The Trump Economy

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

23 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Hey, who knows, maybe the Supreme Court will be dumb enough to kill health insurance for 30 million Americans on top of all this. Sure would be doing what they want. Republican leaders hate the people. 

 

...there IS great comfort though knowing you'll forever be covered...just sayin'...................

[ALF]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A steep economic downturn and massive coronavirus rescue spending will nearly quadruple the fiscal 2020 U.S. budget deficit to a record $3.8 trillion, a staggering 18.7% of U.S. economic output, a Washington-based watchdog group said on Monday.

 

Releasing new budget estimates based on spending mandated by law, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) also projected that the fiscal 2021 deficit would reach $2.1 trillion in 2021, and average $1.3 trillion through 2025 as the economy recovers from damage caused by coronavirus-related shutdowns.

 

“These projections almost certainly underestimate deficits, since they assume no further legislation is enacted to address the crisis and that policymakers stick to current law when it comes to other tax and spending policies,” the group said in a statement.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-budget/u-s-deficit-to-soar-to-record-3-8-trillion-in-2020-budget-watchdog-group-says-idUSKCN21V1TA

 

The Tea Party sure is quiet since Trump was elected especially before covid 19

 

2018 - $779 billion budget deficit
2017 - $665 billion budget deficit
2016 - $585 billion budget deficit
2015 - $439 billion budget deficit
2014 - $514 billion budget deficit
2013 - $719 billion budget deficit
2012 - $1.1 trillion budget deficit
2011 - $1.3 trillion budget deficit
2010 - $1.3 trillion budget deficit
2009 - $1.4 trillion budget deficit

https://www.thoughtco.com/history-of-us-federal-budget-deficit-3321439

 

Budget Control Act of 2011

Long title    An Act to provide for budget control.
Enacted by    the 112th United States Congress
Effective    August 2, 2011

 

The bill directly specified $917 billion of cuts over 10 years in exchange for the initial debt limit increase of $900 billion. This is the first installment ("tranche") of cuts. $21 billion of this will be applied in the FY2012 budget.

Additionally, the agreement established the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, sometimes called the "super committee",to produce deficit reduction legislation by November 23, 2011, that would be immune from amendments or filibuster (similar to the Base Realignment and Closure).

 

The goal of the legislation was to cut at least $1.5 trillion over the coming 10 years and be passed by December 23, 2011. Projected revenue from the committee's legislation could not exceed the revenue budgeting baseline produced by current law.

 

(Current law had the Bush tax cuts expiring at the end of 2012.) The committee would have 12 members, 6 from each party.

The agreement also specified an incentive for Congress to act. If Congress failed to produce a deficit reduction bill with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts, then Congress could grant a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling but this would trigger across-the-board cuts ("sequestrations"[note 1]), as of January 2, 2013.

 

 These cuts would apply to mandatory and discretionary spending in the years 2013 to 2021 and be in an amount equal to the difference between $1.2 trillion and the amount of deficit reduction enacted from the joint committee.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_Control_Act_of_2011

 

Rest In Peace, Budget Control Act: New Budget Deal Wipes Out 40 Percent of Landmark Law’s Savings
by Demian Brady July 31, 2019

 

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019: Restraint Be Damned

 

https://www.ntu.org/foundation/detail/rest-in-peace-budget-control-act-new-budget-deal-wipes-out-40-percent-of-landmark-laws-savings

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by ALF

[daz28]

31 minutes ago, ALF said:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A steep economic downturn and massive coronavirus rescue spending will nearly quadruple the fiscal 2020 U.S. budget deficit to a record $3.8 trillion, a staggering 18.7% of U.S. economic output, a Washington-based watchdog group said on Monday.

 

Releasing new budget estimates based on spending mandated by law, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) also projected that the fiscal 2021 deficit would reach $2.1 trillion in 2021, and average $1.3 trillion through 2025 as the economy recovers from damage caused by coronavirus-related shutdowns.

