8 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I guess you could say that. Usually when people serve up the condescending crap it is at least accurate and the condescension stems from personal issues or being a British "grammar school" elitist. I don't get the condescension and patronising when someone is so clearly wrong on the facts.

Care to identify what facts are incorrect and why? 

 

Also, which parts of my posts you replied to do you consider condescending?

10 minutes ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Heybruce = 9,000 posts.

 

UncleTouchyFingers = 200 posts. 

 

In basic simple math:

 

I do an excellent job of staying away. 

 

Its true though I do pop in here from time to time to have a look. I honestly don’t know of another place on the internet to find such an extreme collective of feelings based liberal group-think anywhere. 

 

Trump cant even fart without all of you going into full blown meltdown. 

 

It’s quite sad that obsessing over Trump has become some posters entire lives... Isn’t that right, Heybruce. 

9000 posts total over 12 years.  I don't know what each of our post counts are on this particular topic, but I suspect they are comparable.  However I don't post about how I hate the topic I'm posting on.

 

"Trump cant even fart without all of you going into full blown meltdown."

 

I don't recall any posts about Trump farts.  Can't you post about real things?

 

I have a good life independent of TV and Trump. However I don't mind spending a little time letting others know why Trump is a dangerous incompetent who shouldn't be in the White House.

2 hours ago, heybruce said:

Care to identify what facts are incorrect and why? 

 

Also, which parts of my posts you replied to do you consider condescending?

The main premise of your argument is "If you want to reduce the trade deficit, you need to reduce the US fiscal deficit." but you've got it the wrong way around. Corelation is not causation.

 

Budget deficits stem not from "consuming more than you produce", but collecting less in tax revenues less than you spend. Tax revenues stem from domestic activity that leads to taxable income; whether it be wages, corporate profits, capital gains or a host of other tax revenue spinners.

 

Reduced domestic activity leads to a smaller tax base especially if the greatest earners within that tax base are given too low of a tax rate. Reduced domestic activity, in part, stems from barriers to doing business in the US being too high or barriers to conducting trade overseas being too low. People cite the tradeoffs for this unholy bargain as being cheap goods for sale to the masses, but they never cite the unaccounted for costs in resource depletement, environmental degradation, the bolstering of totalitarian regimes, human rights abuses and domestic wealth inequality. That's all just a problem left for future generations to go to war over and suffer from.

 

That foreign countries buy our debt because they hold the currency with which we purchased goods from them is done in their own interest.

32 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

The main premise of your argument is "If you want to reduce the trade deficit, you need to reduce the US fiscal deficit." but you've got it the wrong way around. Corelation is not causation.

 

Budget deficits stem not from "consuming more than you produce", but collecting less in tax revenues less than you spend. Tax revenues stem from domestic activity that leads to taxable income; whether it be wages, corporate profits, capital gains or a host of other tax revenue spinners.

 

Reduced domestic activity leads to a smaller tax base especially if the greatest earners within that tax base are given too low of a tax rate. Reduced domestic activity, in part, stems from barriers to doing business in the US being too high or barriers to conducting trade overseas being too low. People cite the tradeoffs for this unholy bargain as being cheap goods for sale to the masses, but they never cite the unaccounted for costs in resource depletement, environmental degradation, the bolstering of totalitarian regimes, human rights abuses and domestic wealth inequality. That's all just a problem left for future generations to go to war over and suffer from.

 

That foreign countries buy our debt because they hold the currency with which we purchased goods from them is done in their own interest.

" The main premise of your argument is "If you want to reduce the trade deficit, you need to reduce the US fiscal deficit." but you've got it the wrong way around. Corelation is not causation."

 

I agree, correlation is not causation.  However definition does come close to causation.

 

By definition a deficit occurs when one consumes more than one produces, and borrows to cover the difference.  Collectively, as a nation, civilian and government borrowing has us in a deficit situation.  Civilian borrowing is largely covered internally, and what is one US citizen's (or business's) debt is another citizen's (or business's) investment in the form of a loan.  It is the US federal deficit that is funded by outside sources, using the money other countries earn from our trade deficit. 

