This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021  (Read 20930 times)

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #540 on: January 20, 2021, 04:29:50 PM »
Half of Trump's policy - and his biggest legislative agenda - was the traditional Republican playbook -- increase government spending and cut taxes across the board, running up the deficit. (The median American got around $1000 from the cuts, but the top 1% got $50,000.)

Where he departs from traditional is in his trade wars and restricted immigration. The benefit of those to the average American is unclear. I don't have a strong opinion, and opinion from economists seems highly varied.

1) $1000 to a median is a much bigger boost than $50,000 to a 1%'er...

   And I think the numbers are off.  As I said before, I do my own taxes and mine was about $2000 difference and I am near the median with no kids.  I'm guessing that wherever those numbers came from is using total taxes, not just federal.*

Because there was a fair amount of restructuring, there is a variance depending on who you are. But I've seen roughly this number from multiple sources. Here's one:

Quote
The Tax Policy Center estimates the 60% of Americans at the lower end of the income distribution will have federal tax savings of less than $1,000. Also, most people believe the tax cuts didn’t benefit people like them but only the very wealthy. They are right. Those in the top 1% save $51,000.
Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresaghilarducci/2019/04/09/five-good-reasons-it-doesnt-feel-like-the-trump-tax-cut-benefited-you/
cf also https://americansfortaxfairness.org/promise-will-middle-class-tax-cut/

2) Restricted immigration raises wages by reducing the supply of workers. This can also raise prices but over the last 50 years the wage stagnation far outstrips any price increase that is due to reduced worker supply.

3) Trade wars and tariffs will cause similar effects, but again the fact that it is not true free trade has still caused prices to rise far faster than wages. 

   ...Would you allow a US company to use slave labor inside the border?  Setting aside the moral/ethical dilemma, economically it would give the company a significant advantage over competition.  Then why is it considered 'free' trade when you allow importers to do it?

4) Economists are never in consensus.  Everything is a series of trade-offs. 

Regarding these - #2 and #3 are a piece of #4. Yes, I've seen similar arguments about immigration, but those seem simplistic. Many people picture that there are a fixed number of jobs from the overlords, so if you double the population - then half the people are out of work. But that's obviously false. More people means more domestic market -- building more homes, shopping more, and so forth. That creates more jobs. And more work can also create more jobs, like how new homes creates new service jobs. The balance between positive and negative effects depends on the details of how immigration is handled.

As for slavery - that is overwhelmingly a moral/ethical question, not an economic one. I would love it if we set trade limits based more on morality rather than convenience - but that wasn't what the recent trade wars were about. We're still close partners with Saudi Arabia and other repressive countries.

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #541 on: January 20, 2021, 04:39:12 PM »
I'm not very clear on Trump's real political views. In a lot of ways, he seems like a typical New York liberal, who doesn't care in the slightest about religious traditionalism or race. His stance on immigration is hard to reconcile with this, but can be explained by political opportunism -- he found an untapped vein of discontent, and exploited it. His appeal to evangelicals is similar: They know he's not one of them, but he'll speak to them and work with them, whereas the rest of the political establishment either bitterly opposes or treats them as an embarrassment.

But that doesn't really explain the birther nonsense, which was long before he became a political demagogue. I think he's really just a businessman, looking for opportunities and worried about competition. He's for free markets in the sense he wants to run a business and do well, but it's the nose in the weeds practical perspective, rather than a sky-high theoretical view from above. That's why he seems oblivious to the damage done by things like monetary inflation, because he has no theoretical grounding; and he's fine with stimulus packages, because he likes handing out things to his friends. He's has no problem with protectionism, as long it favors him or his allies.


I think he does have the theoretical grounding. 

1) At this point, the damage that will come from stimulus, QE, etc. is going to be pretty devastating. 
(Hence, why the can keeps getting kicked down the road.) 

2) Everybody below upper-middle-class will get hit very hard, but the elites try and hide it by manipulating the data.
(Inflation is a big factor at that end of the income spectrum.  Notice which categories have been 'removed' from inflation rate calculations between 2000-2016.)

