Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Yes.

what is the significance?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Denying Trump the 270 votes necessary merely would mean it all gets dumped into the House of Representatives with its Republican majority. He'd be still the next President.

--Brant

so I read somewhere

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Brant Gaede said:

Denying Trump the 270 votes necessary merely would mean it all gets dumped into the House of Representatives with its Republican majority. He'd be still the next President.

--Brant

so I read somewhere

In theory the House could elect any eligible person that it wished.  But if the election is thrown into the House, most likely Trump would be elected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Yes.

What is the significance?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/15/2016 at 10:12 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Is this the Mr. Snarky you talk about showing up?

... 

This isn't accurate.

In Greenspan's case, I don't think he's an idiot.

.......

Maybe you need a refresher course in plain English?

No, you are the Mr. Snarky I refer to. Wasn't that obvious? Three out of oodles of examples follow.

"Greenspan just said the problem with the American economy is that there are too many jobs and too much pay!"

"Blah blah blah."

"The dogs bark as the caravan passes by."

Heh. So you believe Apple, Inc. is going to hire camel jockeys to repair roads and bridges? Doggone. How clever. :)

I didn't claim you literally said he was an idiot. Jeesh! You don't read very well.

17 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Come on, Merlin.

Work with me, now.

It's not hard.

Creating jobs is not a cause. Where have I have said that a job is a primary? In creating wealth, jobs are part of the process. (May I recommend the works of Ayn Rand? :evil: )

My beef is when math gets divorced from reality. No economist-like math on earth explains the Wollman Rink affair. But the morality of the businessman does. I've said it before and I'll say it again. Donald Trump is one of the most moral men ever to run for the presidency.

I find it psychologically telling how we phrase things differently, anyway.

I talk about creating period. You talk about reducing a negative (like unemployment) as a cause for creating.

We see the world from vastly different perspectives.

Echoing you: Blah, blah, blah. :) There, that "solved the debt problem."  :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Below, Robert has a witty suggestion.

Peter

Robert Tracinski wrote: . . . . This is a sucker's game, and there is a much simpler solution. If we're going to repeal Obamacare, maybe what we should do first--wait for it--is to repeal Obamacare. I would prefer a bill that is a single sentence, along the lines of "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 is hereby repealed in its entirety." If you want to get wordy, I wouldn't object to expanding it a little: "The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, the name of which is a cruel joke, is hereby repealed in its entirety."

No, it won't be that simple. That kind of straight repeal would face a filibuster from Senate Democrats, who are still nowhere near recognizing what a political disaster Obamacare has been for them. So instead, Republicans will have to pass a de facto repeal which uses the power of the purse to defund all of Obamacare's central functions. Under budget rules, this can be passed with a simple majority . . . .

Congressional Republicans have a genuine mandate from the voters to repeal Obamacare and draft their own idea for what should replace it. Shutting Obamacare down with a short deadline would be an assertion of that mandate, and it would force even President Trump to go through them on this issue. It's the smart solution, and it is also a bold one that gives the Republican Congress an opportunity, finally, to act from a position of strength. Unfortunately, they haven't been all that great in the past at being smart, strong, and bold.

Republicans seem to be afraid that Democrats will still stubbornly block any replacement, allowing Obamacare to lapse and then blaming Republicans for the fallout. But seriously, after seven years of winning on the issue of Obamacare, it is absurd for Republicans still to be running scared. What are they afraid of? Is repealing Obamacare a political loser? No, the evidence is overwhelming that defending Obamacare is the political loser.

end quote 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael wrote, “There's an old Arabic saying I learned in Brazil. The dogs bark as the caravan passes by.”

And Ba’al answered, “Given that, what makes the dog raise a hind leg and pee on a fire hydrant?” 

"Three Dog Night" . . . "What's a bad night for the D.C. money tree?"

Dah dah dah dah dah. Shave and a haircut . . . two bits. Good evening, this is Ed McMahon with the Tonight Show Orchestra. Welcome to The tonight Show with Johnny Carson where tonight’s guest list includes: Anthropologist Margaret Mead, Gore Vidal, Psychologist Joyce Brothers, and our special guest for the 17th time, which is a new record, Astrophysicist Carl Sagan. And now! Heeerrres Johnny!

