Trump Administration Predictions (3 Viewers)

[Pat Hartman]

Just as is the case with Republicans when the Democrats win. Isn't that how politics works these days?

Your view is one sided and biased. Which side is the one making the false accusations and propagating the lies? Most Republicans still draw the line at outright lies and trying to rile crazy people up into killing their opponents by calling them Hitler and racist, etc.

What host on the View was forced yesterday to walk back her lies about Matt Gaetz yesterday morning? Her legal department forced the public recitation of actual facts which totally contradict the lies she was repeatedly spreading. I'm guessing we will be seeing more of this as Republicans start bringing lawsuits when lies are spread about them over the public airways. It is very difficult for public figures to win because of the silly difference in the "intent" of the lie but sometimes intent becomes obvious and so the lawsuits are winnable.

 

[Thales750]

I think Trump will do very little with tariffs and all of people's paranoia about it will be for naught. He will use it as a negotiating tool, as he should, but perhaps not much else than that. Or he will experiment briefly and then quit.

Thank you. My next prediction was that his people will deflect his words and actions, just like they always have.
He may fail in implementing the tariffs, but only because Congress probably has an average IQ above 100.
He visited significant damage to steel last time by adding tariffs to "supply chain" specialty steel. Maybe we should add tariffs to petrolium while we're at it.
He continously demonstrates that understanding how to cheat contractors, misleading lenders, and using the podium to rent out his personal properties is not analogous to comprehending global macro economics.

 

[Isaac]

Thank you. My next prediction was that his people will deflect his words and actions, just like they always have.
He may fail in implementing the tariffs, but only because Congress probably has an average IQ above 100.
He visited significant damage to steel last time by adding tariffs to "supply chain" specialty steel. Maybe we should add tariffs to petrolium while we're at it.
He continously demonstrates that understanding how to cheat contractors, misleading lenders, and using the podium to rent out his personal properties is analogous to comprehending global macro economics.

So while you say I'm deflecting in suggesting he may not implement them, you deflect by hedging your bets - Well I'll be right because he still tried.

Okay.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Many people believe government cash injections causes inflation. The reality is unemployment levels are a much larger contributing factor.

Based on the idea that credit lines are a way of creating virtual money (money not really printed but the bank acts like it was), inflation can occur when people take out loans and then default on them. Money's value is exercised only when it is flowing, i.e. being used. Damage is done when the virtual money gets spent but nothing is returned to show for it.

Consider, for example, Papa Joe's attempt to forgive student loan debts when the money has been spent but the original debt will not be repaid. Once that virtual money has been spent, you cannot just remove it from the books. The "virtual hole" represented by an unpaid loan results in some money not being provided elsewhere... like maybe the bank's stock dividends aren't so good this quarter due to that bad debt bubbling down to the bottom line. You can't just wipe out debt once it has entered the economy. It WILL pop up elsewhere.

Deficit spending is another example of an expenditure not balanced with offsetting income. The money subsidizing the illegal immigrants is another example of Papa Joe's economic disaster. If you want to call that a "government cash injection" then I won't dispute you.

Unemployment DOES NOT contribute to inflation. Unemployment is free. But government unemployment benefits paid to people who don't provide value back into the economy do significantly contribute to inflation. Some might think my take is heartless - but mathematical theories frequently ARE heartless. Doesn't mean they are wrong.

 

[Thales750]

So while you say I'm deflecting in suggesting he may not implement them, you deflect by hedging your bets - Well I'll be right because he still tried.

Okay.

My bet says, that if he has his way, he will enact tariffs that will damage the economy, just like he did in his practice run. Sadly, the only lessons he learned at rehearsal was how to expand the reach of his lies.

 

[Thales750]

Based on the idea that credit lines are a way of creating virtual money (money not really printed but the bank acts like it was), inflation can occur when people take out loans and then default on them. Money's value is exercised only when it is flowing, i.e. being used. Damage is done when the virtual money gets spent but nothing is returned to show for it.

Consider, for example, Papa Joe's attempt to forgive student loan debts when the money has been spent but the original debt will not be repaid. Once that virtual money has been spent, you cannot just remove it from the books. The "virtual hole" represented by an unpaid loan results in some money not being provided elsewhere... like maybe the bank's stock dividends aren't so good this quarter due to that bad debt bubbling down to the bottom line. You can't just wipe out debt once it has entered the economy. It WILL pop up elsewhere.