3) They started raising the Interest Rate as soon as he got into office.  But his policies still enabled the economy to expand and the rate was almost back into the 'range' that economists like, then the Wu-Flu destroyed the economy. 
(He understood that Keynesian economics are not good long term, but he was trying to soften the blow as much as possible.  If you look at his ideas as a whole they all lean in that direction.)

As much as I despise the use of Keynesian economics to generate wealth off of the back of a serf class, I think he was trying to get people out from under the establishment yoke without collapsing everything.

I told a friend a few years ago.  Donald Trump is rich but he isn't an 'elitist'.  He doesn't require a 'serf class'.  Look at his businesses.  Some people need bowing and scraping, but he doesn't.  He would be just as happy if we were all millionaires, because then we could all spend money at his golf courses, etc.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #542 on: January 20, 2021, 05:44:15 PM »
I think he's really just a businessman, looking for opportunities and worried about competition. He's for free markets in the sense he wants to run a business and do well, but it's the nose in the weeds practical perspective, rather than a sky-high theoretical view from above. That's why he seems oblivious to the damage done by things like monetary inflation, because he has no theoretical grounding; and he's fine with stimulus packages, because he likes handing out things to his friends. He's has no problem with protectionism, as long it favors him or his allies.

I think there's less of a divide over the trade war with China than you think. The political and journalistic classes hate it because it comes from Trump, but even when NPR was interviewing trade officials or import/expert business heads, they couldn't find any who would flat-out say it was bad. They weren't confident that Trump's tactics were going to work, and they knew in the short term it would hurt, but they believed it was far past time someone stood up to China and all their unfair practices. Among economists, some supported the political establishment by saying China is bad and we need to do something, but Trump is still bad because he should have done it a bit differently; and some on the strong free market side will always argue in favor of unilaterally reducing all tariffs to zero; but most seem to think it's at least somewhat justified.

I was speaking about the trade wars in general, not just China. Particularly your last sentence sounds much like what I'm saying. "Most think it's at least somewhat justified" sounds mixed to me, which was my point. I'm not opposed to trade wars -- I don't feel strongly about them either way. I support more restricted trade based on human rights - especially with repressive governments like China, Saudi Arabia, and Russia. But that's on moral grounds rather than economic benefit.


1) At this point, the damage that will come from stimulus, QE, etc. is going to be pretty devastating. 
(Hence, why the can keeps getting kicked down the road.) 

2) Everybody below upper-middle-class will get hit very hard, but the elites try and hide it by manipulating the data.
(Inflation is a big factor at that end of the income spectrum.  Notice which categories have been 'removed' from inflation rate calculations between 2000-2016.)

The only recent president who came close to balancing the budget was Bill Clinton, who had negative deficit for 1998 - 2001. Trump followed the exact same playbook as Bush - continue to raise the federal budget and give a bunch of tax breaks (mostly to the rich), while raising the deficit. Obama came in during the Great Recession, and he continued roughly the same Bush plan for dealing with it.

On the national debt, you point out that the elites are going to walk out of it and the middle and lower classes take the brunt. I agree that this is a distinct possibility. The Republican solution is to keep giving the elites more and more money through tax breaks. The Democratic solution is to undo the elite tax breaks so they pay a greater share.

*If* one's concern is that the middle and lower classes are taking undue burden for the national debt, then I would think that the Democratic solution makes more sense. I think the only way that the Republican deficit approach makes sense is if one believes in trickle-down theory, or "a rising tide lifts all boats".


3) They started raising the Interest Rate as soon as he got into office.  But his policies still enabled the economy to expand and the rate was almost back into the 'range' that economists like, then the Wu-Flu destroyed the economy. 
(He understood that Keynesian economics are not good long term, but he was trying to soften the blow as much as possible.  If you look at his ideas as a whole they all lean in that direction.)

As much as I despise the use of Keynesian economics to generate wealth off of the back of a serf class, I think he was trying to get people out from under the establishment yoke without collapsing everything.

I don't see how you think his policies accomplished this. Yes, the economy expanded under his first three years, though the economy expanded under Obama's second term as well. And his response to the covid economic crisis was roughly the same as Bush and Obama to the Great Recession - stimulus money.