 

“These projections almost certainly underestimate deficits, since they assume no further legislation is enacted to address the crisis and that policymakers stick to current law when it comes to other tax and spending policies,” the group said in a statement.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-budget/u-s-deficit-to-soar-to-record-3-8-trillion-in-2020-budget-watchdog-group-says-idUSKCN21V1TA

 

The Tea Party sure is quiet since Trump was elected especially before covid 19

 

2018 - $779 billion budget deficit
2017 - $665 billion budget deficit
2016 - $585 billion budget deficit
2015 - $439 billion budget deficit
2014 - $514 billion budget deficit
2013 - $719 billion budget deficit
2012 - $1.1 trillion budget deficit
2011 - $1.3 trillion budget deficit
2010 - $1.3 trillion budget deficit
2009 - $1.4 trillion budget deficit

https://www.thoughtco.com/history-of-us-federal-budget-deficit-3321439

We have been sold the notion that trickle down was going to be great since Ronald Reagan.  Turns out it was funnel up economics, which means there was condensation for sure, but never precipitation.  It's like a weather forecast gone horribly wrong.  The real shame of the whole thing is they were able to blame it on lazy Americans sucking from the government's udders.  There was plenty of money for social programs, but the reality is that there was no reason for companies to invest in a market to consumers who are buried in debt.  The end result is now a massive sucking sound coming from the drain.  Maybe I'm just jealous that I didn't get my share of robbing the American people of $20, soon to be $30 trillion dollars.  If you still think this ends well, then you're probably already retired, or close to it.  You may now commence on why unions and money wasted on college education were the real problems.  Hook, line and sinker!

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

18 minutes ago, daz28 said:

We have been sold the notion that trickle down was going to be great since Ronald Reagan.  Turns out it was funnel up economics, which means there was condensation for sure, but never precipitation.  It's like a weather forecast gone horribly wrong.  The real shame of the whole thing is they were able to blame it on lazy Americans sucking from the government's udders.  There was plenty of money for social programs, but the reality is that there was no reason for companies to invest in a market to consumers who are buried in debt.  The end result is now a massive sucking sound coming from the drain.  Maybe I'm just jealous that I didn't get my share of robbing the American people of $20, soon to be $30 trillion dollars.  If you still think this ends well, then you're probably already retired, or close to it.  You may now commence on why unions and money wasted on college education were the real problems.  Hook, line and sinker!

 

Nothing sells like class envy.

[Tiberius]

1 hour ago, ALF said:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A steep economic downturn and massive coronavirus rescue spending will nearly quadruple the fiscal 2020 U.S. budget deficit to a record $3.8 trillion, a staggering 18.7% of U.S. economic output, a Washington-based watchdog group said on Monday.

 

Releasing new budget estimates based on spending mandated by law, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB) also projected that the fiscal 2021 deficit would reach $2.1 trillion in 2021, and average $1.3 trillion through 2025 as the economy recovers from damage caused by coronavirus-related shutdowns.

 

“These projections almost certainly underestimate deficits, since they assume no further legislation is enacted to address the crisis and that policymakers stick to current law when it comes to other tax and spending policies,” the group said in a statement.

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-budget/u-s-deficit-to-soar-to-record-3-8-trillion-in-2020-budget-watchdog-group-says-idUSKCN21V1TA

 

The Tea Party sure is quiet since Trump was elected especially before covid 19

 

2018 - $779 billion budget deficit
2017 - $665 billion budget deficit
2016 - $585 billion budget deficit
2015 - $439 billion budget deficit
2014 - $514 billion budget deficit
2013 - $719 billion budget deficit
2012 - $1.1 trillion budget deficit
2011 - $1.3 trillion budget deficit
2010 - $1.3 trillion budget deficit
2009 - $1.4 trillion budget deficit

https://www.thoughtco.com/history-of-us-federal-budget-deficit-3321439

 

Budget Control Act of 2011

Long title    An Act to provide for budget control.
Enacted by    the 112th United States Congress
Effective    August 2, 2011

 

The bill directly specified $917 billion of cuts over 10 years in exchange for the initial debt limit increase of $900 billion. This is the first installment ("tranche") of cuts. $21 billion of this will be applied in the FY2012 budget.

Additionally, the agreement established the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, sometimes called the "super committee",to produce deficit reduction legislation by November 23, 2011, that would be immune from amendments or filibuster (similar to the Base Realignment and Closure).

