Unfit Joe Biden and Kamala Harris

[a fan]

Everything Trump had going in "the right direction" was on borrowed dime too. "Tax and Spend" vs. "Tax Cut and Spend More" seems to be our choices nowadays.

The last part is what bugs me. At this point taxes have to go up, unfortunately (thanks boomer generation, will never stop on this one, the 1980s ruined this country for everyone afterwards), but it shouldn’t have been that way and if we have to hit future generations harder than prior ones got as taxes were being reduced and spending went up then some degree of sterilization and reduced spending has to occur too.

The eighties?

2 decades into uninterrupted democrat power in the house and senate. With another decade and a half to go.

Yes. Sort of ruins your idea that Dems...especially back then.... were/are liberals, doesn't it?

We had a thriving middle class, food on the table, reasonable access to health care, solid unions, and corporations paid their share of their taxes----keeping taxes for guys like you low.

And Reagan----and yes, the Dems------turned all that upside down by allowing corporations and the rich to operate without paying their fair share. Result? Your taxes are higher here in 2020 at the State and local level to make up the difference for all that lost revenue....and, of course, we're borrowing trillions to make up the short fall.

So yep, you can place every bit of this at Democrats feet, because it wouldn't have happened without them.

At the same time, none of it happens without either Reagan's signature, or, later, Gingrich's vote.

[a fan]

"More people are gone to die" - Biden if the transition doesn't start soon.

I think Biden thinks he is the 2nd coming of Christ or something. Wasn't he also talking about solving the global warming problem.

Is the basic idea here that you're going to give us four years of missives from the Department of Irony?

I doubt that I personally will. When lacrosse starts up I will mostly deal with lacrosse.

If. If it starts up.

That being said, Biden with his moderate intelligence level, senility, and disingenuousness will probably provide a lot of material over the next 4 years.

That's certainly true, and that's fine. I'm simply pointing out that you kept your powder dry for four years with a man who gave you plenty of material for mockery....

Quite a coincidence that he, too, is a Republican....and you didn't hit him once for the incomprehensible nonsense that rolled out of Trump for four full lacrosse seasons.

I hope your Terps have a season this spring, and a fine season at that!

[Cooter]

Lacrosse will probably start up in the next 4 years if not this spring.

I keep my powder dry a lot on politics.

[foreverlax]

Lacrosse will probably start up in the next 4 years if not this spring.

I keep my powder dry a lot on politics.

Of course you do....when your guy is a moron...crickets.

[6ftstick]

Everything Trump had going in "the right direction" was on borrowed dime too. "Tax and Spend" vs. "Tax Cut and Spend More" seems to be our choices nowadays.

The last part is what bugs me. At this point taxes have to go up, unfortunately (thanks boomer generation, will never stop on this one, the 1980s ruined this country for everyone afterwards), but it shouldn’t have been that way and if we have to hit future generations harder than prior ones got as taxes were being reduced and spending went up then some degree of sterilization and reduced spending has to occur too.

The eighties?

2 decades into uninterrupted democrat power in the house and senate. With another decade and a half to go.

Yes. Sort of ruins your idea that Dems...especially back then.... were/are liberals, doesn't it?

We had a thriving middle class, food on the table, reasonable access to health care, solid unions, and corporations paid their share of their taxes----keeping taxes for guys like you low.

And Reagan----and yes, the Dems------turned all that upside down by allowing corporations and the rich to operate without paying their fair share. Result? Your taxes are higher here in 2020 at the State and local level to make up the difference for all that lost revenue....and, of course, we're borrowing trillions to make up the short fall.

So yep, you can place every bit of this at Democrats feet, because it wouldn't have happened without them.

At the same time, none of it happens without either Reagan's signature, or, later, Gingrich's vote.

Dems had veto proof majorities for nearly 4 decades.

[wgdsr]

Of course it could be a pro Biden swing. Or a pro trump Swing. He had things going the right direction before the Rona hit.

All I read is it’s probably excitement about split gov and no likely major policy changes.

Aside from the stock market, which is not the economy, can you point to quantitative or measurable items that indicate the president had things going in the right direction economically? And I would point out that economists who lean both Ways have exposed massive flaws in the measurement of unemployment rate, they are all working towards a better measurement to eventually be adopted by the government which would apply underemployed, meaning people working but below the level they need to support themselves effectively. By this measurement we weren’t doing very good.

So not applying a flawed UE rate and understanding the stock market doesn’t mean anything, what did he have going well?