 

Try to consider this from the macro level.  Once entities external to the US have US dollars from trading with us, they can do one of four things:

 

1.  Pass the dollars to another entity.  However eventually the dollars have to come back to where they work as currency.

 

2.  Invest in the US, which reduces the trade deficit.

 

3.  Buy from the US, which reduces the trade deficit.

 

4.  Buy US treasuries, which funds the federal deficit.

 

Option 4 is the only option that does not reduce the trade deficit.  By reducing or eliminating the federal budget deficit, one reduces the viability of option 4, shifting money to options that reduce the trade deficit. 

 

Tariffs and import quotas are misguided attempts to treat symptoms instead of the cause--so long as the nation, as a whole, is funding its deficits through foreign borrowing there will be a trade deficit.  Our trade deficit is where the foreigners get the money to invest in our treasuries.

 

Obviously the details get fiendishly complicated:  The US dollar is the default currency in a number of countries, the massive federal deficit will provide options for buying new treasuries as older treasuries mature even if the annual deficit is eliminated, money supply is not a fixed quantity, etc. 

 

However the basic fact remains--the US as a whole is in a deficit situation because the federal government is borrowing to pay its bills rather than living within its means.  This borrowing provides the option for those who have a trade surplus with the US to invest the surplus in a manner, buying treasuries, that does not reduce the US trade deficit or endanger their trade surplus.

 

Basic economic logic states that the time to reduce or eliminate deficit spending is when the economy is strong, as it is now.  However Trump and friends prefer to increase deficit spending because it buys political popularity until the next election, and there is always a next election.  Worse, they are not using the deficit spending to improve US infrastructure and improve the nation's productive capability.  This is bad for the economic future of the US, and bad for the trade deficit.

 

Once again, please tell me how my facts and logic are wrong, or identify what is condescending about the reasoning.

Analysis: Tax cuts, spending to raise deficit to $1T by 2019

The report paints an unrelentingly bleak picture of federal deficits, which would permanently breach the $1 trillion mark in 2020 unless Congress stems the burst of red ink. The government would borrow about 19 cents of every dollar it spends this year. Deficits would grow to $1.5 trillion by 2028 — and could exceed $2 trillion if the tax cuts are fully extended and if Washington doesn't cut spending.

https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/analysis-tax-cuts-spending-raise-180225906.html

4 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

 

Heybruce = 9,000 posts.

 

UncleTouchyFingers = 200 posts. 

 

In basic simple math:

 

I do an excellent job of staying away. 

 

Its true though I do pop in here from time to time to have a look. I honestly don’t know of another place on the internet to find such an extreme collective of feelings based liberal group-think anywhere. 

 

Trump cant even fart without all of you going into full blown meltdown. 

 

It’s quite sad that obsessing over Trump has become some posters entire lives... Isn’t that right, Heybruce. 

Quote

Its true though I do pop in here from time to time to have a look. I honestly don’t know of another place on the internet to find such an extreme collective of feelings based liberal group-think anywhere. 

Ever tried Fox News, Infowars or Breitbart?

1 hour ago, heybruce said:

" The main premise of your argument is "If you want to reduce the trade deficit, you need to reduce the US fiscal deficit." but you've got it the wrong way around. Corelation is not causation."

 

I agree, correlation is not causation.  However definition does come close to causation.

 

By definition a deficit occurs when one consumes more than one produces, and borrows to cover the difference.  Collectively, as a nation, civilian and government borrowing has us in a deficit situation.  Civilian borrowing is largely covered internally, and what is one US citizen's (or business's) debt is another citizen's (or business's) investment in the form of a loan.  It is the US federal deficit that is funded by outside sources, using the money other countries earn from our trade deficit. 

 

Try to consider this from the macro level.  Once entities external to the US have US dollars from trading with us, they can do one of four things:

 

1.  Pass the dollars to another entity.  However eventually the dollars have to come back to where they work as currency.