Deficit spending is another example of an expenditure not balanced with offsetting income. The money subsidizing the illegal immigrants is another example of Papa Joe's economic disaster. If you want to call that a "government cash injection" then I won't dispute you.

Unemployment DOES NOT contribute to inflation. Unemployment is free. But government unemployment benefits paid to people who don't provide value back into the economy do significantly contribute to inflation. Some might think my take is heartless - but mathematical theories frequently ARE heartless. Doesn't mean they are wrong.

Over-employment is the biggest contributor to inflation in the US economy. We have the only non-fiat currency in the world. They call that the Reserve Currency. All other currency is based on it. The US Dollar is 100% backed up by an actual resource.

The last time we had inflation in our economy was back in the 70s early 80s. That inflation was one hundred percent caused by over employment. And it was ultimately controlled by a multiple of solutions, some of which were implemented during Carter's term, others during Regan's. Regan got all the credit. In truth Regan's fixes came from Alan Greenspan, whereas Carters were by direct Presidential order.

Steel Tariffs

That started it all right there. The end of Inflation in the US economy.

However, as we have seen since then, corporate greed and political lust for power has evolved this temporary solution into one of the main factors in the transfer of wealth away from the middle class to the upper class.

Now Brainless, (that would be head of Trumpland) on the hangover from the highest inflation since the 70s wants to implement the very thing that was the main contributor to the inflation.

I also agree that people volunteering to not work can have an inflationary effect. I need to think about that for a while though.

 

[Thales750]

Your view is one sided and biased. Which side is the one making the false accusations and propagating the lies? Most Republicans still draw the line at outright lies and trying to rile crazy people up into killing their opponents by calling them Hitler and racist, etc.

Maybe some of them do. Unfortunately, you are currently unqualified to detect Conservative Lies. You have been feeding on them for too long now.
I'm betting you were a fan of Rush Limbaugh, and earlier you repeated the tag line of Fox News. Calling them Fair and Balanced. And I know you believe that.

 

[Steve R.]

The US Dollar is 100% backed up by an actual resource.

Please identify the US dollar's "actual resource"?
It is not backed by a real physical resource such as gold. So what is it?

 

[Pat Hartman]

The US Dollar is 100% backed up by an actual resource.

Since when? We've been off the gold standard since 1933 and Nixon removed what remained of it in 1971.

We have the only non-fiat currency in the world.

No, we don't. That's backwards. What planet do you live on?

"The gold standard was completely replaced by fiat money, a term to describe currency that is used because of a government's order, or fiat, that the currency must be accepted as a means of payment. In the U.S., for instance, the dollar is fiat money, and in Nigeria, the naira is."

PS Fox news calls itself "fair and balanced". They are liars. There is nothing fair or balanced about Fox and there hasn't been for many years. Fox was instructing all the talking heads to pan Trump back last year when he first announced. Even Stuart Varney jumped on that bandwagon so his was the last Fox program that I tuned out.

 

[Thales750]

Since when? We've been off the gold standard since 1933 and Nixon removed what remained of it in 1971.

No, we don't. That's backwards. What planet do you live on?

"The gold standard was completely replaced by fiat money, a term to describe currency that is used because of a government's order, or fiat, that the currency must be accepted as a means of payment. In the U.S., for instance, the dollar is fiat money, and in Nigeria, the naira is."

PS Fox news calls itself "fair and balanced". They are liars. There is nothing fair or balanced about Fox and there hasn't been for many years. Fox was instructing all the talking heads to pan Trump back last year when he first announced. Even Stuart Varney jumped on that bandwagon so his was the last Fox program that I tuned out.

Gold is the ultimate Fiat. It's value is purely perceived.
Oil on the other hand, is the real value of currency.
How does gold get its value?

 

[Pat Hartman]

Can't you ever admit being wrong? A hard currency has hard assets backing it. We have none. The world is expected to trust us to not default. However, even we can fail if we persist in trying to spend ourselves into oblivion.

Our money never said anything about oil. It used to mention silver. I'm not old enough to know if it ever mentioned gold or if that was just understood.

Gold gets its value by mutual consent. Our problem in 1971 was that we wanted to inflate the "value" of a dollar and $35 per ounce wasn't cutting it anymore.

 

[Thales750]

Can't you ever admit being wrong? A hard currency has hard assets backing it. We have none. The world is expected to trust us to not default. However, even we can fail if we persist in trying to spend ourselves into oblivion.

Our money never said anything about oil. It used to mention silver. I'm not old enough to know if it ever mentioned gold or if that was just understood.