GDP growth?
Stability of the dollar?
Budget deficit?
Productivity?
Inflation? (Why did we have Powell lowering Fed Funds prior to Rona if inflation was stable at the long run benchmark? Deflation is 100x worse than inflation when it hits you surely know)
Other metrics?

wage growth was probably the best metric
https://www.epi.org/publication/swa-wages-2019/
a lot of numbers someone can not like in there (wage inequality, others), but as a result of the already tightening employment picture prior and since, wages had a lot of beneficiaries.

[a fan]

Dems had veto proof majorities for nearly 4 decades.

Which four decades was that, 6ft? (yeah----no they didn't.....don't invent stuff).

Besides, are you now telling me that the dismantling of Unions (Air traffic controllers ring a bell) and the massive tax cuts that Reagan engineered were really the work of the Dems?

The cornerstone of your Republican party for going on 40 years----tax cuts-----was executed by the Dems? That's what you're selling here?

Would you like me to detail the tax cut bills that Reagan signed? I can, if you're serious here.

[Cooter]

Lacrosse will probably start up in the next 4 years if not this spring.

I keep my powder dry a lot on politics.

Of course you do....when your guy is a moron...crickets.

And now we will have your moron for 4 years.

Trump was not really my guy. I did not vote for him in either election.

[6ftstick]

Dems had veto proof majorities for nearly 4 decades.

Which four decades was that, 6ft? (yeah----no they didn't.....don't invent stuff).

Besides, are you now telling me that the dismantling of Unions (Air traffic controllers ring a bell) and the massive tax cuts that Reagan engineered were really the work of the Dems?

The cornerstone of your Republican party for going on 40 years----tax cuts-----was executed by the Dems? That's what you're selling here?

Would you like me to detail the tax cut bills that Reagan signed? I can, if you're serious here.

from the sixties to the nineties. LBJohnson til Gingrich won the house back in the 90's

except for slim Senate majorirties for three years in Reagans first term

[holmes435]

Dems had veto proof majorities for nearly 4 decades.

Which four decades was that, 6ft? (yeah----no they didn't.....don't invent stuff).

Besides, are you now telling me that the dismantling of Unions (Air traffic controllers ring a bell) and the massive tax cuts that Reagan engineered were really the work of the Dems?

The cornerstone of your Republican party for going on 40 years----tax cuts-----was executed by the Dems? That's what you're selling here?

Would you like me to detail the tax cut bills that Reagan signed? I can, if you're serious here.

from the sixties to the nineties. LBJohnson til Gingrich won the house back in the 90's

except for slim Senate majorirties for three years in Reagans first term

Dem's have never had a veto-proof majority post WWII (2/3 of the House & Senate at the same time). They had a filibuster-proof majority of Congress & WH for 61-69, 77-79 and a few months in 2009.

R's also had Senate majorities for 6 years under Reagan.

Of course things weren't as party-line driven then as they are now.

[kramerica.inc]

Sectors and companies at risk of being impacted by new regulations and sweeping policy changes under a Democratic majority probably HATE the certainty that a split gov't (no new regulations) gives them.

IMHO, if anything is driving the market bounce, it's two things. First the news of vaccines.

And second, is that everyone in my biz is expecting that Biden will get rid of the pointless tariffs (speaking of regulations that you don't think the R"s engage in ) early in his term. I don't think you've noticed how much economic damage Trump's tariffs have done.

Partly because he just handed Farmers a few billion dollars of YOUR MONEY to lessen the blow of Trump's stupid game. It was $22 Billion in 2019 alone, Kramerica. Cash. For no reason. That's half the budget for Department of Education, for heaven's sake. Money wasted on NOTHING.

So maybe tone down the blame of Dems and regulations? Republican Tariffs are regulations too, my friend......

Of course. The blame for regulations doesn't fall solely on the Dems. But to be fair, that's what they are kinda known for, right? There's more regulations than just tariffs...And lots that are driven by Dem pet projects- Environmental, social and wage reporting, tax changes etc.
So no new regulations due to a split gov is generally a good thing for businesses. Regardless of the parties involved. It means many less new regulations (Read: changes to SOPs).

[Farfromgeneva]

Of course it could be a pro Biden swing. Or a pro trump Swing. He had things going the right direction before the Rona hit.

All I read is it’s probably excitement about split gov and no likely major policy changes.

Aside from the stock market, which is not the economy, can you point to quantitative or measurable items that indicate the president had things going in the right direction economically? And I would point out that economists who lean both Ways have exposed massive flaws in the measurement of unemployment rate, they are all working towards a better measurement to eventually be adopted by the government which would apply underemployed, meaning people working but below the level they need to support themselves effectively. By this measurement we weren’t doing very good.

