On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.

That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill. If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.
The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

They certainly wouldn't be endlessly driveling and gossiping like you,
senile gossip!

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 13:49:13 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
dennis@home to know-it-all Rodent Speed:
"You really should stop commenting on things you know nothing about."
Message-ID:

On 3/16/21 12:56 AM, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.
The CDC has thought a lot of things.
Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask" to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.


Bingo!

I suspect that the N-Zero mask mandate was born when Bezos realized there were 330 million people who would need a clean new disposable mask every day.

I also suspect Bezos does not want to get stuck with a warehouse full of masks so ending the mask mandate will require coordination with the mask manufacturers and the CDC clowns.

On Monday, March 15, 2021 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 12:58:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:15:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:40:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
On 03/13/2021 05:04 AM, wrote:
You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the disease
less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes the
vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.

What am I missing?

Nothing, you're just too stupid to comprehend.
What did he say that was stupid?

Keep thinking, maybe you'll figure it out. Probably not though, because you've
posted similar.

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

As usual, now you're trying to move the goal posts. This is what was stated:

Do you read your quotes or do you just pop off insults blindly like
Rod?
Read the 2 quotes above and below this that you cited and tell me
where the goal posts moved?

I suggest you read them again and try to focus this time. Maybe you can
figure it out.





Before the vaccine we needed to distance and wear a mask, After the
vaccine we need to distance and wear a mask.

A key fallacy there is that it's not "after the vaccine" now. Even most adults
have not been vaccinated.


"That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance. "


It is the government that says, in
spite of vaccination, we still need to do what they said we were
supposed to be doing last summer, except it is TWO masks now.

With only 10% or so vaccinated and new variants that are even more contagious,
the govt is being cautious. Imagine that. I guess you prefer a president holding
maskless, no social distancing death rallies. It's just a mask. And if the govt said
if you're vaccinated, now you don't need to wear a mask, it's not hard to see the
huge problem it would immediately create. Fifty million Trumptards would try to
go into Walmart maskless, claiming they were already vaccinated. It's just a mask.
So you think we should be wearing masks another year.
I am sure the GOP agrees with you too. It is their best chance of
flipping congress.

Nice, keep making wearing masks a nasty, stupid, divisive issue in the midst of
a pandemic with 550K Americans dead. It's the new GOP way. I see there is a new
public service ad campaign for getting vaccinated. It features every living president
and first lady, except for two people. Can you guess the two? They got vaccinated
privately, won't go on record. So they protected themselves, but screw the trumptards,
let them die instead of showing some leadership. So far what the GOP has flipped
are the WH, House and Senate and they are still following the shyster that achieved
it. So are you.

If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

No, that isn't all you;ve said, not by a long shot. You've been a reliable Covid
denier since the beginning.





Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates, significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1 trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No surprise there.



Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 12:56:38 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:
On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.
Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask" to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

Understanding context was never your forte. Sure, the CDC has evolved and
changed their recommendations based on changing data and circumstances.
That's how science works, that's how intelligent people operate.
When the CDC said masks were not necessary, the US either had no cases,
or just started having the first cases. And then in a short time, PPP became
in very short supply, with healthcare workers, first responders, etc not having
enough. It also was not understood how the virus was transmitting, how much
was via droplets and air. As things changed the CDC changed. Obviously you
prefer the Trump approach, stuck on lies and stupid, never change, never adapt,
never learn, approach.

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:14:29 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.
That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill.

That's an exaggeration. Individual income tax accounts for just over half
of revenue, so there is a lot of additional revenue.



If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.

That's BS. The deficit in 2019, the last pre-Covid year was $1 tril. If you
doubled individual income taxes, using your number above, we'd have
a $900 bil SURPLUS.



The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

On 16/03/2021 12:02, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:14:29 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.
That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill.

That's an exaggeration. Individual income tax accounts for just over half
of revenue, so there is a lot of additional revenue.



If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.

That's BS. The deficit in 2019, the last pre-Covid year was $1 tril. If you
doubled individual income taxes, using your number above, we'd have
a $900 bil SURPLUS.



The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:56:22 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask"

..... before it was a pandemic.......

to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

..... after it became a pandemic and hundreds of thousands of people
died because they were too stupid to wear masks.

Is that too hard to understand?
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, March 15, 2021 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 12:58:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:15:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:40:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
On 03/13/2021 05:04 AM, wrote:
You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the disease
less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes the
vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.

What am I missing?

Nothing, you're just too stupid to comprehend.
What did he say that was stupid?

Keep thinking, maybe you'll figure it out. Probably not though, because you've
posted similar.