KingCheops

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • K
  • Posts: 973
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #543 on: January 20, 2021, 08:18:52 PM »
I told a friend a few years ago.  Donald Trump is rich but he isn't an 'elitist'.  He doesn't require a 'serf class'.  Look at his businesses.  Some people need bowing and scraping, but he doesn't.  He would be just as happy if we were all millionaires, because then we could all spend money at his golf courses, etc.

I used to make fun of him for being a shitty businessman but I've always liked the stories of how he treated people.  Flying that sick girl on his plane when no one else would.  Randomly walking into his restaurants and handing out $100s like they're candy.  The stories about the massive party he threw for the construction crews and their families when Caesar's Vegas was finished.  That's before even getting into the Mar-a-Lago thing.

I think his biggest problem is that he likes people and treats them well and goes into social interactions thinking that the other person will be the same.  Drop him into the shark tank that is Washington DC and you can see how that went wrong for him.  Most of his worst decisions were because he was trusting professional liars.

rawma

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1789
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #544 on: January 20, 2021, 09:40:08 PM »
Remember rawma was calling for liars to be punished.

That is not true, and I do not call for you to be punished for saying something untrue.

EOTB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #545 on: January 20, 2021, 09:44:06 PM »
Trump was always just a brand, and that was all he’d ever needed.  On trade, where he had talented people aligned with his desire, he succeeded.  And yes, the new NA trade pact is a success.  He didn’t hit the end goal with China.  There were also other US factions working against him on China, and China decided to wait and see who won 2020.

But everywhere else, he had people saying one thing and doing something else.  That’s on Trump; hiring is his responsibility.  He’d have been better off with the smallest admin staff ever who were aligned to him, than all the legions of establishment GOP he took in.  It’s not as if hiring Mitch’s wife accomplished any hard or soft objectives

But he felt a genuine sense of noblesse oblige, something long missing from US elites that everyday Americans responded to. 
A framework for generating local politics

https://mewe.com/join/osric A MeWe OSRIC group - find an online game; share a monster, class, or spell; give input on what you'd like for new OSRIC products.  Just don't 1) talk religion/politics, or 2) be a Richard

Shasarak

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2607
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #546 on: January 20, 2021, 09:58:04 PM »
Remember rawma was calling for liars to be punished.

That is not true, and I do not call for you to be punished for saying something untrue.

How ironic that we must punish rawma under the rawma protocols.
There will be poor always,
pathetically struggling,
look at the good things you've got! -  Jesus

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #547 on: January 20, 2021, 10:02:10 PM »
Half of Trump's policy - and his biggest legislative agenda - was the traditional Republican playbook -- increase government spending and cut taxes across the board, running up the deficit. (The median American got around $1000 from the cuts, but the top 1% got $50,000.)

Where he departs from traditional is in his trade wars and restricted immigration. The benefit of those to the average American is unclear. I don't have a strong opinion, and opinion from economists seems highly varied.

1) $1000 to a median is a much bigger boost than $50,000 to a 1%'er...

   And I think the numbers are off.  As I said before, I do my own taxes and mine was about $2000 difference and I am near the median with no kids.  I'm guessing that wherever those numbers came from is using total taxes, not just federal.*

Because there was a fair amount of restructuring, there is a variance depending on who you are. But I've seen roughly this number from multiple sources. Here's one:

Quote
The Tax Policy Center estimates the 60% of Americans at the lower end of the income distribution will have federal tax savings of less than $1,000. Also, most people believe the tax cuts didn’t benefit people like them but only the very wealthy. They are right. Those in the top 1% save $51,000.
Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/teresaghilarducci/2019/04/09/five-good-reasons-it-doesnt-feel-like-the-trump-tax-cut-benefited-you/
cf also https://americansfortaxfairness.org/promise-will-middle-class-tax-cut/

They both come from the same source paper.  The source paper brings up the fact that the bottom quint includes the people who don't file/do not pay any income tax...but I noticed neither article points that out because it doesn't fit the narrative of 'orange man bad'...

Speaking of which, did you really source something that used 'latinx' as a category and then made everything about race? I noticed that they included asians in the chart, but left them out of the discussion.  Do you suppose that particular ethnic group might have skewed their imaging that no one but 'whitey' can succeed?  I'm not even going to get into the outright lie when they say no business loopholes were closed.

