Radical for the blue foamers but an actual imbecile in the real world.
She’s actually an imbecile…
- Thread starter Arbor1
- Start date
I don't need to call her a name, the proof is in the pudding, I will say this though, if you think we can have her represent us at the negotiation table with Russia, Iran, and China and not lose ground, you may be an imbecile.
So I just listened to the response. She's basically saying that Build Back Better would not address inflation directly, but would reduce costs elsewhere, lessening the overall cost of living burden on working families.
You may or may not agree with this premise, but do you not agree that it is a cogent line of reasoning?
You may or may not agree with this premise, but do you not agree that it is a cogent line of reasoning?
No I do not agree that spending tens of billions of dollars on a government program will ease inflation.
Thankfully most of the billions tied to BBB and the IRA are being held up by moronic DEI strings. Inflation has come down as consumers run out of savings.
All the DEI assessment consultants got in on the government grift, they will all get paid.
Like always, it's an either-or choice in November. She's may not be the brightest mind in the country but she's miles ahead of the alternative mashed potato brain option.
Last edited:
I like the mash potato brain that wants America to be the best, not the mashed potato brain who thinks we can make everywhere else better so people just stay home.
Like the mash potato brain that thinks America isn't great unless he is in charge? Don't be naive and think Dems don't want America great. Trump's priority is himself over party and country.
Nobody goes from idiot to rocket scientist in the period of one week, like Kamala appears to have done,.. Things will begin to equilibrate over the next few weeks as she continues to open her mouth...
If you make something great again it was inherently great at one time before you owned it.
It was a decent narrative though.
I would agree with you up to a point, there was a day when what you said was very true, when you include a bunch of bullshit initiatives as "infrastructure" that doesn't include productivity.
I am not sure what to make of this. She studied Economics (and Political Science) at Howard University so she should have a better understanding of that bill and of Economics in general.
She clearly was out of her depth in that clip. Whether it can be blamed on being poorly educated (Ignorance) or simple stupidity is an open question. I suspect it is the former ... since she did provide a game attempt at connecting dots that do not connect.
She clearly was out of her depth in that clip. Whether it can be blamed on being poorly educated (Ignorance) or simple stupidity is an open question. I suspect it is the former ... since she did provide a game attempt at connecting dots that do not connect.
magas love stupid people. Unfortunately, she is too bright for them.
Don't confuse the ability to pass a test with actually knowing shit. I have minor in Japanese and can't even remember how to write my name in katakana anymore.
Uh, define "elsewhere" for purposes of your cogency analysis please...in particular, I'm curious "where" inflation is that doesn't count toward "elsewhere" (or, alternatively, where "elsewhere" is that isn't subsumed within the "where" that is the situs of inflation).
For that matter (and I'm actually serious about this), just how does one ever "address inflation directly"?
Last edited:
Inflation is caused by unfunded government spending. The question is about solving inflation. Inflation is cumulative and has a compounding effect that goes beyond the so-called infrastructure improvements by an extremely inefficient federal government. Poor people suffer the most from inflation.
If the argument was indeed cogent, the answer would be unlimited government spending and restrictive energy policy. Yes, that's an extreme thought, but debt service is now the biggest item in the federal 'budget'.
This is just my opinion, and I'm not trying to discount yours. My opinion might be different under other circumstances such as being a part of a balanced budget.
lol - I don't think we can even blame your age related decline on this one.
Oh? So assume you have a program to pay for drugs. You decide to pay for them, essentially, based on cost+6%. What do you think happens to the price of those drugs? Well, what happens is that, a few years after that, you create another program that requires the manufacturer to make 'refunds' to the extent that a drug's price increases faster than inflation. Now, what do you think happens next? I'll tell you. Launch prices for new products increase dramatically.
For the uninitiated, this program is called Medicare Part B.
Speaking of which, there is no way he could actually graduate from a real college.
"At least half a dozen professors at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School have called on the University of Pennsylvania to investigate an allegation that Donald Trump paid another person to take the SAT exam on his behalf and was therefore fraudulently admitted to Wharton.
The professors—all of whom teach ethics at Wharton—believe the university should revoke Trump’s 1968 undergraduate business degree if a probe can confirm the claim originally made by his niece in her best-selling, tell-all memoir published last month."
UNIVERSITY REJECTED THE DEMANDS ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT ‘OCCURRED TOO FAR IN THE PAST’
https://poetsandquants.com/2020/08/...probe-of-claim-that-trump-cheated-on-the-sat/
"At least half a dozen professors at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School have called on the University of Pennsylvania to investigate an allegation that Donald Trump paid another person to take the SAT exam on his behalf and was therefore fraudulently admitted to Wharton.
The professors—all of whom teach ethics at Wharton—believe the university should revoke Trump’s 1968 undergraduate business degree if a probe can confirm the claim originally made by his niece in her best-selling, tell-all memoir published last month."
UNIVERSITY REJECTED THE DEMANDS ON THE GROUNDS THAT IT ‘OCCURRED TOO FAR IN THE PAST’
https://poetsandquants.com/2020/08/...probe-of-claim-that-trump-cheated-on-the-sat/
Oh? So you think inflation is caused by unfunded government spending? Because that's the claim I was laughing at. Your story is far less funny, which is pretty much the norm from you. Please, just stick to sharing hilarious anecdotes about moving to Lexington, that's what the board craves.
i have to say, that does not sound at all like a first draw the curves, then plot the data exercise on the part of these (wait for it) business school instructors. (sarcasm font)
im here to serve. (incidentally, still waiting for some sort of response to the shell game analysis previously)
I mean, it could be worse, i could be telling stories about moving to iowa...
There really is no bottom to the pandering to stupidity.
It can be. Inflation is always and everywhere a monetary phenomenon. If you increase the money supply, you will have inflation.
So unfunded government spending will cause inflation if you “print” money to do it. If you issue debt into the regular market to pay for the spending, it won’t.
Monetary policy? Supply of money? Consumer demand? Taxation policy? Supply shocks? Plenty of others.
Government spending can certainly add to inflation, but to simply leave it at: "Inflation is caused by unfunded government spending." is ignorant, but to your credit you don't go by Economics85.
It seems as though you are agreeing that government has little to do with inflation. That it is more indicative of consumer spending patterns.
I don't think it's the location of where your stories occur that is underwhelming... but yeah, I don't recommend moving to Iowa.
Coming up on ten years in Chicago. Don't recommend moving here either.
I thought you were in Chicago but wondered if I had missed a moving to Iowa thread.
Both private spending and government spending contribute to inflation.
Government deficit spending is out of control because every administration (GOP + DEM) is obsessed with an ever increasing GDP.
“If the government spends more than it collects in revenue, then there is a budget deficit. If the government spends less than it collects in revenue, there is a budget surplus. In fiscal year (FY) 2023, the government spent $6.13 trillion, which was more than it collected (revenue), resulting in a deficit. Visit the national deficit explainer to see how the deficit and revenue compare to federal spending.”
“The federal government spent $ 6.13 trillion in FY 2022. This means federal spending was equal to 23% of the total gross domestic product (GDP), or economic activity, of the United States that year.“
Fiscal Data Explains Federal Spending
Check out @FiscalService Fiscal Data’s new federal spending page! #FederalSpending
fiscaldata.treasury.gov