So not applying a flawed UE rate and understanding the stock market doesn’t mean anything, what did he have going well?

GDP growth?
Stability of the dollar?
Budget deficit?
Productivity?
Inflation? (Why did we have Powell lowering Fed Funds prior to Rona if inflation was stable at the long run benchmark? Deflation is 100x worse than inflation when it hits you surely know)
Other metrics?

wage growth was probably the best metric
https://www.epi.org/publication/swa-wages-2019/
a lot of numbers someone can not like in there (wage inequality, others), but as a result of the already tightening employment picture prior and since, wages had a lot of beneficiaries.

The underemployment metric would suggest it wasn’t nearly enough to declare success. I would also note it took a long time after the financial crisis for wage growth to make ground. Stabilization took 4-5yrs into 2013, then we had the “taper tantrum” that summer because, oh god the Fed is going to raise rates, then the biyach Fed backed off and let the market have their way. There was almost no way to see true wage growth until 2014 or 2015.

And while that’s a nice metric, it’s not enough to state the “economy was humming” under this soon to be prior admin. Fact is things were weakening in 2019 for sure.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2019/mobil ... r-2019.htm

[Farfromgeneva]

Dems had veto proof majorities for nearly 4 decades.

Which four decades was that, 6ft? (yeah----no they didn't.....don't invent stuff).

Besides, are you now telling me that the dismantling of Unions (Air traffic controllers ring a bell) and the massive tax cuts that Reagan engineered were really the work of the Dems?

The cornerstone of your Republican party for going on 40 years----tax cuts-----was executed by the Dems? That's what you're selling here?

Would you like me to detail the tax cut bills that Reagan signed? I can, if you're serious here.

He’s not serious, just comes across as more real than the now gone provocateur.

[Farfromgeneva]

Sectors and companies at risk of being impacted by new regulations and sweeping policy changes under a Democratic majority probably HATE the certainty that a split gov't (no new regulations) gives them.

IMHO, if anything is driving the market bounce, it's two things. First the news of vaccines.

And second, is that everyone in my biz is expecting that Biden will get rid of the pointless tariffs (speaking of regulations that you don't think the R"s engage in ) early in his term. I don't think you've noticed how much economic damage Trump's tariffs have done.

Partly because he just handed Farmers a few billion dollars of YOUR MONEY to lessen the blow of Trump's stupid game. It was $22 Billion in 2019 alone, Kramerica. Cash. For no reason. That's half the budget for Department of Education, for heaven's sake. Money wasted on NOTHING.

So maybe tone down the blame of Dems and regulations? Republican Tariffs are regulations too, my friend......

Of course. The blame for regulations doesn't fall solely on the Dems. But to be fair, that's what they are kinda known for, right? There's more regulations than just tariffs...And lots that are driven by Dem pet projects- Environmental, social and wage reporting, tax changes etc.
So no new regulations due to a split gov is generally a good thing for businesses. Regardless of the parties involved. It means many less new regulations (Read: changes to SOPs).

Hate to say it, but most refs come from appointed administrative heads and EOs. Split govt won’t change that. I’m with you on regulations, the administrative state, though perhaps more at the state and local level than federal, has gotten out of hand. Anyone can come up with a decent reason to disallow any behavior or any function in society, but without an honest cost benefit analysis it’s just a lever for politicians to pull to favor their benefactors.

[Andersen]

I also understood that big business love and push for regulations because it makes it harder for small businesses to compete with them, while they can just hire more staff to deal with the additional paperwork.

[wgdsr]

Of course it could be a pro Biden swing. Or a pro trump Swing. He had things going the right direction before the Rona hit.

All I read is it’s probably excitement about split gov and no likely major policy changes.

Aside from the stock market, which is not the economy, can you point to quantitative or measurable items that indicate the president had things going in the right direction economically? And I would point out that economists who lean both Ways have exposed massive flaws in the measurement of unemployment rate, they are all working towards a better measurement to eventually be adopted by the government which would apply underemployed, meaning people working but below the level they need to support themselves effectively. By this measurement we weren’t doing very good.

So not applying a flawed UE rate and understanding the stock market doesn’t mean anything, what did he have going well?

GDP growth?
Stability of the dollar?
Budget deficit?
Productivity?
Inflation? (Why did we have Powell lowering Fed Funds prior to Rona if inflation was stable at the long run benchmark? Deflation is 100x worse than inflation when it hits you surely know)
Other metrics?

wage growth was probably the best metric
https://www.epi.org/publication/swa-wages-2019/
a lot of numbers someone can not like in there (wage inequality, others), but as a result of the already tightening employment picture prior and since, wages had a lot of beneficiaries.