By definition, people who aren't paying income tax, can't have it reduced...You do realize that including a large number of people who either didn't pay any income tax before or else have their burden reduced to zero artificially reduces the 'per capita' tax break in that quint making it appear lower, right??

Do I need to set up some fractions or other advanced mathematical concepts to demonstrate that concept?

2) Restricted immigration raises wages by reducing the supply of workers. This can also raise prices but over the last 50 years the wage stagnation far outstrips any price increase that is due to reduced worker supply.

3) Trade wars and tariffs will cause similar effects, but again the fact that it is not true free trade has still caused prices to rise far faster than wages. 

   ...Would you allow a US company to use slave labor inside the border?  Setting aside the moral/ethical dilemma, economically it would give the company a significant advantage over competition.  Then why is it considered 'free' trade when you allow importers to do it?

4) Economists are never in consensus.  Everything is a series of trade-offs. 

Regarding these - #2 and #3 are a piece of #4. Yes, I've seen similar arguments about immigration, but those seem simplistic. Many people picture that there are a fixed number of jobs from the overlords, so if you double the population - then half the people are out of work. But that's obviously false. More people means more domestic market -- building more homes, shopping more, and so forth. That creates more jobs. And more work can also create more jobs, like how new homes creates new service jobs. The balance between positive and negative effects depends on the details of how immigration is handled.

As for slavery - that is overwhelmingly a moral/ethical question, not an economic one. I would love it if we set trade limits based more on morality rather than convenience - but that wasn't what the recent trade wars were about. We're still close partners with Saudi Arabia and other repressive countries.

Point 4 was included specifically as reference to your comment about economists not having a consensus...and I specifically excluded the moral/ethical argument about slavery because we were discussing economics.  Apparently fighting China in a trade war (for whatever reason) and reducing our energy dependence on countries like Saudi Arabia weren't enough for you.  I'm glad Biden is going to do more to support your moral/ethical outlook than Trump tried to do.  I bet ol' Joe really sticks it to the Chinese and the oppressive oil exporters.  All he has to do is finish Keystone so we can get more oil from better world citizens like Canada...oh wait, he cancelled that didn't he? Oopsie!

2 & 3 aren't 'simplistic'.  I specifically pointed out the good/bad duality.  I assumed everyone on the board had enough economic education that they didn't need the paragraph long explanation of how everything moved along the curve in little steps to equilibrium.  I'm not trying to pad a thesis here.  I also notice you had nothing to say about my actual point, which was that the wage stagnation over the years has been so pronounced that they would rise faster than prices at this point...


1) At this point, the damage that will come from stimulus, QE, etc. is going to be pretty devastating. 
(Hence, why the can keeps getting kicked down the road.) 

2) Everybody below upper-middle-class will get hit very hard, but the elites try and hide it by manipulating the data.
(Inflation is a big factor at that end of the income spectrum.  Notice which categories have been 'removed' from inflation rate calculations between 2000-2016.)

The only recent president who came close to balancing the budget was Bill Clinton, who had negative deficit for 1998 - 2001. Trump followed the exact same playbook as Bush - continue to raise the federal budget and give a bunch of tax breaks (mostly to the rich), while raising the deficit. Obama came in during the Great Recession, and he continued roughly the same Bush plan for dealing with it.

On the national debt, you point out that the elites are going to walk out of it and the middle and lower classes take the brunt. I agree that this is a distinct possibility. The Republican solution is to keep giving the elites more and more money through tax breaks. The Democratic solution is to undo the elite tax breaks so they pay a greater share.

*If* one's concern is that the middle and lower classes are taking undue burden for the national debt, then I would think that the Democratic solution makes more sense. I think the only way that the Republican deficit approach makes sense is if one believes in trickle-down theory, or "a rising tide lifts all boats".

OMG...You are actually going to bring Bill's 'budget surplus' into this discussion...now I know you aren't being serious...The 'federal budget' is a trojan horse because 2 of the top 3 outlays for federal dollars (SS and means-tested need *cough* welfare *cough* aren't included in the so called 'budget'...I mean I'd love to leave my house and car payments out of my personal budget but I don't think the credit agencies are gonna buy it.

