Why I am a Ronald Reagan Republican...OT
- Thread starter bullmarket
- Start date
Declaring a national emergency over a border wall, usurping the 1st amendment, is akin to the abuse of executive power we are accustomed to seeing by autocrats/dictators in flawed despotic countries, not the U.S. If it happens, it adds weight to the side of the scale of justice in support of impeachment. Most on this board joined millions of Americans and took a chance on Trump, believing that the former reality TV show host would act in the nation's best interest. You looked past his sordid personal life, his 6 declared bankruptcies, his abusive words to women and minorities, to see a patriot. Please look again! Trump has threatened the guardrails of democracy with an unconstitutional Muslim travel ban; by firing an FBI director who would not pledge personal loyalty; by undermining the national intelligence community, our federal judiciary, and now, assuming he goes through with it, the very structure of our democratic system.
Medic007
Sooner starter
Your education is failing you. These were corporate not personal.
Last edited:
What difference does it make. Trump has made bankruptcy an integral part of his strategic business plan. Now, as president, he has extended the marketing of his plan to include his properties in the management of the executive branch, trashing the Emoluments Clause in a clear pay-to-play effort. Oh, & then there's the unfortunate revelation that his properties employ illegal aliens on a regular basis to a point where data near one entire town moved north for employment. So which is it, a wall to protect the country or an underground railroad for undocumented workers at Trump properties.
What difference does it make? I hate to break it to you but buying financially weak companies, stripping assets, key personnel, merging and then filing bankruptcy for the tax benefits goes way back in corporate America. I had no idea Trump was HR manager at his properties. You should change your moniker from Owenfieldreams to Chickenlittle Skyfalling. Your claim to being an educated man is clear to me now. As a man once told me, "I read 10 books on how to swim and realized they didn't teach me shit when my brother pushed me off the boat dock at the lake". I'm done here.
Last edited:
medic, do you an scottsdale sleep in the same bed. Neither of you have a clue.
You both spew the same bull shit. Acting like you know what you're talking about
but it all comes down to the fact that neither of you know just how much the US
debt really is. The 21 trillion you're stuck on isn't even a 1/5 of their total liabilities.
Get your head out your azz.
You both spew the same bull shit. Acting like you know what you're talking about
but it all comes down to the fact that neither of you know just how much the US
debt really is. The 21 trillion you're stuck on isn't even a 1/5 of their total liabilities.
Get your head out your azz.
Jeremiahxyz, in like-fashion, likes to win arguments about carbon-14 dating too. He's the expert on unfathomable numbers and can nail them exactly. You all quit acting like you know what you're talking about and learn from The Oracle of the gods.
Last edited:
medic and scottsdale are talking so far above your head, that this is the best you could come up with?? HAHA
Jeremiahxyz, in like-fashion, likes to win arguments about carbon-14 dating too. He's the expert on unfathomable numbers and can nail them exactly. You all quit acting like you know what you're talking about and learn from The Oracle of the gods.
___________________________________________________________________
Just another with his head up his azz. How much debt is there in Social Security,
Medi-Care, Gov Pensions. Go to U.S. National Debt Clock. You'll see a bunch of
moving numbers that will tell you what i'm talking about. Current debt in borrowed
money is over $22 trillion. Current unfunded liabilities is over $122 Trillion. That's
over $1 million for every tax payer in this country. That figure bankrupts 99% of
every household in this country. These ain't no unfathomable numbers. That's
realtity dumazz.
___________________________________________________________________
Just another with his head up his azz. How much debt is there in Social Security,
Medi-Care, Gov Pensions. Go to U.S. National Debt Clock. You'll see a bunch of
moving numbers that will tell you what i'm talking about. Current debt in borrowed
money is over $22 trillion. Current unfunded liabilities is over $122 Trillion. That's
over $1 million for every tax payer in this country. That figure bankrupts 99% of
every household in this country. These ain't no unfathomable numbers. That's
realtity dumazz.
Medic007
Sooner starter
Tell us what you think would happen if the federal government took $22 trillion out of the non-government sector through taxes and spending cuts to pay that national debt. Surely this is something you've put a lot of study into. I'd hate to think your knowledge ends at screeching at the debt clock website.
__________________________________________________________________
All you've said is you're ignoring what you see, that's a dumb azz. You and I know
the Gov. ain't about to pay off any of this debt. The reality is, at some point in time,
sooner more likely than later, they will default on all of this mess leaving every
family in America out there on their own. It's called chaois, others call it a Depression.
Robert Shiller is a nobel prize winner in Economics, check him out and what he says about the next depression then come back with more of your BS.