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

As usual, now you're trying to move the goal posts. This is what was stated:

Do you read your quotes or do you just pop off insults blindly like
Rod?
Read the 2 quotes above and below this that you cited and tell me
where the goal posts moved?

I suggest you read them again and try to focus this time. Maybe you can
figure it out.



OK here was the original statement
"You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the
disease less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes
the vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.




Before the vaccine we needed to distance and wear a mask, After the
vaccine we need to distance and wear a mask.

A key fallacy there is that it's not "after the vaccine" now. Even most adults
have not been vaccinated.

He was talking about AFTER the vaccine.


If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

No, that isn't all you;ve said, not by a long shot. You've been a reliable Covid
denier since the beginning.

I haven't denied Covid is a thing. I only question the hysteria and
ever changing advice from political hacks like Fauci.





Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates, significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1 trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No surprise there.


You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.



Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.


There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.
That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I understand you and Rod think we can just keep borrowing and printing
money forever but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches us that
leads to a financial disaster.
In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.
You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.
I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)
Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.
At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 05:02:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:14:29 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.
That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill.

That's an exaggeration. Individual income tax accounts for just over half
of revenue, so there is a lot of additional revenue.

Yeah I said that. It is the payroll tax but that doesn't even cover
the expenses tied to it so it is a wash. You are left with the 15%
that is other than those two.

If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.

That's BS. The deficit in 2019, the last pre-Covid year was $1 tril. If you
doubled individual income taxes, using your number above, we'd have
a $900 bil SURPLUS.

But the income tax is about the same as the giveaway, ($1.9T) Read for
content.




The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

You just don't read what is written. I have explained this to you many
times and you have yet to show me where I said the tax cut was a good
idea. I am still waiting.
All I ever said was it helped the working man. I didn't say it was a
good idea.
You can't make **** up and then use it as your argument.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 13:18:57 +0000, Bod wrote:

On 16/03/2021 12:02, trader_4 wrote:
On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:14:29 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.
That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill.

That's an exaggeration. Individual income tax accounts for just over half
of revenue, so there is a lot of additional revenue.



If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.

That's BS. The deficit in 2019, the last pre-Covid year was $1 tril. If you
doubled individual income taxes, using your number above, we'd have
a $900 bil SURPLUS.



The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.

Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 10:44:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski posted for all of us to
digest...


On 3/15/2021 9:37 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 03/15/2021 05:57 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 12:58:13 -0400, wrote:

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

****It greatly decreases morbidity.

You don't know that.


CDC seems to think it will.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7006e3.htm
Vaccinating a large proportion of persons in the United States against
COVID-19 is critical for preventing SARS-CoV-2?associated morbidity and
mortality and helping bring an end to the global pandemic.

Then you have the J & J vaccine
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2777172

Data released by Johnson & Johnson suggest that 1 dose of vaccine was
66% effective in preventing moderate to severe COVID-19 and 100%
effective in preventing COVID-19?related hospitalization and death.

The CDC & Fauci have no clue. The 6' distancing has been shot down in an
article in Lancet and the mask BS is based on some doctor purporting it over
100 years ago, no further studies. One knows the gov't lies and would not
retract a stance made on their mothers bodies.

--
Tekkie

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, March 15, 2021 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 12:58:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:15:19 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:40:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
On 03/13/2021 05:04 AM, wrote:
You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes
the disease
less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes
the
vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but
there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.

What am I missing?

Nothing, you're just too stupid to comprehend.
What did he say that was stupid?

Keep thinking, maybe you'll figure it out. Probably not though,
because you've
posted similar.

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

As usual, now you're trying to move the goal posts. This is what was
stated:

Do you read your quotes or do you just pop off insults blindly like
Rod?
Read the 2 quotes above and below this that you cited and tell me
where the goal posts moved?

I suggest you read them again and try to focus this time. Maybe you can
figure it out.



OK here was the original statement
"You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the
disease less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes
the vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.




Before the vaccine we needed to distance and wear a mask, After the
vaccine we need to distance and wear a mask.

A key fallacy there is that it's not "after the vaccine" now. Even most
adults
have not been vaccinated.

He was talking about AFTER the vaccine.


If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

No, that isn't all you;ve said, not by a long shot. You've been a
reliable Covid
denier since the beginning.

I haven't denied Covid is a thing. I only question the hysteria and
ever changing advice from political hacks like Fauci.





Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates,
significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1
trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now
suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No
surprise there.


You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.



Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no
reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid
disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth
since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.