3) They started raising the Interest Rate as soon as he got into office.  But his policies still enabled the economy to expand and the rate was almost back into the 'range' that economists like, then the Wu-Flu destroyed the economy. 
(He understood that Keynesian economics are not good long term, but he was trying to soften the blow as much as possible.  If you look at his ideas as a whole they all lean in that direction.)

As much as I despise the use of Keynesian economics to generate wealth off of the back of a serf class, I think he was trying to get people out from under the establishment yoke without collapsing everything.

I don't see how you think his policies accomplished this. Yes, the economy expanded under his first three years, though the economy expanded under Obama's second term as well. And his response to the covid economic crisis was roughly the same as Bush and Obama to the Great Recession - stimulus money.

Yes, Trump raised the budget.  You 'forgot' to note that the rising interest rates mean that the economy was doing significantly better than under either predecessor.  That allows for the reduction of the stimulus over time which is moving in the right direction, at least compared to Bush and Obama.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #548 on: January 20, 2021, 10:24:01 PM »
Funny how the 'winner' desperately needed 30,000+ NG, 'properly vetted', to protect him during his own inauguration.

But that's none of my business *sip*

It's scary that you're NG has a anti-democratic traitor in their ranks.

Really...a Traitor??...Wow!

Do you have a link to the charges?

Luckily they didn't need to be charged because they didn't have the opportunity to fulfill whatever traitorous agenda was in their heads.

No coup for you.

Oh...So you lied about them being traitors then.

Apparently they must not have done anything untoward if there are also no USCMJ charges, since those are a bit more strict...

When did I ask for a coup? ???

Mibbe eh mibbe naw.

Well, first...you would be easier to understand if you spit Biden's dick out before trying to talk...

Anybody who doesn't accept the democratic will if the American people is a traitor.

That's better.  ;)

Uhhh...well that's a first.  I never heard anyone call MLK a traitor for opposing laws that were properly passed...except maybe he was called that by the FBI, that bastion of all that is good and holy in the US.

To be a member of the armed forces and not be trustworthy to defend the President marks you out.
Unless the President might be one of those 'domestic enemies' who is actually in the service of another nation like Russia, right?

True Americans should look to upholding the democratic traditions of the nation.

But only those 'traditions' that you actually support, right?





"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #549 on: January 21, 2021, 12:37:37 AM »
Trump was always just a brand, and that was all he’d ever needed.  On trade, where he had talented people aligned with his desire, he succeeded.  And yes, the new NA trade pact is a success.  He didn’t hit the end goal with China.  There were also other US factions working against him on China, and China decided to wait and see who won 2020.

But everywhere else, he had people saying one thing and doing something else.  That’s on Trump; hiring is his responsibility.  He’d have been better off with the smallest admin staff ever who were aligned to him, than all the legions of establishment GOP he took in.  It’s not as if hiring Mitch’s wife accomplished any hard or soft objectives
I think part of that was lack of experience with government workers/politicians.  It wasn't his area of expertise and I think he trusted people to put the country's interest ahead of their own if they were working on the taxpayer dime.  Just a bit naive.  I still think that was why they targeted Flynn from day one.  He wasn't an establishment type.  Combine that with having to explain the illegal FISA warrant.  They were able to remove his best go-to person and bundle up a sham investigation to hamstring him all in one swoop.
But he felt a genuine sense of noblesse oblige, something long missing from US elites that everyday Americans responded to.
He is one of the few people in the last 50 years that would have probably been a good king in a monarchy.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

GameDaddy

  • BANNED
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2931
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #550 on: January 21, 2021, 01:00:07 AM »
OMG...You are actually going to bring Bill's 'budget surplus' into this discussion...now I know you aren't being serious...The 'federal budget' is a trojan horse because 2 of the top 3 outlays for federal dollars (SS and means-tested need *cough* welfare *cough* aren't included in the so called 'budget'...I mean I'd love to leave my house and car payments out of my personal budget but I don't think the credit agencies are gonna buy it.

Just a couple comments here... Mark my words, Joe is certainly not going to stick it to the Chinese, mostly because, ...they hold his leash, and have since about 2012 or so. They also hold yet another leash on the Federal Deficit.