Gold gets its value by mutual consent. Our problem in 1971 was that we wanted to inflate the "value" of a dollar and $35 per ounce wasn't cutting it anymore.

That's your answer? You just said that Gold gets its value from MUTUAL consent. Oil get its value from what you can do with it. The dollar has been on the Oil standards since the Saudis (1974) unofficially made the Dollar the only accepted trade currency for Crude Oil. The US kept the Soviet Bear off their shores, and Saudi Arabia, and OPEC, made the Dollar the Global Reserve Currency. This created a non-fiat standard for the Dollar.
Oil is a "hard asset" with real value in a real world.

Gold does not have a real value. You said so yourself.

If you want to learn more about this concept do some history studies of what happened to the Spanish Economy after they looted South America of it gems and gold. Than compare that to The British Empire during that same time period.

Spain's economy was based on the FIAT of Gold and Silver, whereas England's was based on the value of the trade goods, and the increased value (value added) of the manufactured product.

You really need to stop listening to the Conservative Great Lies. There is no such thing as trickle down economy.

As far as spending ourselves into oblivion, what do you think the answer to that is?

 

[Thales750]

Please identify the US dollar's "actual resource"?
It is not backed by a real physical resource such as gold. So what is it?

Oil. I've answered some of Pat's rebuttals in the previous posts.

 

[AccessBlaster]

So we should drill baby drill, right?

 

[Isaac]

There is no such thing as trickle down economy.

Tell that to all the CEOs that have given us jobs over the past 20 years

 

[Thales750]

So we should drill baby drill, right?

It's a balanced system.

 

[Thales750]

Tell that to all the CEOs that have given us jobs over the past 20 years

You know, of course, that Trickle Down refers to reducing taxes on the wealthiest in order to stimulate growth in the economy.

Please explain your understanding of how that works. I have good rebuttals to all of the common misconceptions. You providing a definition will skip over the volumes of back and forth. Plus, you get the benefit making you case unincumbered by my personal rhetoric.

 

[Isaac]

Trickle Down refers to reducing taxes on the wealthiest

Not necessarily. People use trickle down to refer to a lot of things I refer it in one particular capacity in this case. There are many ways in which having successful wealthy people trickles down to mean the success of others as well

 

[Thales750]

Not necessarily. People use trickle down to refer to a lot of things I refer it in one particular capacity in this case. There are many ways in which having successful wealthy people trickles down to mean the success of others as well

A lot of spin involves playing on average people's lack of knowledge of the unfathonable vallue of assets held by the global financial system.
The private money supply is measured in the tens of trillions if not hundreds.
That's one part to get your head wrapped around.
Another part, the part where a much larger percentage of the wealth of our nation was held by the middle class. During the middle on the 20th century this ownership by the middle class peaked. At that time the highest tax rate was 93%. And yet, American companies were able to fund the growth of most of the emerging economies, including China.
Another factor, one not directly tagged to Trickle Down, is automation and specialization. Unfortunately for middle class Americans, companies are now able to concentrate a much larger percentage to servicing debt because of the lower percentage of employment fees associated with advanced productitivty technologies.
And not last, but clearly one of the most important. The wealthiest folks, receive their pay in a type currency that is not subject to income tax.

So the system rewards those at the very top, where the money only flows up. And all of the wealth is owned by a very few.

 

[Isaac]

So the system rewards those at the very top, where the money only flows up

A few questions to ponder.

1. For those at "the top" who climbed there from "the bottom", are you saying the system wasn't rewarding them when they were halfway? If it wasn't, then what else would you call it if not a reward. If it was, then the system rewards people at all stages of the ladder, it doesn't wait until they're at the top
2. If the system only rewards those at the very top, how could anyone get there?
3. If the system rewards those at the top, then why have my own personal diligence in certain areas of life resulted in a higher income, more retirement financial security, and a better life? Why have I gotten jobs at companies who were expanding and growing?

The system rewards people at all stages. My wife went to school to get a technical degree, now she makes more money, now we are better off. I spent 15 years in the same line of work, now I make a lot more money than I did 10 years ago. Now we have >1 property. I'm climbing, and I don't see anything successfully holding me back. My brother went from penniless burger-flipper to CEO based on nothing but his own personal inputs, the system didn't put him there.

Now at certain times in my life, I had problems that rendered me poorer and sadder. I didn't blame the system, I blamed myself, and when I got my a** in gear to change those things, my life got much better very quickly

Just the mere wealth-building avenue of purchasing real estate, for one, is a way people climb up and it's available to everyone.