 

The goal of the legislation was to cut at least $1.5 trillion over the coming 10 years and be passed by December 23, 2011. Projected revenue from the committee's legislation could not exceed the revenue budgeting baseline produced by current law.

 

(Current law had the Bush tax cuts expiring at the end of 2012.) The committee would have 12 members, 6 from each party.

The agreement also specified an incentive for Congress to act. If Congress failed to produce a deficit reduction bill with at least $1.2 trillion in cuts, then Congress could grant a $1.2 trillion increase in the debt ceiling but this would trigger across-the-board cuts ("sequestrations"[note 1]), as of January 2, 2013.

 

 These cuts would apply to mandatory and discretionary spending in the years 2013 to 2021 and be in an amount equal to the difference between $1.2 trillion and the amount of deficit reduction enacted from the joint committee.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budget_Control_Act_of_2011

 

Rest In Peace, Budget Control Act: New Budget Deal Wipes Out 40 Percent of Landmark Law’s Savings
by Demian Brady July 31, 2019

 

The Bipartisan Budget Act of 2019: Restraint Be Damned

 

https://www.ntu.org/foundation/detail/rest-in-peace-budget-control-act-new-budget-deal-wipes-out-40-percent-of-landmark-laws-savings

 

Oh ya, the Tea Party, remember them! Lol

 

Hypocrites to the core. 

28 minutes ago, daz28 said:

We have been sold the notion that trickle down was going to be great since Ronald Reagan.  Turns out it was funnel up economics, which means there was condensation for sure, but never precipitation.  It's like a weather forecast gone horribly wrong.  The real shame of the whole thing is they were able to blame it on lazy Americans sucking from the government's udders.  There was plenty of money for social programs, but the reality is that there was no reason for companies to invest in a market to consumers who are buried in debt.  The end result is now a massive sucking sound coming from the drain.  Maybe I'm just jealous that I didn't get my share of robbing the American people of $20, soon to be $30 trillion dollars.  If you still think this ends well, then you're probably already retired, or close to it.  You may now commence on why unions and money wasted on college education were the real problems.  Hook, line and sinker!

My favorite was the lie they told about how deficits would pay for themselves. Ya, sure looks like it! 

[RochesterRob]

26 minutes ago, daz28 said:

We have been sold the notion that trickle down was going to be great since Ronald Reagan.  Turns out it was funnel up economics, which means there was condensation for sure, but never precipitation.  It's like a weather forecast gone horribly wrong.  The real shame of the whole thing is they were able to blame it on lazy Americans sucking from the government's udders.  There was plenty of money for social programs, but the reality is that there was no reason for companies to invest in a market to consumers who are buried in debt.  The end result is now a massive sucking sound coming from the drain.  Maybe I'm just jealous that I didn't get my share of robbing the American people of $20, soon to be $30 trillion dollars.  If you still think this ends well, then you're probably already retired, or close to it.  You may now commence on why unions and money wasted on college education were the real problems.  Hook, line and sinker!

  Huh?  What?  Automation eliminated most of the jobs you are talking about.  Robots replaced humans on the auto assembly line with one person monitoring a few machines so a net decrease in jobs.  Nobody wanted to go 1,000 feet below the surface to mine coal so strip mining came to eliminate a dangerous job.  

 

  Unions did push some industries off shore.  Many people do make bad choices in terms of college education.  Extremely few can make a good living on an Elizabethan Poetry degree.  Make good choices in terms of a curriculum so you can secure your future.  

[plenzmd1]

50 minutes ago, daz28 said:

We have been sold the notion that trickle down was going to be great since Ronald Reagan.  Turns out it was funnel up economics, which means there was condensation for sure, but never precipitation.  It's like a weather forecast gone horribly wrong.  The real shame of the whole thing is they were able to blame it on lazy Americans sucking from the government's udders.  There was plenty of money for social programs, but the reality is that there was no reason for companies to invest in a market to consumers who are buried in debt.  The end result is now a massive sucking sound coming from the drain.  Maybe I'm just jealous that I didn't get my share of robbing the American people of $20, soon to be $30 trillion dollars.  If you still think this ends well, then you're probably already retired, or close to it.  You may now commence on why unions and money wasted on college education were the real problems.  Hook, line and sinker!