Good evening Ladies and Gentlemen. What a sense of timing our new President has. Not only is President elect Trump negating Obama’s last days as President by being Presidential himself, he is expanding his base to the Never Trump republicans. How sweet it is! Now Mr. Trump can do no wrong. Newt is on board and even Krauthammer is amused. Everybody is excited about his cabinet picks, his first one hundred days, and the lame stream media will soon have a bunch of headlines about the Trump family as they wheel, deal, and commute. A round of applause for Doc Severinson, ladies and gentlemen. Doc, strike up the theme song to TV’s “Dallas.” We will return right after these messages. Cue “See the USA in your Chevrolet, America we’re asking you to buy . . .”

Welcome back. This is Carnac the Magnificent‘s sidekick, Ed McMahon. Our famed psychic will now divine the answers to questions contained in a sealed envelope.

"Debate" . . . "What do you use to catch de fish?"

"Baja" . . . "What sound does a Mexican sheep make when it laughs about taking your job?"

"Ben-Gay" . . . "Why didn't Mrs. Franklin have any kids? I wonder who used what bathroom, way back then?"

"Sis boom bah" . . . "Describe the sound made when a sheepish lobbyist explodes."

“Trump Tow-er” . . . “What do you call a vehicle that pulls the Congress out of a swamp?”

“You’re fired!” . . . what our new boss is going to say to the illegals working at the fish dock.”
Peter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2016 at 9:56 AM, merjet said:

MSK's messiah has arrived! :D

I dont know what Trump could be said to be doing, primarily he hasnt done anything but talk. His Carrier episode was a blustering advertisement for the low info citizen. I dont know him to be wrong about these macro economic issues but when I read articles about the missteps I find more reason than not for the mistaken premises and conclusions drawn by him and others.

Bloviation comes to mind. A guy who shoots from the hip will wing himself and his policies and his fans if he doesnt stop the rhetorical approach to economics and instead tries to convince the masses hes right by way of his yuge personality. It does damage to credibility and trustworthiness to careen along a narrow path with no glance to the side to insure youre not risking running off the rails. It may be a temporary mindset. 70 is the new 50. Alcohol and cigarettes have known health consequences, hes avoided those. That hasnt stopped the addictions. If hes as moral a business man as has been ascribed perhaps he will walk back wrong thinking too. Its an honest thing to do after being confronted with new information...to change your thinking thereby admitting you were wrong.

Walk like a man, man. ) Just dont run like Seagal. ;)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, turkeyfoot said:

It does damage to credibility and trustworthiness to careen along a narrow path with no glance to the side to insure youre not risking running off the rails.

Geoff,

Damage to credibility and trustworthiness?

With whom?

People--and some of the mainstream press--who never found him credible or trusted him, ever? Do you mean there's damage to Trump's credibility and trustworthiness with those people? 

Because for the rest, I just don't see this damage, not throughout the rest of the country. Take a look at the crowds of his thank you tours. Where's the damage?

As for low information people being hoodwinked, you mean low information people like Paul Ryan, who's now at these rallies? Or these "low information" people from the tech giants who flew in to meet him on Wednesday? 

Image result for trump tech meeting photo

BI Graphics_Trump's Table

(OK, I'll stop now.)

:)

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Geoff,

Damage to credibility and trustworthiness?

With whom?

People--and some of the mainstream press--who never found him credible or trusted him, ever? Do you mean there's damage to Trump's credibility and trustworthiness with those people? 

Because for the rest, I just don't see this damage, not throughout the rest of the country. Take a look at the crowds of his thank you tours. Where's the damage?

As for low information people being hoodwinked, you mean low information people like Paul Ryan, who's now at these rallies? Or these "low information" people from the tech giants who flew in to meet him on Wednesday? 

Image result for trump tech meeting

(OK, I'll stop now.)

:)

Michael

Ok Michael, no contest. Wait, is it raining or did you just pee on my leg. ;)

I know you arent maintaining a pretense of Trump being correct in all of his views. Youve said as much. Though there is a scarcity of opinions questioning his stances in this thread. Presumably hes not irretrievably lost except in regard to his views with tariffs because he has yet to act on them to make us great again. In that way he has yet to prove he says what he means as well as meaning what he says. He has back pedaled on a de jure repeal of ACA by offering up existing conditions and child care which causes his earlier pronouncements to lose legitimacy in my view. Then again he cant be blamed for anything other than having a faulty opinion until a time when he acts on it. I give him the benefit of the doubt where his intellectual honesty could allow him to come to a position that becomes seasoned on advice from his specialists in the field and from his new perspective given his looking at the world anew, if he does that, because as of yet all I see is posturing which can be bad when one comes to a fast conclusion without salient facts.

I see him as able to change an opinion do you? As someone who has the gall to take another tact in place of what was once thought by him to be a knowledgeable position. 

My writing skills are sad, I know that. Im imprecise, something Im learning to do less of. Im going for more beef less time typing.