There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.
That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I understand you and Rod think we can just
keep borrowing and printing money forever

Neither of us have ever said anything even
remotely like that, you lying arsehole.

but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches
us that leads to a financial disaster.

That is a bare faced lie with the USA.

In a way this is very much like 2007.

Bull**** it is.

Everyone said the housing market could never
fail and real estate was always a safe investment,

Only the fools ever said anything like that.

until the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.

That utterly mangles what actually happened, as always with you.

We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt

Nope, we noticed that even with the close to the highest
govt debt ever, they continued to do that when a very
large part of world financial system imploded spectacularly
and noticed that there was a reason for that, even if you
are actually too stupid to work that out.

but as soon as that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

How odd that it didn't happen in 2008.

You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the
Fed had to buy $4.5T of our debt with money they printed
out of thin air because the market couldn't absorb it.

Again, utterly mangling what actually happened all over again.

I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

Bull**** he did.

At a certain point we are going to have to start paying
an interest rate that more correctly reflects the market

What they are paying *IS* the market, ****wit.

and that will blow out the deficit.

More utterly mindless pig ignorant ****.

If we have to pay Carter era interest

Taint gunna happen any time soon, you watch.

it is almost all of our current revenue without
spending another dime on SS/MC, federal
pensions or any of the "discretionary" spending.

And even if that did happen, the tax rate can
be changed so that the stupidity that HALF
pay no net federal income tax is stopped.

Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

Just as true with the fact that the federal debt
was higher than it is now at the end of WW2.

"Tekkie©" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 10:44:53 -0400, Ed Pawlowski posted for all of us to
digest...


On 3/15/2021 9:37 AM, rbowman wrote:
On 03/15/2021 05:57 AM, Shadow wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 12:58:13 -0400, wrote:

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

It greatly decreases morbidity.

You don't know that.


CDC seems to think it will.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7006e3.htm
Vaccinating a large proportion of persons in the United States against
COVID-19 is critical for preventing SARS-CoV-2?associated morbidity and
mortality and helping bring an end to the global pandemic.

Then you have the J & J vaccine
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jam...rticle/2777172

Data released by Johnson & Johnson suggest that 1 dose of vaccine was
66% effective in preventing moderate to severe COVID-19 and 100%
effective in preventing COVID-19?related hospitalization and death.

The CDC & Fauci have no clue. The 6' distancing
has been shot down in an article in Lancet

And by what happened in Melbourne Australia hospitals in their second wave.

and the mask BS is based on some doctor purporting
it over 100 years ago, no further studies.

That is a bare faced lie.
https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 6:33:33 AM UTC-5, jimmy wrote:
On 3/14/21 6:37 AM, Peeler wrote:
Clearly the several vaccines on the market work, already produced positive
results and already saved quite a few lives (quickly stabilizing infected
patients that were close to death).
Again, why the mask requirement?

We flattened the curve a year ago. Why are the dimocraps still holding America hostage?

I watched an interview with a former surgeon general who answered your question coincidentally

Flattening the curve does NOT mean you eradicate the disease. It means you slow the rate of spread. Generally does not change the death rate. It changes the speed with which people get ill and the extent to which they impact health services.

So masks are still needed where spread is high even with a flattened curve

I am glad there is so much good information out there, it is available if you care to avail yourself of it

Just like there is a lot of good information about the recovery bill. Even so, knowing that people do not avail themselves, the Biden administration is doing a lot of good outreach to help people understand it

In trying to learn about it, I found that it was passed using a
somewhat obscure rule, budget reconciliation, that this administration has finally used in its arsenal. hope they find more like this.
'
I remember when
trump first came aboard gop majority tried to pass something and had to throw it out and he had to start from scratch. I did not understand it at the time, because the coverage and resources poorly explained iit

I think the key is if it is or is not a budget item , where and how does it have to originate

The rescue package is budget driven, wage hike is not

I think that has something to do with it.

mk5000

Dr. Carson is very dismissive of the question because it was hypothetical and Dr. Carson does not answer in hypotheticals. And so he intentionally did not answer the question, dr. Carson is still on a learning curve.--Armstrong Williams

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:31:17 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:


FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
The Natural Philosopher about senile Rodent:
"Rod speed is not a Brexiteer. He is an Australian troll and arsehole."
Message-ID:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 07:22:45 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH 205 !!! lines of the trolling senile asshole's latest troll****
unread

--
Marland answering senile Rodent's statement, "I don't leak":
"That¢s because so much **** and ****e emanates from your gob that there is
nothing left to exit normally, your arsehole has clammed shut through disuse
and the end of prick is only clear because you are such a ******."
Message-ID:

"marika" wrote in message
...
On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 6:33:33 AM UTC-5, jimmy wrote:
On 3/14/21 6:37 AM, Peeler wrote:
Clearly the several vaccines on the market work, already produced
positive
results and already saved quite a few lives (quickly stabilizing
infected
patients that were close to death).
Again, why the mask requirement?