What does the first bolded mean? I truly do not understand.Thanks

 

Also, i am close to retirement, and scared poopless of what may happen based on we respond to this virus. 

[Tiberius]

3 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

 

 

Also, i am close to retirement, and scared poopless of what may happen based on we respond to this virus. 

Or, don’t respond. Look at the meat industry, they are hurting because of the virus, not the response. Let’s not forget that. Some people seem to want to blame the response. I know we are a political people, but the virus is the disaster, not the response. 

[plenzmd1]

11 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Or, don’t respond. Look at the meat industry, they are hurting because of the virus, not the response. Let’s not forget that. Some people seem to want to blame the response. I know we are a political people, but the virus is the disaster, not the response. 

i think looking at the meat industry is perfect to help form our response, I agree. Lets test everyone in the plants, and crank the numbers to establish how many are positive and asympatomatic, how many hospitalizations, deaths etc. I mean, can there be a worse envirnoment for transmitting than in those plants? 

 

Maybe those numbers have already been established, i am not aware of them. 

 

And i do not agree that the response has no consequenes....liquor sales for the months of March and  April in VA..equivalnt every week to the week of Thanksgiving...that means people are slamming booze at record numbers ..look at the amount of vacinations young kids are getting now..way down..42% in April CDC estimates.

Edited May 10, 2020 by plenzmd1

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

i think looking at the meat industry is perfect to help form our response, I agree. Lets test everyone in the plants, and crank the numbers to establish how many are positive and asympatomatic, how many hospitalizations, deaths etc. I mean, can there be a worse envirnoment for transmitting than in those plants? 

 

Maybe those numbers have already been established, i am not aware of them. 

If you just look at sports, schools and restaurants, they had to be closed and those alone would really hurt the economy badly. Not sure how you get those up and running soon. 

[Chef Jim]

17 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Or, don’t respond. Look at the meat industry, they are hurting because of the virus, not the response. Let’s not forget that. Some people seem to want to blame the response. I know we are a political people, but the virus is the disaster, not the response. 

Wait so #orangemannotbad?  Are you ok?  

[plenzmd1]

7 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

If you just look at sports, schools and restaurants, they had to be closed and those alone would really hurt the economy badly. Not sure how you get those up and running soon. 

NUmbers from places like meat packing could provide a great clue. If they indicate high, high levels of asymptomatic positives...that helps form a risk/reward analysis. Make sure to extend the testing to households, as so many workers in these plants live in multigenerational and often household members have other high risk factors. These are thge types of testing that needs to be done, and done immediately. Take high risk environment/population, and start to make decisions based on actual numbers, not models, not fear, but with empirical evidence

Edited May 10, 2020 by plenzmd1

[daz28]

44 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Nothing sells like class envy.

You don't even try to understand, but if you did, you'd see that there is no "you're worth what the market says" if the market is only dictated from the top.  I think most posters here try to see both sides, but I don't see that from you.  I could be wrong, but from your posts you strike me as the guy they made 'ok boomer' for.

 

15 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

What does the first bolded mean? I truly do not understand.Thanks

 

Also, i am close to retirement, and scared poopless of what may happen based on we respond to this virus. 

It means that you could make all the money in the world available to investors, but if their customers(the consumer) are already saddled with bank debts and high cost of living, then  the investment is wasted, because they don't have the available purchasing power to give you any return on your investment.  With the country currently saddled with 100k of debt for every man, woman and child, there will be absolutely no way out of this without major cuts to social programs.  There is also less population forecasted to carry the burden of social security for the next generation.  They may be looking to take maybe half of their earnings to keep social security solvent by say 2050.  In that respect, immigration is absolutely a good way to replace those lost workers, but people fear culture change.  The economy is not going to roar back to life quickly, so I'd protect any risky assets you may have.  

 

32 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Huh?  What?  Automation eliminated most of the jobs you are talking about.  Robots replaced humans on the auto assembly line with one person monitoring a few machines so a net decrease in jobs.  Nobody wanted to go 1,000 feet below the surface to mine coal so strip mining came to eliminate a dangerous job.  

 

  Unions did push some industries off shore.  Many people do make bad choices in terms of college education.  Extremely few can make a good living on an Elizabethan Poetry degree.  Make good choices in terms of a curriculum so you can secure your future.  