 

2.  Invest in the US, which reduces the trade deficit.

 

3.  Buy from the US, which reduces the trade deficit.

 

4.  Buy US treasuries, which funds the federal deficit.

 

Option 4 is the only option that does not reduce the trade deficit.  By reducing or eliminating the federal budget deficit, one reduces the viability of option 4, shifting money to options that reduce the trade deficit. 

 

Tariffs and import quotas are misguided attempts to treat symptoms instead of the cause--so long as the nation, as a whole, is funding its deficits through foreign borrowing there will be a trade deficit.  Our trade deficit is where the foreigners get the money to invest in our treasuries.

 

Obviously the details get fiendishly complicated:  The US dollar is the default currency in a number of countries, the massive federal deficit will provide options for buying new treasuries as older treasuries mature even if the annual deficit is eliminated, money supply is not a fixed quantity, etc. 

 

However the basic fact remains--the US as a whole is in a deficit situation because the federal government is borrowing to pay its bills rather than living within its means.  This borrowing provides the option for those who have a trade surplus with the US to invest the surplus in a manner, buying treasuries, that does not reduce the US trade deficit or endanger their trade surplus.

 

Basic economic logic states that the time to reduce or eliminate deficit spending is when the economy is strong, as it is now.  However Trump and friends prefer to increase deficit spending because it buys political popularity until the next election, and there is always a next election.  Worse, they are not using the deficit spending to improve US infrastructure and improve the nation's productive capability.  This is bad for the economic future of the US, and bad for the trade deficit.

 

Once again, please tell me how my facts and logic are wrong, or identify what is condescending about the reasoning.

 

I think somewhere along the way you got the impression that I was indifferent to budget deficits and increasing national debt. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am what is termed a "deficit hawk" and if I could wave a magic wand I'd institutute a constitutional amendment requiring  balanced federal budgets, just like the vast majority of states have either by statute or constitutionally.

 

The difference is you have just woken up to this need for fiscal responsibility. When the National Debt doubled in the last 8 years from what it was cumulatively over the preceding 232 years I didn't hear a word out of you. NOW, because the crook you wanted to be elected president was beat by another crook it's the worst thing ever. Well, it's always been the worst thing ever, and it isn't just impacting our economy but it is impacting the social fabric. We Baby Boomers and the generation that preceeded us are the most selfish, destructive generation since at least the Great Depression and probably the Civil War. We have not been good stewards of our nation or its economy and we have made the lives of future generations that much more difficult. Rationalize it any way you like.

 

I envy you guys that only wake up to all the ways we've screwed up the lives of future generations when the party you didn't vote for is in power. That's only about half the time. Not bad. For me, I get to see it whoever you short sighted folks choose to elect.

8 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

I swear, this thread has got to be the biggest lefty/liberal echo-chamber I’ve ever seen. 

 

Literal doom and gloom end-of-days rhetoric barfed up in here page after page after page. 

Well I don't think you will find the feelings of doom and gloom are going to be misplaced.

 

Two interactions on Monday could well lead to a very bad outcome for many young men and women and their families.

I don't think rhetoric like this has been exchanged between Russia and the US in  50 years.

 

Quote

Syria 'chemical attack': Russia and US in fierce row at UN

Quote

Russian representative Vassily Nebenzia said the incident in Douma was staged and that US military action in response could have "grave repercussions".

US envoy Nikki Haley said Russia - a Syrian military backer - had the "blood of Syrian children" on its hands.

 

Mr Nebenzia, presenting Russia's case that rebels in Douma staged the event for their own ends, painted the incident and its fallout as part of a US-led effort to hurt Russia with a "broad arsenal of methods", including slander, insults and "hawkish rhetoric".

 

"Armed force under mendacious pretext against Syria, where, at the request of the legitimate government of a country, Russian troops have been deployed, could lead to grave repercussions," he said.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-43706579

Now I wonder what Bolton will be saying to Trump now? The Russian 'line in the sand' is now as serious as Trump's line in the sand. I don't think Trump will be headed for Mara largo this weekend - more like Cheyenne Mountain!

 

If you tie the above in with the following other remarkable event yesterday then I have no doubt that Trump's mind will be on starting a major conflict and trying to distract people from his own personal failings and corruption.