Social Seurity is a problem the government brought upon itself. The American taxpayer ponied up monies that go into that fund, Which should be invested and provide a return but Congress has looted social security to prop up the rest of the budget, including, you know... Defense and ...paying back what they looted along with paying the interest bill on the deficit they have run up. Medicare/Medicaid, and SNAP/Unemployment make up the next biggest categories of annual Federal Spending that Social Security $$$ goes towards. They haven't figured out how to pay back the social security fund yet. My guess is they will borrow money and raise the federal deficit right up until they can't anymore.

Just recently the Chinese bought almost a Trillion dollars of the federal deficit, and are collecting the interest payments on that. It's like they bought Boardwalk in the Monopoly game and the Federal Government stays there, and pays them, every time they come around the board. 
Blackmoor grew from a single Castle to include, first, several adjacent Castles (with the forces of Evil lying just off the edge of the world to an entire Northern Province of the Castle and Crusade Society's Great Kingdom.

~ Dave Arneson

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 686
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #551 on: January 21, 2021, 01:52:28 AM »
OMG...You are actually going to bring Bill's 'budget surplus' into this discussion...now I know you aren't being serious...The 'federal budget' is a trojan horse because 2 of the top 3 outlays for federal dollars (SS and means-tested need *cough* welfare *cough* aren't included in the so called 'budget'...I mean I'd love to leave my house and car payments out of my personal budget but I don't think the credit agencies are gonna buy it.

Just a couple comments here... Mark my words, Joe is certainly not going to stick it to the Chinese, mostly because, ...they hold his leash, and have since about 2012 or so. They also hold yet another leash on the Federal Deficit.
Yeah, I mentioned that a couple of posts back

Social Seurity is a problem the government brought upon itself forced upon the citizens illegally. The American taxpayer ponied up monies that go into that fund, Which should be invested and provide a return but Congress has looted social security to prop up the rest of the budget, including, you know... Defense and ...paying back what they looted along with paying the interest bill on the deficit they have run up. Medicare/Medicaid, and SNAP/Unemployment make up the next biggest categories of annual Federal Spending that Social Security $$$ goes towards. They haven't figured out how to pay back the social security fund yet. My guess is they will borrow money and raise the federal deficit right up until they can't anymore.

Just recently the Chinese bought almost a Trillion dollars of the federal deficit, and are collecting the interest payments on that. It's like they bought Boardwalk in the Monopoly game and the Federal Government stays there, and pays them, every time they come around the board.

FTFY.    :)
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

EOTB

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1172
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #552 on: January 21, 2021, 03:05:05 AM »
There is no way to invest the social security intake in any practical measure.  People do not want that money going into the stock market (and they'd have to change the law to do so). 

Social security could go into US Government general obligation bonds...when a bond is purchased that social security money that purchased it would go into the general fund.  The social security asset would have "a bond".  And then you'd have a fictitious, meaningless accounting mechanism where the government would pay itself interest raised by your taxes...out of the general fund...to repay the social security "trust fund" and redeem the bond. 

it's all bullshit.  There's zero difference between that and doing what they do, which is dump the revenue into the general fund, and pay benefits out of the general fund.  "It's supposed to go into a trust" was always bullshit and people over 60 need to start figuring that out.
A framework for generating local politics

https://mewe.com/join/osric A MeWe OSRIC group - find an online game; share a monster, class, or spell; give input on what you'd like for new OSRIC products.  Just don't 1) talk religion/politics, or 2) be a Richard

Ghostmaker

  • Chlorine trifluoride
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1188
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #553 on: January 21, 2021, 08:19:17 AM »

Anybody who doesn't accept the democratic will if the American people is a traitor. To be a member of the armed forces and not be trustworthy to defend the President marks you out. True Americans should look to upholding the democratic traditions of the nation.
Wow, usually they don't walk into the buzzsaw that easily.

Shall we discuss the last four years of nonstop 'resistance'?

Or we can ride the Wayback Machine and check out how the left treated Dubya.

Yeah, you can go fuck yourself, Mr. Rules-For-Thee-But-Not-For-Me.

Trond

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
    • View Profile
Re: LIVE COVERAGE of Rally for President Trump in DC! 01/06/2021
« Reply #554 on: January 21, 2021, 01:13:47 PM »