Hey it's a huge propaganda win for KJU and North Korea.

We now have the American President chasing him round the planet dancing to his tune.

Where is this great negotiator?

---

Hey it's a huge propaganda win for KJU and North Korea.

We now have the American President chasing him round the planet dancing to his tune.

Where is this great negotiator?

You ever buy a used car?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Hey it's a huge propaganda win for KJU and North Korea.

We now have the American President chasing him round the planet dancing to his tune.

Where is this great negotiator?

Or he dragged KJU to Vietnam and forced him to see what a communist dictatorship in Asia could achieve when it didn't waste all of its GDP on missiles, nukes, and a huge standing army.

In any case I fail to see how it's a propaganda win. Do you really think any sane person would think more of KJU just because Trump agreed to meet with him? Maybe it will impress his subjects, but they are firmly under his thumb anyway.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Here's a resounding win for you:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/0...w2cgRIZBew

McConnell also made clear he tried to dissuade Trump from declaring the emergency, arguing that future Democratic presidents could use it to further liberal policy proposals: “That’s one reason I argued without success that he not take this route.”

“I was one of those hoping the president would not take the national emergency route,” McConnell said. “Once he decided to do that I said I would support it, but I was hoping he wouldn’t take that particular path.”

Interesting little bit of trying to roll back his support there.

---

Does that mean George W Bush and the republicans were the worst government in history?

Actually George W. And Democrat majority. Presidents can influence the economy with policy as much as Congress can sink it with out of control budgets and legislations.

A symptom of intellectual dishonesty is the straining out of a gnat for the sole purpose of using the gnat to blame others for one's own problems.

Democrats led Congress to override four vetoes from 2007 to 2009.  Republicans helped, of course, because Democrats did not have the 2/3 majority required.  Nothing significant happened those two years without the consent of both parties.

Most of the groundwork for the economic collapse was laid in years where Republicans had full control and didn't need Democrats to cooperate with them.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Actually George W. And Democrat majority. Presidents can influence the economy with policy as much as Congress can sink it with out of control budgets and legislations.

A symptom of intellectual dishonesty is the straining out of a gnat for the sole purpose of using the gnat to blame others for one's own problems.

Democrats led Congress to override four vetoes from 2007 to 2009.  Republicans helped, of course, because Democrats did not have the 2/3 majority required.  Nothing significant happened those two years without the consent of both parties.

Most of the groundwork for the economic collapse was laid in years where Republicans had full control and didn't need Democrats to cooperate with them.

Republicans never had a filibuster-proof Senate, not since at least far back as FDR. So "full control" is a lie.

Bush identified the problem years earlier, but could not get congress to overturn the law requiring mortgage loans to people with bad financial status.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

A symptom of intellectual dishonesty is the straining out of a gnat for the sole purpose of using the gnat to blame others for one's own problems.

Democrats led Congress to override four vetoes from 2007 to 2009.  Republicans helped, of course, because Democrats did not have the 2/3 majority required.  Nothing significant happened those two years without the consent of both parties.

Most of the groundwork for the economic collapse was laid in years where Republicans had full control and didn't need Democrats to cooperate with them.

Republicans never had a filibuster-proof Senate, not since at least far back as FDR. So "full control" is a lie.

Bush identified the problem years earlier, but could not get congress to overturn the law requiring mortgage loans to people with bad financial status.

There was more collegiality and respect for the system then. Senators would vote for cloture even when they did not like the bill and had no intent of voting for the actual bill. They saved their filibuster for stuff that they really found outrageous, not just disagreeable. Nowadays they tell us that everything is outrageous though.

That said I don't think you have your history right regarding subprime mortgages. I don't think Bush made any kind of push to change those laws and regulations. And he could have changed the regulations mostly on his own. He did not do so.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Republicans never had a filibuster-proof Senate, not since at least far back as FDR. So "full control" is a lie.

Bush identified the problem years earlier, but could not get congress to overturn the law requiring mortgage loans to people with bad financial status.

There was more collegiality and respect for the system then. Senators would vote for cloture even when they did not like the bill and had no intent of voting for the actual bill. They saved their filibuster for stuff that they really found outrageous, not just disagreeable. Nowadays they tell us that everything is outrageous though.

That said I don't think you have your history right regarding subprime mortgages. I don't think Bush made any kind of push to change those laws and regulations. And he could have changed the regulations mostly on his own. He did not do so.

Timeline of Bush warnings

---

BTW, more winning.

Crime drops under Trump

I think this has more to do with the drop in unemployment than any anti-crime action. Still, Trump gets credit for the full employment, with workers again getting raises because of the competitive job market.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

There was more collegiality and respect for the system then. Senators would vote for cloture even when they did not like the bill and had no intent of voting for the actual bill. They saved their filibuster for stuff that they really found outrageous, not just disagreeable. Nowadays they tell us that everything is outrageous though.

That said I don't think you have your history right regarding subprime mortgages. I don't think Bush made any kind of push to change those laws and regulations. And he could have changed the regulations mostly on his own. He did not do so.

Timeline of Bush warnings

---

BTW, more winning.

Crime drops under Trump

I think this has more to do with the drop in unemployment than any anti-crime action. Still, Trump gets credit for the full employment, with workers again getting raises because of the competitive job market.

First of all, the general trend of investment bubbles and loose lending standards was international. Somehow, globally, people became taken by the idea that they should be able to get a really high yield at no risk. So there's an aspect of all of this was way beyond the Bush administration's control. They really were unlucky.