 

Quote

F.B.I. Raids Office of Trump’s Longtime Lawyer Michael Cohen; Trump Calls It ‘Disgraceful’

Quote

The F.B.I. raided the office and hotel room of President Trump’s longtime personal lawyer, Michael D. Cohen, on Monday, seizing business records, emails and documents related to several topics, including payments to a pornographic film actress.

Federal prosecutors in Manhattan are investigating Mr. Cohen for possible bank fraud, and the documents identified in the warrant date back years, according to a person briefed on the search.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/us/politics/fbi-raids-office-of-trumps-longtime-lawyer-michael-cohen.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

 

The writing is on the wall and Trump is now in a very tight corner. He promises action against Syria, and the FBI now have confidential communications between him and Cohen. Get your popcorn - and 6 months supply of food.

 

With the words against Russia about Syria and the ferocity of the exchange at the UN, I wouldn't be surprised to see the Moscow pee pee tapes appear soon.

 

Trump needs to go today! Not even in 3 years - today, before the damage and consequences are irreversible.

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

The difference is you have just woken up to this need for fiscal responsibility. When the National Debt doubled in the last 8 years from what it was cumulatively over the preceding 232 years I didn't hear a word out of you.

Well as the previous administration had to pay for the most expensive war in the last 232 years then the National Debt increase was hardly surprising. All said and done Bush left the US economy in tatters and Obama pulled it all back. Like him or hate him that is a fact.

 

1 hour ago, lannarebirth said:

We Baby Boomers and the generation that preceeded us are the most selfish, destructive generation since at least the Great Depression and probably the Civil War. We have not been good stewards of our nation or its economy and we have made the lives of future generations that much more difficult

The most honest and accurate words on TV at the moment. Thank you.

 

Mueller closing in even closer to "trump." "trump" is freaking out big time. "trump" maybe firing Mueller is back in play. Stay tuned (we all will).

 

Quote

 

Michael Cohen is in serious legal jeopardy. That’s a really bad sign for Trump.

...

Cohen, someone extremely close to Trump and who has been known as the president’s “fixer,” appears to have serious legal problems. If federal prosecutors feel they have enough on you to execute a search warrant, it’s never a good sign — just ask Paul Manafort. And to the extent that Cohen, part of Trump’s innermost circle, might have knowledge relevant to Mueller’s inquiry, we can’t rule out the possibility that his own legal troubles could induce him to cooperate in the Russia investigation.

 

 

 

http://www.paywallnews.com/life/Opinion-|-Michael-Cohen-is-in-serious-legal-jeopardy--That’s-a-really-bad-sign-for-Trump-.H1gR4cFiz.html

11 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

I swear, this thread has got to be the biggest lefty/liberal echo-chamber I’ve ever seen. 

 

Literal doom and gloom end-of-days rhetoric barfed up in here page after page after page. 

Heaven help them they have no life

8 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I think somewhere along the way you got the impression that I was indifferent to budget deficits and increasing national debt. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am what is termed a "deficit hawk" and if I could wave a magic wand I'd institutute a constitutional amendment requiring  balanced federal budgets, just like the vast majority of states have either by statute or constitutionally.

 

The difference is you have just woken up to this need for fiscal responsibility. When the National Debt doubled in the last 8 years from what it was cumulatively over the preceding 232 years I didn't hear a word out of you. NOW, because the crook you wanted to be elected president was beat by another crook it's the worst thing ever. Well, it's always been the worst thing ever, and it isn't just impacting our economy but it is impacting the social fabric. We Baby Boomers and the generation that preceeded us are the most selfish, destructive generation since at least the Great Depression and probably the Civil War. We have not been good stewards of our nation or its economy and we have made the lives of future generations that much more difficult. Rationalize it any way you like.

 

I envy you guys that only wake up to all the ways we've screwed up the lives of future generations when the party you didn't vote for is in power. That's only about half the time. Not bad. For me, I get to see it whoever you short sighted folks choose to elect.

First you pronounce my posts as being completely false.  When I explain my logic in detail, you don't refute the logic, you change the subject. 

