Re: China Trade Deal
Posted: Wed Jan 15, 2020 10:59 pm
Ah, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
Where it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:58 amWhere it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
So far, those hammering that the tax cuts have been pretty accurate - it's done nothing to spur GDP to the levels Trump/Kudlow predicted nor have they paid for themselves.
a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:53 pmFacepalm.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 8:28 pm I’ll choose to wait and see. You can react immediately. History suggests that’s unwise.
Of course you can wait and see. The tariffs haven't hit your business.
They HAVE hit mine. I HAVE to react immediately. I can give you a tally from just this year. The odds that we will "make this up" somewhere are zero.
No one thinks longer term than a whiskey distiller. I have 20 year business plan, in writing, that I'm executing right now.
Enjoy your Trump protections, old boy. Political protection comes and goes. I hope for your sake that you put that in your long term planning.
Double down....like when you saidPeter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:07 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:58 amWhere it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
So far, those hammering that the tax cuts have been pretty accurate - it's done nothing to spur GDP to the levels Trump/Kudlow predicted nor have they paid for themselves.
I'm curious why you're determined to double down on something that's easy to see now? Your original post was a bad post, accomplished nothing, and risked damage to the credibility of the perma-neverTrump mindset (I assume you're part of that).
The market finished up 90 pts on the day. That was the only relevant thing to post, by seeing the actual impact on the day. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock ... us-markets
and I show you that is wrong by a factor of 2x....and you want to talk about mea culpa.Education, health care and energy monopolies receive extreme favoritism, control nearly 40 percent of the economy
foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:38 amDouble down....like when you saidPeter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:07 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:58 amWhere it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
So far, those hammering that the tax cuts have been pretty accurate - it's done nothing to spur GDP to the levels Trump/Kudlow predicted nor have they paid for themselves.
I'm curious why you're determined to double down on something that's easy to see now? Your original post was a bad post, accomplished nothing, and risked damage to the credibility of the perma-neverTrump mindset (I assume you're part of that).
The market finished up 90 pts on the day. That was the only relevant thing to post, by seeing the actual impact on the day. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock ... us-markets
and I show you that is wrong by a factor of 2x....and you want to talk about mea culpa.Education, health care and energy monopolies receive extreme favoritism, control nearly 40 percent of the economy
So we agree, your claim was wrong.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:48 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:38 amDouble down....like when you saidPeter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:07 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:58 amWhere it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
So far, those hammering that the tax cuts have been pretty accurate - it's done nothing to spur GDP to the levels Trump/Kudlow predicted nor have they paid for themselves.
I'm curious why you're determined to double down on something that's easy to see now? Your original post was a bad post, accomplished nothing, and risked damage to the credibility of the perma-neverTrump mindset (I assume you're part of that).
The market finished up 90 pts on the day. That was the only relevant thing to post, by seeing the actual impact on the day. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock ... us-markets
and I show you that is wrong by a factor of 2x....and you want to talk about mea culpa.Education, health care and energy monopolies receive extreme favoritism, control nearly 40 percent of the economy
"Doubling down" is denying a fact after being presented with a fact. I have not questioned your statistic, have I?
foreverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:51 amSo we agree, your claim was wrong.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:48 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:38 amDouble down....like when you saidPeter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:07 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:58 amWhere it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
So far, those hammering that the tax cuts have been pretty accurate - it's done nothing to spur GDP to the levels Trump/Kudlow predicted nor have they paid for themselves.
I'm curious why you're determined to double down on something that's easy to see now? Your original post was a bad post, accomplished nothing, and risked damage to the credibility of the perma-neverTrump mindset (I assume you're part of that).
The market finished up 90 pts on the day. That was the only relevant thing to post, by seeing the actual impact on the day. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock ... us-markets
and I show you that is wrong by a factor of 2x....and you want to talk about mea culpa.Education, health care and energy monopolies receive extreme favoritism, control nearly 40 percent of the economy
"Doubling down" is denying a fact after being presented with a fact. I have not questioned your statistic, have I?
Sure sounds like it....if not, why claim a mea culpa is due?
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 11:13 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:51 amSo we agree, your claim was wrong.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:48 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:38 amDouble down....like when you saidPeter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 9:07 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:58 amWhere it closed is irrelevant to the timing of my post and your comments regarding that post.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 8:43 amforeverlax wrote: ↑Thu Jan 16, 2020 5:54 amAh, no. Actually that is a factual statement.Peter Brown wrote: ↑Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:16 pmforeverlax wrote: ↑Fri Dec 13, 2019 2:12 pm Kudlow on CNBC right now...explaining the details. Market now up 10.90 pts.
Like this thread's genesis, you commented too soon. Shall we expect a mea culpa?
(it is perhaps best to have a self-imposed time rule before commenting on matters which we probably have no understanding of other than a superficial review - for the China trade deal, as it is being layered in on 3 phases, me personally, I'd wait to see what the real end game is before assigning a weight to the impact)
You should actually try that little rule of yours....might help you get your facts straight.
*the market ended up 90.55 points on the day...
The point is that, in the mad haste to lay waste to anything Trump, how often are we incorrect in the end?
So far, those hammering that the tax cuts have been pretty accurate - it's done nothing to spur GDP to the levels Trump/Kudlow predicted nor have they paid for themselves.
I'm curious why you're determined to double down on something that's easy to see now? Your original post was a bad post, accomplished nothing, and risked damage to the credibility of the perma-neverTrump mindset (I assume you're part of that).
The market finished up 90 pts on the day. That was the only relevant thing to post, by seeing the actual impact on the day. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/stock ... us-markets
and I show you that is wrong by a factor of 2x....and you want to talk about mea culpa.Education, health care and energy monopolies receive extreme favoritism, control nearly 40 percent of the economy
"Doubling down" is denying a fact after being presented with a fact. I have not questioned your statistic, have I?
Sure sounds like it....if not, why claim a mea culpa is due?
My claim that the market finished up 90 points, not 10? That was incorrect? You are the only one talking about closing price...I was reflecting where the market was when Kudlow made his statement. You are talking apple vs my oranges. And you asked me to apologize for your mistake!!
When you spike the football with a Q1 lead, you're way more likely to look like you don't care to wait to make judgments. Which, again, read my signature.
The last sentence is absolutely true. People think Trump has done a great job with the stock market because he says so. The market saw more “new highs” under Obama but he didn’t tell people.a fan wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:03 pm You really think I'm not being patient? You seriously think THAT is the problem? You think that if I wait long enough, 1+1 won't equal 2....it will equal 3 if I give it enough time.
I told you guys that Trump's Trade Deal does not address your (your complaint, not mine) issue with IP theft. You didn't listen.
Now you're finding that, as has been the case since the Clinton era, China is cleaning our IP clock at Universities and Research Centers in plain sight.
Trump doesn't address this ANYWHERE. So no, being patient for new policies that don't exist to "begin working" won't cut the mustard.
What Trump is doing isn't addressing IP theft. But you don't want to hear that, and neither do Trump fans who pretend to care about IP theft.
Oh well. I can only tell you these things so many times. Trump will leave office eventually, the problem will still be there, and you'll move on, because you'll think the problem has been solved because Trump isn't around to tell you there's a problem.
The Tea Party has been camped out in front of the White House since inauguration day, protesting Trump's record deficits...Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Wed Jan 29, 2020 10:54 pm I remember “fiscal conservatives....lol: where deh at?