico pay for it, balance a budget, pay off the entire debt, increase manufacturing jobs, win re-election, deliver election victories in 18, 20 or 22?

Denial is the wrong river to be boating at there Abrie Krueger.

Not a tree you wanna bark up little doggy. It was your god McCain that gave the thumbs down on the ACA repeal, after all the blow harding from the GOP he did exactly what he was known for, back stabbing his constituents.... nice try clown