 

I have been a deficit hawk since Reagan.  I understand that when the economy is slow and needs stimulus that deficit spending is sometimes a useful tool, and I understand that when the federal debt is increasing at a rate slower than the economy is growing that it isn't too bad. I don't complain about the deficit then.  I also don't complain too much about the deficit when it is shrinking, as it was during most of the Obama years.

 

However I do speak out when large, unaffordable tax cuts are put in place when the economy is doing nicely.  That is when deficits should be cut.  That is a favorite trick of the Republicans; in fact they rely on it so much I sometimes refer to them as a one-trick party.  I also point out the hypocrisy of Republicans going from vocal deficit hawks when there is a Democrat in the White House to "deficit don't matter" spending maniacs when they control the White House.

 

Tax reform was, and still is, desperately needed.  Trump's tax cuts, touted as reform, didn't do the job.  They will just lead to trillion dollar deficits for the indefinite future.

Heaven help them they have no life [emoji2]

Heaven help Americans that don't realize the threat posed by "trump" and that enough people do something about it before it's too late.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

Judge finalizes $25 million for 'victims of Donald Trump's fraudulent university'

 

Trump University attendees are getting paid back.

 

A federal judge in the Southern District of California on Monday finalized a $25 million settlement to be paid to attendees of the now-defunct real estate seminar called Trump University.

Judge Gonzalo Curiel's decision came after an appeals court rejected arguments from a Florida woman who attended Trump University and said she wanted to pursue a separate lawsuit.

New York Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman called the settlement a victory for Trump U. "victims."

 

http://abc7news.com/3321421/

 

 

17 hours ago, Neeranam said:

You are obsessed. Acceptance is the key if you dislike getting beat in the election. Nobody likes a sore loser.

 

 

Yep I agree. I'm accepting 45 like you accepted 44.

5 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Heaven help Americans that don't realize the threat posed by "trump" and that enough people do something about it before it's too late.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app
 

I'm sick of your personal witch hunt.

 

I assume you mean citizens of the USA, who voted the man into office.

 

 

 

 

4 hours ago, mikebike said:

Yep I agree. I'm accepting 45 like you accepted 44.

No idea what you mean. I wasn't even addressing you.

9 hours ago, meechai said:

Heaven help them they have no life

They remind me of my kids having a tantrum when they didn't get what the wanted so badly. They are dividing the USA by thinking they are in some way more intelligent than those who saw the truth about Hillary Clinton. The REFUSE to have a rational debate

I seriously think they are acting so irrationally due to the fact that they are still in shock, after Hilary lost.

Winning! Shall we compare the start of the first full year-to-date investment in the Dow between Obama (2010) and the reality TV President (2018)?

 

Let's say if someone invested $10,000 in a DOW index fund at the Jan 1st of 2010 compared to Jan 1st of 2018:

 

2010 Dow:
Invest Jan 1st, 2010 - $10000
Investment as of Apr 9, 2010 - $10,546
Gain of $546

 

2018 Dow:
Invest Jan 1st, 2018 - $10000
Investment as of Apr 9, 2018 - $9700
Loss of $300

 

DOH! Just got to love those new WH policies!

 

 

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

They remind me of my kids having a tantrum when they didn't get what the wanted so badly. They are dividing the USA by thinking they are in some way more intelligent than those who saw the truth about Hillary Clinton. The REFUSE to have a rational debate

I seriously think they are acting so irrationally due to the fact that they are still in shock, after Hilary lost.

We refuse to have a rational debate? 

 

Pick any of my posts about Trump.  I recently posted a few about how the trade deficit will not go away while the US has to borrow (sell treasuries) to foreign buyers to fund its trillion dollar deficits.  Do you want to debate that?

 

If not, pick any of my other posts.  I'll be happy to have a rational debate.  I've been unable to drag any of the MAGA crowd into anything resembling a rational, evidence based debate about Trump.

2 minutes ago, heybruce said:

We refuse to have a rational debate? 

 

Pick any of my posts about Trump.  I recently posted a few about how the trade deficit will not go away while the US has to borrow (sell treasuries) to foreign buyers to fund its trillion dollar deficits.  Do you want to debate that?