I'm not discussing jobs at all.  They aren't(weren't) really even an issue in this country.  I'm just saying trickle down was a sham.  Yes, globalism and unions are kind of conflicting issues.  

[plenzmd1]

@daz28, i am still lost, sorry. BTW, i have been screaming from the rooftops the tax cuts were silly and beyond dumb, an exploding debt(per covid) in the "greatest economy" ever was insane...and the Trump economy was just an extension of the Obama economy. And yes, the overwhlming majority of the benefit of the cuts went to the well off..as few companies increased capital expeditures at a significant rate, instead opting for buybacks.

 

[daz28]

3 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

@daz28, i am still lost, sorry. BTW, i have been screaming from the rooftops the tax cuts were silly and beyond dumb, an exploding debt(per covid) in the "greatest economy" ever was insane...and the Trump economy was just an extension of the Obama economy. And yes, the overwhlming majority of the benefit of the cuts went to the well off..as few companies increased capital expeditures at a significant rate, instead opting for buybacks.

 

You answered your own question.  It wasn't profitable enough for them to invest that capital.  it was better for them to do stock buybacks.  The average Americans is like $30k in debt(not an exact number, but it's just to give you an idea).  The bottom line is you can't get blood from a stone.  You're absolutely correct, the tax cuts weren't paying for themselves.  We were taking on debt to make the economy better, which was dumb, because it was already good.  The consumer has to have spending cash. 

Edited May 10, 2020 by daz28

[plenzmd1]

1 minute ago, daz28 said:

You answered your own question.  It wasn't profitable enough for them to invest that capital.  it was better for them to do stock buybacks.  The average Americans is like $30k in debt(not an exact number, but it's just to give you an idea).  The bottom line is you can't get blood from a stone.  

well, that is not the reason..the reason is pure greed.  The C suite and the board at public companies have the vast majority of their earnings tied to stock performance. So in order to maximize their LTIPs, they bought back shares, rising the price, hiking in their escalters , and guess what..paying lower taxes on those profits.

 

Never underestimate the greed and hubris of these folks.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

24 minutes ago, daz28 said:

You don't even try to understand, but if you did, you'd see that there is no "you're worth what the market says" if the market is only dictated from the top.  I think most posters here try to see both sides, but I don't see that from you.  I could be wrong, but from your posts you strike me as the guy they made 'ok boomer' for.

 

 

 

So, If I went to school, studied hard, picked up a set of skills and got a job according to that skillset, I shouldn't be rewarded by the market for those skills?

 

Tell me, if that's the case, what's the point of educating anyone?

 

And as far as globalism goes, I'm against it. As I'm against free immigration. As I'm against corporate outsourcing and offshoring. As I'm against unlimited financial donations to political campaigns. As I'm against progressive taxation. Edit: as I was against the bailouts for banks and manufacturers during the Great Recession.

 

But please, carry on with your misinformed opinion.

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by Joe in Winslow

[daz28]

1 minute ago, plenzmd1 said:

well, that is not the reason..the reason is pure greed.  The C suite and the board at public companies have the vast majority of their earnings tied to stock performance. So in order to maximize their LTIPs, they bought back shares, rising the price, hiking in their escalters , and guess what..paying lower taxes on those profits.

 

Never underestimate the greed and hubris of these folks.

Well, we could have just kept the taxes we were collecting, and gave cuts to the people who are deeply in debt, which increases their spending power.  It's become a shell game at this point.  Honestly, is greed what the people want??  It seems that way, but it's a very complicated issue.  It seems there's a sweet spot for how much to tax companies.  Otherwise, why even tax them at all, right?  If you want to get into some real dicey conversations, talk to a market capitalist Libertarian.  

1 minute ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

So, If I went to school, studied hard, picked up a set of skills and got a job according to that skillset, I shouldn't be rewarded by the market for those skills?

 

 

 

You absolutely should, but what happens when everyone else does the same thing?  Then who sets the market???  We've already mostly lost job pensions and health care.  Where did that money go?