We flattened the curve a year ago. Why are the dimocraps still holding
America hostage?

I watched an interview with a former surgeon general who answered your
question coincidentally

Flattening the curve does NOT mean you eradicate the disease. It means
you slow the rate of spread. Generally does not change the death rate.
It changes the speed with which people get ill and the extent to which
they impact health services.

So masks are still needed where spread is high even with a flattened curve

They are actually still needed to be safer for a while because
we havent seen how well the vaccines prevent infection yet,
all the Phase III trials proved is that they do radically reduce
severe disease and the Johnson and Johnson eliminated all
deaths from the disease.

We will only know how well the vaccines do at reducing
the spread of the virus once we get places like Israel
vaccinating a high percentage of their population and
have very reliable stats on who gets infected after that.

I am glad there is so much good information out
there, it is available if you care to avail yourself of it

Yeah, that is something that has been done very well indeed.

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:10:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, March 15, 2021 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 12:58:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:15:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:40:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
On 03/13/2021 05:04 AM, wrote:
You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the disease
less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes the
vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.

What am I missing?

Nothing, you're just too stupid to comprehend.
What did he say that was stupid?

Keep thinking, maybe you'll figure it out. Probably not though, because you've
posted similar.

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

As usual, now you're trying to move the goal posts. This is what was stated:

Do you read your quotes or do you just pop off insults blindly like
Rod?
Read the 2 quotes above and below this that you cited and tell me
where the goal posts moved?

I suggest you read them again and try to focus this time. Maybe you can
figure it out.


OK here was the original statement
"You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the
disease less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes
the vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.




Before the vaccine we needed to distance and wear a mask, After the
vaccine we need to distance and wear a mask.

A key fallacy there is that it's not "after the vaccine" now. Even most adults
have not been vaccinated.
He was talking about AFTER the vaccine.

BS. He's obviously talking about NOW, this point in time, because we''re nowhere
near the point where most Americans have been vaccinated. And bingo, again,
that's just one part why it's stupid and wrong.




If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

No, that isn't all you;ve said, not by a long shot. You've been a reliable Covid
denier since the beginning.

I haven't denied Covid is a thing. I only question the hysteria and
ever changing advice from political hacks like Fauci.

You advocated last spring that it wasn't a big deal and that we should just
let her rip. You're here now spreading FUD about the vaccines and masks.
You've made plenty of posts complaining that the death numbers must be
significantly inflated because hospitals are lying about the deaths to make
money.






Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates, significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1 trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No surprise there.

You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.

Thanks for admitting it, right in the above. Like I said, you didn't complain about
the Trump tax cut and increased spending on the deficits, but now you're complaing
about it under Biden.




Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.

There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.

According to you. Funny, we didn't see you here saying there was no reason for
Trump's tax cut and increased spending.


That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I haven't seen a detailed analysis of what all is in it. I know there has been
complaining because some of the money is going to projects like a bridge
in NY. But infrastructure spending is stimulative to the economy. A lot
of it is aid to cities, like NYC, that has been hit hard by Covid. The economy
has taken a big hit, so have cities. That's why I said at least Biden's deficit
increase is arguably justified. Trump did his deficit blowout with a Goldylocks
economy, steadily growing since 2009, low unemployment, low inflation,
low interest rates. There was no justification, just a pack of lies about a
terrible economy while he was running and then suddenly the same growth,
the same continuation under Trump was a great achievement. Is the new
Covid package too big? Not all going to where it should? Probably. You
can put the blame for that on yourself and the other Trumpets, who defended
every horrible, stupid thing he did while he gutted the GOP. Now the WH,
House and Senate are lost and this is the result. I predicted it 5 years ago.


I understand you and Rod think we can just keep borrowing and printing
money forever but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches us that
leads to a financial disaster.

That's a lie. I spoke out against Trump's tax cuts and increased spending,
I said it would greatly increase the deficits, that were already at $500 bil.
But at least they were steadily declining, until Trump came along.


In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

I've said the same thing many times. I said it when Trump was cutting taxes
and increasing spending. You didn't.

You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.

That's not true either. There was no US debt that had to be bought from
the US treasury. The FED bought the debt in the open markets, from people
already holding it, exactly as it has always done when it needs to provide liquidity,
to stimulate the economy, to lower interest rates. The US didn't suddenly
issue $4.5T of new debt.