The underemployment metric would suggest it wasn’t nearly enough to declare success. I would also note it took a long time after the financial crisis for wage growth to make ground. Stabilization took 4-5yrs into 2013, then we had the “taper tantrum” that summer because, oh god the Fed is going to raise rates, then the biyach Fed backed off and let the market have their way. There was almost no way to see true wage growth until 2014 or 2015.

And while that’s a nice metric, it’s not enough to state the “economy was humming” under this soon to be prior admin. Fact is things were weakening in 2019 for sure.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2019/mobil ... r-2019.htm

total employment had been climbing.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/269 ... ed-states/
as had wages. started in 2014 for both in unison. i guess you can have any take you wish.

[a fan]

But to be fair, that's what they are kinda known for, right?

Sure. But that's propaganda from the Republican party. Do you know how fast businesses would open in Republican States if they thought the regulatory environment was minimal? Or that my brother and I would vote Republican across the board if that was true?

There's more regulations than just tariffs...And lots that are driven by Dem pet projects- Environmental

Clean water act and the EPA was started by Nixon, my friend. And I have no idea why you keep complaining about environmental regs. You want grandkids with three heads, or something?

So no new regulations due to a split gov is generally a good thing for businesses. Regardless of the parties involved. It means many less new regulations (Read: changes to SOPs).

Yeah, but you keep forgetting that only large corporations actually have to deal with FEDERAL regulations. So does your party, actually.

Even Hogan's "blue ribbon panel" looking at red tape and regulations disappeared after doing pretty much nothing. Oh, they got rid of barber licenses. Wow. Deep stuff.

Want to make life easier businesses? 99% of the issues are local zoning and building regulations. Get rid of---or minimize----those? The failure rate of American businesses will plummet. So will the willingness of investors to start new ventures.

But no one ever bothers doing that one simple thing. And as I said.....Republican cities are no different that Dems. They all have regs that stifle entrepreneurialism......

[a fan]

Of course it could be a pro Biden swing. Or a pro trump Swing. He had things going the right direction before the Rona hit.

All I read is it’s probably excitement about split gov and no likely major policy changes.

Aside from the stock market, which is not the economy, can you point to quantitative or measurable items that indicate the president had things going in the right direction economically? And I would point out that economists who lean both Ways have exposed massive flaws in the measurement of unemployment rate, they are all working towards a better measurement to eventually be adopted by the government which would apply underemployed, meaning people working but below the level they need to support themselves effectively. By this measurement we weren’t doing very good.

So not applying a flawed UE rate and understanding the stock market doesn’t mean anything, what did he have going well?

GDP growth?
Stability of the dollar?
Budget deficit?
Productivity?
Inflation? (Why did we have Powell lowering Fed Funds prior to Rona if inflation was stable at the long run benchmark? Deflation is 100x worse than inflation when it hits you surely know)
Other metrics?

wage growth was probably the best metric
https://www.epi.org/publication/swa-wages-2019/
a lot of numbers someone can not like in there (wage inequality, others), but as a result of the already tightening employment picture prior and since, wages had a lot of beneficiaries.

The underemployment metric would suggest it wasn’t nearly enough to declare success. I would also note it took a long time after the financial crisis for wage growth to make ground. Stabilization took 4-5yrs into 2013, then we had the “taper tantrum” that summer because, oh god the Fed is going to raise rates, then the biyach Fed backed off and let the market have their way. There was almost no way to see true wage growth until 2014 or 2015.

And while that’s a nice metric, it’s not enough to state the “economy was humming” under this soon to be prior admin. Fact is things were weakening in 2019 for sure.

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2019/mobil ... r-2019.htm

total employment had been climbing.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/269 ... ed-states/
as had wages. started in 2014 for both in unison. i guess you can have any take you wish.

Yes. Borrowing a few trillion dollars, and pumping it throughout the country, willy-nilly, will do that.

[foreverlax]

Can someone explain why votes from Dominion voting machines (used across the country) are counted in BARCELONA?

Which means the US election is online and hackable.

Trout on a fly.

Sh*t you're a fly fisherman. Another activity ruined for me.

When I heard Tucker was a fly fisher, I thought at least we have that in common. You = half empty.

[foreverlax]

Lacrosse will probably start up in the next 4 years if not this spring.

I keep my powder dry a lot on politics.

Of course you do....when your guy is a moron...crickets.

And now we will have your moron for 4 years.

Trump was not really my guy. I did not vote for him in either election.

Biden is no more a moron than you or me.