[Chef Jim]

4 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Well, we could have just kept the taxes we were collecting, and gave cuts to the people who are deeply in debt, which increases their spending power.  It's become a shell game at this point.  Honestly, is greed what the people want??  It seems that way, but it's a very complicated issue.  It seems there's a sweet spot for how much to tax companies.  Otherwise, why even tax them at all, right?  If you want to get into some real dicey conversations, talk to a market capitalist Libertarian.  

So what you’re saying is we give people in debt more money to spend?  I assume your in favor of giving drug addicts free drugs?  

[plenzmd1]

2 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Well, we could have just kept the taxes we were collecting, and gave cuts to the people who are deeply in debt, which increases their spending power.  It's become a shell game at this point.  Honestly, is greed what the people want??  It seems that way, but it's a very complicated issue.  It seems there's a sweet spot for how much to tax companies.  Otherwise, why even tax them at all, right?  If you want to get into some real dicey conversations, talk to a market capitalist Libertarian.  

I am not sure what a market capilist Libertarian is, but I am pretty sure I am prolly one.

 

But why in the world would you want the bolded? My wife and I am worked our butts off our whole lives, lived conservatively, saved a ton, have relatively no debt outside of that we want like mortgages, paid off both of our student loans, are paying for my kids education., and have a pretty nice sum saved for reitrement...and you want to reward people who have done the opposite? Who lived the good life while we scrimped  and saved? 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 minutes ago, daz28 said:

 We've already mostly lost job pensions and health care.

 

We lost health care because SOMEONE decided it would be a bright idea to have the government handle health insurance mandates and acceptable pre-existing conditions.

 

I said it then (you can research it if you'd like), the ACA was a BAD idea. They should have either gone to a medicare-for-all or left the market alone.

 

Half-assing it wasn't the answer, it never is.

 

As far as pensions go, I'll give you an anecdotal story. My father worked as a materials engineer for Bethlehem Steel for 40 years. A pension was part of his package of benefits. Know what that package is worth today? Zero. Why? Because the company which promised it doesn't exist any more. Fortunately for him, he was bright enough to understand that it wasn't something that was sustainable, and made preparations for his own retirement.

 

[daz28]

2 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

So what you’re saying is we give people in debt more money to spend?  I assume your in favor of giving drug addicts free drugs?  

If you're going that route, our discussion is done.  I don't do suppositions.  Have a great Mother's day.  

1 minute ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

We lost health care because SOMEONE decided it would be a bright idea to have the government handle health insurance mandates and acceptable pre-existing conditions.

 

I said it then (you can research it if you'd like), the ACA was a BAD idea. They should have either gone to a medicare-for-all or left the market alone.

 

Half-assing it wasn't the answer, it never is.

 

As far as pensions go, I'll give you an anecdotal story. My father worked as a materials engineer for Bethlehem Steel for 40 years. A pension was part of his package of benefits. Know what that package is worth today? Zero. Why? Because the company which promised it doesn't exist any more. Fortunately for him, he was bright enough to understand that it wasn't something that was sustainable, and made preparations for his own retirement.

 

We tried the ACA BECAUSE our job related health care was already gone.

 

As for your dad's pension, well someone took off with the money.  Who let them?

[Chef Jim]

2 minutes ago, daz28 said:

If you're going that route, our discussion is done.  I don't do suppositions.  Have a great Mother's day.  

 Excuse me?  Then why are you here? 

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

5 minutes ago, daz28 said:

If you're going that route, our discussion is done.  I don't do suppositions.  Have a great Mother's day.  

We tried the ACA BECAUSE our job related health care was already gone.

 

As for your dad's pension, well someone took off with the money.  Who let them?

 

The bankruptcy courts gave it to creditors, obviously.

 

Edit: as far as "healthcare being gone," I had FANTASTIC coverage from work pre-ACA. It went to ***** AFTER ACA. SO, instead of blaming the government for ***** it all up, I should blame my employer?

 

 

Edited May 10, 2020 by Joe in Winslow

[daz28]

Just now, Chef Jim said:

 Excuse me?  Then why are you here? 

Not here to have someone tell me I probably want to give free drugs to drugs addicts.  If you want to discuss a topic, stick to it.

7 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

I am not sure what a market capilist Libertarian is, but I am pretty sure I am prolly one.