But there's also an aspect that was within their ability to control via regulation. Simple regulations can loosen and tighten lending standards without Congressional intervention. The Bush administration actually did many bailouts of the housing market, starting in about 2003. Their goal was always to keep the loose cash flowing rather than tighten lending standards. And Bush's public statements repeatedly praised the increase in home ownership which attended the laxity in lending standards. He called it part of his "ownership society" goals.

the bush administration's warnings are at once too vague and too specific to really be considered prescient in hindsight. They are too specific in the focus Fannie and Freddie but, where are the comments about what bear Stearns and AIG were doing? and they were too vague in the sense of, what reforms did the Bush administration even want?
there is a reason that most of the press did not take this kind of thing seriously before or after.

A lack of credibility.
And a lack of actionability.

He's not really worse than those who came before him in this regard. But he gives himself too much credit.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

JOBS JOBS JOBS!

---

JOBS JOBS JOBS!

---

Lowest unemployment rate since 1969. I think we need to get Joe Biden in here to fix this so everyone can "feel it".

---

Lowest unemployment rate since 1969. I think we need to get Joe Biden in here to fix this so everyone can "feel it".

Haven't you heard? The low unemployment rate is because everyone's working two jobs!

---

Lowest unemployment rate since 1969. I think we need to get Joe Biden in here to fix this so everyone can "feel it".

I'm on board with this.  Also, the reason 1969 was so low is because our idiotic leaders invoked the draft and sent everyone off to Vietnam to die.  Thus, in some manner, whether serving in the military or working in support of the war (e.g. making weapons, etc.) wartime is a very deceptive period to evaluate unemployment rates.

---

Lowest unemployment rate since 1969. I think we need to get Joe Biden in here to fix this so everyone can "feel it".

263,000 new jobs in April, unemployment at 3.6% and average hourly wage up 3.2% compared to a year ago.  Watching the financial news this morning was very telling.  FOX Business was talking about the numbers and the great news from this morning's jobs report.  MSNBC was mainly talking about non-economy related topics (mainly trying to smear the Attorney General).

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

Mexico folds like a cheap suit. #winning

---

We are awaiting details of whatever deal Trump and Obrador have come to.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Lowest unemployment rate since 1969. I think we need to get Joe Biden in here to fix this so everyone can "feel it".

263,000 new jobs in April, unemployment at 3.6% and average hourly wage up 3.2% compared to a year ago.  Watching the financial news this morning was very telling.  FOX Business was talking about the numbers and the great news from this morning's jobs report.  MSNBC was mainly talking about non-economy related topics (mainly trying to smear the Attorney General).

That's all very well and good, but what bothers me is the trillion dollar deficits.  We should never run deficits that size in a time of prosperity and low unemployment.  That is a ticking time bomb, because when and if we have a recession, the deficits will skyrocket.  And since we are already paying interest on 20 trillion ($20,000,000,000,000!) dollars in debt, that could bankrupt the US government and cause a deep worldwide depression.  At that point the only way out is for the federal reserve to monetize the debt, and then we have hyperinflation like Venezuela.   

It's coming, folks, if we don't do anything about it.  The mathematics are irrefutable.

In a way, you can say Trump's winning because he's cheating.  Running trillion dollar deficits in a time of full employment is like giving methedrine to a perfectly healthy person.  Seems great for a while, but eventually, the chickens will come home to roost.

---

263,000 new jobs in April, unemployment at 3.6% and average hourly wage up 3.2% compared to a year ago.  Watching the financial news this morning was very telling.  FOX Business was talking about the numbers and the great news from this morning's jobs report.  MSNBC was mainly talking about non-economy related topics (mainly trying to smear the Attorney General).

That's all very well and good, but what bothers me is the trillion dollar deficits.  We should never run deficits that size in a time of prosperity and low unemployment.  That is a ticking time bomb, because when and if we have a recession, the deficits will skyrocket.  And since we are already paying interest on 20 trillion ($20,000,000,000,000!) dollars in debt, that could bankrupt the US government and cause a deep worldwide depression.  At that point the only way out is for the federal reserve to monetize the debt, and then we have hyperinflation like Venezuela.   

It's coming, folks, if we don't do anything about it.  The mathematics are irrefutable.

In a way, you can say Trump's winning because he's cheating.  Running trillion dollar deficits in a time of full employment is like giving methedrine to a perfectly healthy person.  Seems great for a while, but eventually, the chickens will come home to roost.

+1

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

263,000 new jobs in April, unemployment at 3.6% and average hourly wage up 3.2% compared to a year ago.  Watching the financial news this morning was very telling.  FOX Business was talking about the numbers and the great news from this morning's jobs report.  MSNBC was mainly talking about non-economy related topics (mainly trying to smear the Attorney General).

That's all very well and good, but what bothers me is the trillion dollar deficits.  We should never run deficits that size in a time of prosperity and low unemployment.  That is a ticking time bomb, because when and if we have a recession, the deficits will skyrocket.  And since we are already paying interest on 20 trillion ($20,000,000,000,000!) dollars in debt, that could bankrupt the US government and cause a deep worldwide depression.  At that point the only way out is for the federal reserve to monetize the debt, and then we have hyperinflation like Venezuela.   

It's coming, folks, if we don't do anything about it.  The mathematics are irrefutable.

In a way, you can say Trump's winning because he's cheating.  Running trillion dollar deficits in a time of full employment is like giving methedrine to a perfectly healthy person.  Seems great for a while, but eventually, the chickens will come home to roost.

Yes, we should be reducing our debt. Write your Congressman or go here: https://www.pay.gov/public/form/start/23779454.

To compare our monetary system to any other country is ridiculous. The U.S. has not had hyperinflation triggered since the civil war, and we have been monetizing debt since. Our entire system is based on monetary policy, and money manipulation and debt is not the only number in the mathematics you claim are irrefutable. The same game existed before Trump, yet his results are cheating? You people are insufferable.

---