Signed, Not ready for prime time. Just wait.  

I want to bring a differing opinion to the thread but if youre crying uncle, its ok. ;) You said stop or you'd stop now or close.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2016 at 8:09 PM, Brant Gaede said:

I'll ask Durk Pearson how big his "large" is.

--Brant

Several megatons. But the grid is slowly being hardened.

--Brant

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/13/2016 at 10:52 PM, Jules Troy said:

One is all you need!

50 megatons.  The original design was for a bomb that could produce a 100 megaton blast but the Soviet Union did not have a plane big enough to lift it so they halved the yeild.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now that takes the term "fireworks" to a whole new level. -- J

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's another crow moment.

I see this exactly as Rush sees it.

I am pretty sure anti-Trump people will think this is so exaggerated, it's crow-eating level.

Rush says the people living inside the bubble are not going to know what hit them, that they have no idea of what kind pf person Trump is. Meanwhile, there is going to be a whirlwind of productive projects so vast, the insiders will not be able to catch their breaths. Also, he said, Trump's cabinet is shaping up to be people who do not need this job for their resumés. They are doers, not social climbers or political animals. There is going to be a vast amount of creative destruction going on, quickly, efficiently and without consideration for insider sacred cows.

He also said Trump will probably make a few mistakes as humans are wont to do.

His last observation tickled me. He said that Trump's idea of going to war, if and when he needs to, is to win it--to kill and obliterate the enemy with finality. Annihilate the threat. Then he started laughing and said if you think the yelling about Russian hacking is something, wait until you hear the caterwauling about this...

:)

The thing is, my view of Trump as Rush states it here is what my view of him was at the beginning of the campaign. Rush's view was probably the same, too. It's hard to say because he was so ambivalent at times. But then again, he has a famous brother (David) who was a staunch NeverTrumper all the way up to the end. So maybe he had to keep peace in the family a bit.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KorbenDallas said:

1g7dmp.jpg

Well, no, that's silly. Trump is a television personality best known for his trademark "You're fired!" and that's what his constituents want him to do, fire about half of the Federal civilian workforce and kick Congress in the butt to cut spending, cut regulation, cut taxes, repeal Obamacare with interstate competition for health insurance. People also understand that something pretty fucking creative has to happen with unfunded entitlements, Dept of Education, Section 8 housing for illegals, etc. Oh, and build the wall, of course.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, wolfdevoon said:

Well, no, that's silly. Trump is a television personality best known for his trademark "You're fired!" and that's what his constituents want him to do, fire about half of the Federal civilian workforce and kick Congress in the butt to cut spending, cut regulation, cut taxes, repeal Obamacare with interstate competition for health insurance.

1g7nua.jpg

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

John "Jack" Bogle is the founder and retired CEO of The Vanguard Group. The Vanguard Group is a huuuge asset manager with $1.721 trillion in assets. (In comparison Citigroup has about $1.8 trillion and JPMorgan Chase & Co, the largest US bank, has about $2.466 trillion. Fidelity Investments has $2.1 trillion.) In this audio interview Bogle calls Donald Trump the "new John Maynard Keynes" at about 6:45 past the start. 

Is that accurate? I don't know and will defer judgment. Trump's first budget as President will be very telling to me. 

"The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 requires the President to submit the budget to Congress for each fiscal year which is the 12-month period beginning on October 1 and ending on September 30 of the next calendar year. The current federal budget law [ ] requires that the President submit the budget between the first Monday in January and the first Monday in February. In recent times, the President's budget submission has been issued in the first week of February. The budget submission has been delayed, however, in some new presidents' first year when the previous president belonged to a different party" (link).

Trump picked Mick Mulvaney to be director of the Office of Management and Budget (link). Mulvaney is viewed to be a strong fiscal hawk. So it will be very interesting to see how this works out.

The projected federal deficit for the current fiscal year (ending Sep. 30, 2017) is $503.5 billion and for the next fiscal year is $453.6 billion (source).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A synopsis of JMK:  https://www.maynardkeynes.org/

The bugaboo is his economics: "... when national economies suffer a downturn, governments should borrow and spend money to boost economic activity. Part of the proceeds of the resulting economic growth should then be used to repay the debt. "

But I understand from my past readings of Austrian economists who actually corresponded with Keynes that he had misgivings or didn't stand by this characterization of his ideas later in his life.  But of course, to the left, he became the bible in reference to government interference in the economy.

Keynes the Speculator is precious:  " “markets can remain irrational far longer than you or I can remain solvent.” "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...