Just wow....
https://www.forbes.com/sites/france...-about-government-debt-is-wrong/#5df485fa314f
"Even if default is avoided, the cost of servicing debt will be unaffordable for future generations, we are told (by Jeremiahxyz). The moral imperative is to close deficits and cut debt, even at the expense of much needed investment, because otherwise young people will bear an unacceptable burden. Young people themselves might think investment that helps to restore economic growth would be worthwhile, especially if they face years of unemployment because the economy is in a slump. But who cares what they think. Their elders (Jeremiahxyz) know(s) what is good for them and will make sure they get it, even if it hurts."
"For advanced economies in good standing, the government’s debt capacity appears to be infinite.The key to this is the affordability of debt. Government debt is often quoted as debt to GDP, and sustainable debt models usually presume that the government will run a primary surplus (the excess of government income over spending before interest costs) sufficient to pay back all the debt over a defined time horizon. But governments in good standing generally don’t repay debt, they refinance it. So what really matters is the debt service cost. To be sustainable, debt interest must be comfortably payable from current income. For a country, therefore, public debt is sustainable indefinitely if the interest rate is equal to or less than the growth rate of nominal gross domestic product (NGDP)."
"Barrett concludes that in practice, governments probably do have limits on debt issuance, but those limits are unlikely to stem from affordability constraints. They are more likely to arise from rollover risk. This implies that governments would be wise to lengthen the maturity profiles of their debt portfolios."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/france...-about-government-debt-is-wrong/#5df485fa314f
"Even if default is avoided, the cost of servicing debt will be unaffordable for future generations, we are told (by Jeremiahxyz). The moral imperative is to close deficits and cut debt, even at the expense of much needed investment, because otherwise young people will bear an unacceptable burden. Young people themselves might think investment that helps to restore economic growth would be worthwhile, especially if they face years of unemployment because the economy is in a slump. But who cares what they think. Their elders (Jeremiahxyz) know(s) what is good for them and will make sure they get it, even if it hurts."
"For advanced economies in good standing, the government’s debt capacity appears to be infinite.The key to this is the affordability of debt. Government debt is often quoted as debt to GDP, and sustainable debt models usually presume that the government will run a primary surplus (the excess of government income over spending before interest costs) sufficient to pay back all the debt over a defined time horizon. But governments in good standing generally don’t repay debt, they refinance it. So what really matters is the debt service cost. To be sustainable, debt interest must be comfortably payable from current income. For a country, therefore, public debt is sustainable indefinitely if the interest rate is equal to or less than the growth rate of nominal gross domestic product (NGDP)."
"Barrett concludes that in practice, governments probably do have limits on debt issuance, but those limits are unlikely to stem from affordability constraints. They are more likely to arise from rollover risk. This implies that governments would be wise to lengthen the maturity profiles of their debt portfolios."
Medic007
Sooner starter
So your answer is a resounding NO. You have no idea what taking $22 trillion out of the non-government sector would do economically. You do just screech at the debt clock website.
Thanks for your honesty.
Medic007
Sooner starter
I liked and unliked this several times just so I could like it again. I know this won't count for more than one, but for the record it's like 10 likes, which is all I can count to on two hands. I'm not taking my shoes off to go higher.
Drink much xyz? You're obviously an alcoholic. No filter. Not worth a minute of my time.
Medic007
Sooner starter
Nobody said the government can spend with zero consequence. That's why some really smart and educated people are involved with federal monetary policy. But I'm sure they have nothing on you. I'm surprised you aren't the Fed chairman with all your knowledge.
I'm beginning to think Jeremiah, Alan Greenspan & Roy Mercer are one and the same.
Medic007
Sooner starter
Hahahahahahahahahaha! I laughed out loud.
_____________________________________________________________________
So none of you smart azz's even bothered to view Robert Shiller. This tells me you
can't deal with the ideal of admitting you ain't near as smart as you think you are.
If all you got is a comparison to Greenspan then you're just the fools I said you are.
When your house of cards comes falling down you'll be buried under it.
Last edited:
Yes Jeremiah, we read Robert Shiller and follow up with reading Jeremy Siegel as a counterpoint. I get this haunting profound effect when reading your post. It's as if Gomer Pyle or Jethro Bodine is reading in my head.
Do you read Robert Shiller? That's the real question -
This is too freaking funny....
Robert Shiller -
"The fundamental problem for much of the world today is that investors are overreacting to debt-to-GDP ratios, fearful of some magic threshold, and demanding fiscal-austerity programs too soon. We should worry less about debt ratios and thresholds, and more about our inability to see these indicators for the often-irrelevant constructs that they are."
Me thinks Jeremiahxyz needs to stick to the World of Warcraft economical markets and leave real world stuff to the literates.
Medic007
Sooner starter
Well, it's actually your house of cards too if you participate in the US economy. But what do any of us know?
Someone should remind him of the Trilateral Commission reading he needs to catch up on in between games of thrones
Similar threads