 

If not, pick any of my other posts.  I'll be happy to have a rational debate.  I've been unable to drag any of the MAGA crowd into anything resembling a rational, evidence based debate about Trump.

Yep. Impossible to really talk to people whose main talking points are MAGA!, KAG!, and how we should be so proud to have such a great man leading us. No there there. 

15 minutes ago, heybruce said:

We refuse to have a rational debate? 

 

Pick any of my posts about Trump.  I recently posted a few about how the trade deficit will not go away while the US has to borrow (sell treasuries) to foreign buyers to fund its trillion dollar deficits.  Do you want to debate that?

 

If not, pick any of my other posts.  I'll be happy to have a rational debate.  I've been unable to drag any of the MAGA crowd into anything resembling a rational, evidence based debate about Trump.

What makes you think I was talking about you?

5 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

What makes you think I was talking about you?

Weren't you talking about people who recognize that Trump is an unqualified incompetent and a threat to the country?

11 hours ago, Jingthing said:

Mueller closing in even closer to "trump." "trump" is freaking out big time. "trump" maybe firing Mueller is back in play. Stay tuned (we all will).

 

 

 

http://www.paywallnews.com/life/Opinion-|-Michael-Cohen-is-in-serious-legal-jeopardy--That’s-a-really-bad-sign-for-Trump-.H1gR4cFiz.html

What is this, an anti Trump spewing thread?

Stay on topic please.

There are two or three continually doing this.

Please close the thread, add it just is so one sided and biased now.

 

 

4 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Weren't you talking about people who recognize that Trump is an unqualified incompetent and a threat to the country?

No.

2 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

What is this, an anti Trump spewing thread?

Stay on topic please.

There are two or three continually doing this.

Please close the thread, add it just is so one sided and biased now.

 

 

I take it you don't want to have a rational debate about Trump, his lack of qualifications, his lack of interest in learning the job, his shady financial dealings, his habit of surrounding himself with advisers who run afoul of the law, his lack of legislative achievements other than a deficit exploding tax cut for the rich....

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

They remind me of my kids having a tantrum when they didn't get what the wanted so badly. They are dividing the USA by thinking they are in some way more intelligent than those who saw the truth about Hillary Clinton. The REFUSE to have a rational debate

I seriously think they are acting so irrationally due to the fact that they are still in shock, after Hilary lost.

 

12 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

What makes you think I was talking about you?

 

6 minutes ago, heybruce said:

Weren't you talking about people who recognize that Trump is an unqualified incompetent and a threat to the country?

 

2 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

No.

Are you sure?

On 3/18/2018 at 12:32 AM, Jingthing said:

I get it. Even if he's guilty, you don't care. Decent Americans must continue to RESIST such blind loyalty to the authoritarian demagogue in the oval. Rosenstein may be fired. Mueller may be fired. But that will not stop the resistance to the evil rot at the top known as "trump."

The democrats did not care about Clinton corruption, bribery. nor rape. I was in Chi in 67 or 68 when Mayor daily was killing protesters. 

11 minutes ago, The manic said:

The democrats did not care about Clinton corruption, bribery. nor rape. I was in Chi in 67 or 68 when Mayor daily was killing protesters. 

But, but, but....Clinton!  And rather fanciful Clinton stuff at that.  The Clintons are the most investigated first family in history.  With the exception of Bill Clinton lying about a BJ, there have been no charges and no out of court settlements.

 

In other words, you are spreading unsubstantiated accusations.  You don't want to make this thread about accusations, accusations against Trump are endless.

But, but, but....Clinton!  And rather fanciful Clinton stuff at that.  The Clintons are the most investigated first family in history.  With the exception of Bill Clinton lying about a BJ, there have been no charges and no out of court settlements.
 
In other words, you are spreading unsubstantiated accusations.  You don't want to make this thread about accusations, accusations against Trump are endless.

Yes and Hillary is totally irrelevant now except to desperate "trump" supporters who need some stupid thing to harp about to try to avoid the inevitable massacre of the r party in the midterms.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app