 

But why in the world would you want the bolded? My wife and I am worked our butts off our whole lives, lived conservatively, saved a ton, have relatively no debt outside of that we want like mortgages, paid off both of our student loans, are paying for my kids education., and have a pretty nice sum saved for reitrement...and you want to reward people who have done the opposite? Who lived the good life while we scrimped  and saved? 

That's not what I meant, and maybe I worded it wrong.  What I meant is why give the cuts to those already wealthy if they weren't going to invest it.  It should have went to you, I and they other struggling Americans.  I guess I was just putting us all in the average American with debt category

3 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

The bankruptcy courts gave it to creditors, obviously.

 

Edit: as far as "healthcare being gone," I had FANTASTIC coverage from work pre-ACA. It went to ***** AFTER ACA. SO, instead of blaming the government for ***** it all up, I should blame my employer?

 

 

The percentage of Americans who did have what you had was far lower than those 30 years previously.  I'm not trying to argue the ACA with you, I was simply pointing out it was an attempt to address that issue for many people

[Chef Jim]

1 minute ago, daz28 said:

Not here to have someone tell me I probably want to give free drugs to drugs addicts.  If you want to discuss a topic, stick to it.

It’s called a metaphor.   

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

4 minutes ago, daz28 said:

The percentage of Americans who did have what you had was far lower than those 30 years previously.  I'm not trying to argue the ACA with you, I was simply pointing out it was an attempt to address that issue for many people

A really piss-poor attempt that instead of raising up many people, lowered many others.

 

 

[daz28]

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

It’s called a metaphor.   

You mean like an apple is a metaphor for an orange?

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

A really piss-poor attempt that instead of raising up many people, lowered many others.

 

 

Part of that issue is that both sides of the political isle really don't care to make the other look good.  Has either party introduced anything the other party would even remotely agree to?  The ACA, as you probably already know, was forced through so the Obama administration could say they did something good.  Did they have good intentions, absolutely, but they took what they could get and ran.  

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

6 minutes ago, daz28 said:

You mean like an apple is a metaphor for an orange?

Part of that issue is that both sides of the political isle really don't care to make the other look good.  Has either party introduced anything the other party would even remotely agree to?  The ACA, as you probably already know, was forced through so the Obama administration could say they did something good.  Did they have good intentions, absolutely, but they took what they could get and ran.  

 

There are not two sides to the political aisle. Most of these politicians serve the same interests.

 

It's one of the reasons I voted Trump. He's not one of them. It's also the reason I voted Perot many years ago. He wasn't one of them.

 

Populism and anti-globalism is the answer to our nation's woes, along with a complete teardown of the establishment.

 

[daz28]

2 minutes ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

There are not two sides to the political aisle. Most of these politicians serve the same interests.

 

It's one of the reasons I voted Trump. He's not one of them. It's also the reason I voted Perot many years ago. He wasn't one of them.

 

Populism and anti-globalism is the answer to our nation's woes, along with a complete teardown of the establishment.

 

Yes, that's true.  maybe I should have said the illusion of a political isle.  

 

I voted Perot as well, but wasn't upset about Clinton.  

 

I'd say absolutely that Trump has morphed into a Republican, though

Edited May 10, 2020 by daz28

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

I'd say absolutely that Trump has morphed into a Republican, though

 

Then you're ignoring how a pretty sizeable chunk of the Republican party hates him.

 

[daz28]

Just now, Joe in Winslow said:

 

Then you're ignoring how a pretty sizeable chunk of the Republican party hates him.

 

Maybe of the electorate, but Congress seems to have his back pretty solidly.  Publicly at least.

[3rdnlng]

2 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

i think looking at the meat industry is perfect to help form our response, I agree. Lets test everyone in the plants, and crank the numbers to establish how many are positive and asympatomatic, how many hospitalizations, deaths etc. I mean, can there be a worse envirnoment for transmitting than in those plants? 

 

Maybe those numbers have already been established, i am not aware of them. 

 

And i do not agree that the response has no consequenes....liquor sales for the months of March and  April in VA..equivalnt every week to the week of Thanksgiving...that means people are slamming booze at record numbers ..look at the amount of vacinations young kids are getting now..way down..42% in April CDC estimates.

Two things:

 

Are you including the liquor that restaurants and bars were previously ordering?

 

Are there any adjacent states that have shut down their liquor stores? The liquor stores in NYS are having a booming business from PA customers who can't purchase hard liquor in PA. 

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

You mean like an apple is a metaphor for an orange?

 

No. Expecting people who live in debt to use tax breaks to reduce their debt is like feeding a drug addict expecting them to quit drugs. That kind of metaphor. 

[daz28]

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

No. Expecting people who live in debt to use tax breaks to reduce their debt is like feeding a drug addict expecting them to quit drugs. That kind of metaphor. 

Read the thread more carefully you'll see the point was that it's better to give it to the average American than it to give it to a company who's just gonna use it to buy back stocks

[Chef Jim]

3 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Read the thread more carefully you'll see the point was that it's better to give it to the average American than it to give it to a company who's just gonna use it to buy back stocks

Yeah I got that. And understand my point I’m making. All I’m doing is pointing out the folly of your point that people are going to do the right thing with the tax breaks. That is all. Oh and most average Americans did get a tax break. 

[B-Man]

 

 

HIGHER EDUCATION IS NOT NOTED FOR ITS FRUGALITY WITH OTHER PEOPLE’S MONEY: 

 

Higher ed experts concerned colleges could blow through coronavirus aid.

 

 

 

 

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, Joe in Winslow said:

 

We lost health care because SOMEONE decided it would be a bright idea to have the government handle health insurance mandates and acceptable pre-existing conditions.

 

I said it then (you can research it if you'd like), the ACA was a BAD idea. They should have either gone to a medicare-for-all or left the market alone.

 

Half-assing it wasn't the answer, it never is.

 

As far as pensions go, I'll give you an anecdotal story. My father worked as a materials engineer for Bethlehem Steel for 40 years. A pension was part of his package of benefits. Know what that package is worth today? Zero. Why? Because the company which promised it doesn't exist any more. Fortunately for him, he was bright enough to understand that it wasn't something that was sustainable, and made preparations for his own retirement.

 

No, Obamacare was a great idea. 30 million American can now go see a doctor who wouldn't have been able to before. Who cries over that fact? 

29 minutes ago, daz28 said:

Read the thread more carefully you'll see the point was that it's better to give it to the average American than it to give it to a company who's just gonna use it to buy back stocks

If you make unemployment too generous though, the workers won't risk their lives to go out and get the economy running again until its safe to do so 

[daz28]

3 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

No, Obamacare was a great idea. 30 million American can now go see a doctor who wouldn't have been able to before. Who cries over that fact? 

If you make unemployment too generous though, the workers won't risk their lives to go out and get the economy running again until its safe to do so 

But Obamacare did do some things that people didn't like, and had a big impact on the overall effect on how we can move forward trying to correct it.  

 

 

I know you're being sarcastic, but we've already established that the unemployment myth is false.  You can't refuse to go back to work, and still collect benefits.

32 minutes ago, Chef Jim said:

Yeah I got that. And understand my point I’m making. All I’m doing is pointing out the folly of your point that people are going to do the right thing with the tax breaks. That is all. Oh and most average Americans did get a tax break. 

Most people would have injected that money right back into the economy.  A lot of Americans love to spend, and not worry about the future.  Also, the tax break is temporary right now, while most of those stock buybacks were sold almost immediately to go straight to their bank accounts.  IMO, it's almost securities fraud.  

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, daz28 said:

But Obamacare did do some things that people didn't like, and had a big impact on the overall effect on how we can move forward trying to correct it.  

 

 

I know you're being sarcastic, but we've already established that the unemployment myth is false.  You can't refuse to go back to work, and still collect benefits.

Most people would have injected that money right back into the economy.  A lot of Americans love to spend, and not worry about the future.  Also, the tax break is temporary right now, while most of those stock buybacks were sold almost immediately to go straight to their bank accounts.  IMO, it's almost securities fraud.  

My point exactly. You mentioned the “unfortunate” ones who are I debt could use the tax breaks. They would have those tax breaks and still be in debt. Fools will be fools. 
 

And you and I didn’t benefit from those stock by backs?  So a buy back is “almost” securities fraud?  ????