I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

They will pay for it the same way that all US spending in excess of revenue
is paid for, by issuing new debt.

Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

That's wrong too. What the US is doing is on the books, available for all to see.
Banks, institutions, world banks, all see it, they know exactly what the US govt
is doing. Bernie was a lying crook who issued totally made up financial statements.

At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On that point, you're correct, that interest rates will rise at some point.
Hopefully Treasury has the vast majority of debt in 20+ maturities, in which
case the immediate impact won't be severe.

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:16:42 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 05:02:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:14:29 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.
That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill.

That's an exaggeration. Individual income tax accounts for just over half
of revenue, so there is a lot of additional revenue.
Yeah I said that. It is the payroll tax but that doesn't even cover
the expenses tied to it so it is a wash. You are left with the 15%
that is other than those two.
If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.

That's BS. The deficit in 2019, the last pre-Covid year was $1 tril. If you
doubled individual income taxes, using your number above, we'd have
a $900 bil SURPLUS.
But the income tax is about the same as the giveaway, ($1.9T) Read for
content.

We;re not doing an extra $1.9T spending bill every year, so comparing it
to one year's personal income tax revenue is largely meaningless.






The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.
You just don't read what is written. I have explained this to you many
times and you have yet to show me where I said the tax cut was a good
idea. I am still waiting.
All I ever said was it helped the working man. I didn't say it was a
good idea.
You can't make **** up and then use it as your argument.

Thanks again for confirming what I said. I said it's funny you weren't making posts
complaining about the Trump tax cut and increased spending. You just responded
saying;

"All I ever said was it helped the working man. I didn't say it was a good idea.'


So, you don't deny that you didn't complain about it at the time, like I said.
And I guess piling up national debt to "help the working man" is a good idea
by you. Prior to Trump, the GOP claimed that was what the Democrats do.
Another conversion by Trump.

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.
We will be living with that for many years to come. And Trump has anointed
himself as grand leader of the GOP, his minions are out there right now trying
to punish and get even with those that voted against him, those that dare speak
the truth about him. Did you see his latest shyster act? His lawyers sent cease
and desist letters to the RNC, the Republican Senatorial Committee, Congressional
Committee, demanding that they stop using his name and pictures for any fund
raising. Trump demands that only his PAC, the one he uses to line his own pockets,
can do that. We're not done with him by a long shot.

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 08:45:12 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread


--
Norman Wells addressing trolling senile Rodent:
"Ah, the voice of scum speaks."
MID:

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 08:29:50 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

--
"Who or What is Rod Speed?
Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod Speed
is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered he can
enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the big, hard
man" on the InterNet."
https://www.pcreview.co.uk/threads/r...d-faq.2973853/

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:50:56 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:56:22 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask"

.... before it was a pandemic.......

to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

.... after it became a pandemic and hundreds of thousands of people
died because they were too stupid to wear masks.

Is that too hard to understand?
[]'s

The only flaw in your logic is the number of covid infected people who
were wearing their mask and got it anyway.
I doubt we will ever get decent statistics on this because when they
polled, they didn't get the answers they were hoping for. They stopped
asking the question.

On 03/16/2021 02:51 PM, marika wrote:
In trying to learn about it, I found that it was passed using a
somewhat obscure rule, budget reconciliation, that this administration has finally used in its arsenal. hope they find more like this.

https://slate.com/business/2021/01/b...d-to-know.html

The Dems would love to get rid of the filibuster too but Mitch the
Turtle has given them fair warning. If the Reps ever get a Senate
majority, which is a possibility in 2022, they will nuke everything the
Democrats ever did and then go on to legislate the Democrat's biggest
nightmares.

On 03/16/2021 03:12 PM, marika wrote:
as a rule I am a fiscal conservative, but the constitution provides for printing money during emergencies, so I view this time differently.

Being a fiscal conservative is like being pregnant. In this case, you
aren't.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:19:39 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:10:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, March 15, 2021 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 12:58:23 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:15:19 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:40:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, rbowman wrote:
On 03/13/2021 05:04 AM, wrote:
You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the disease
less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes the
vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.

What am I missing?

Nothing, you're just too stupid to comprehend.
What did he say that was stupid?

Keep thinking, maybe you'll figure it out. Probably not though, because you've
posted similar.

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what is
it good for?

As usual, now you're trying to move the goal posts. This is what was stated:

Do you read your quotes or do you just pop off insults blindly like
Rod?
Read the 2 quotes above and below this that you cited and tell me
where the goal posts moved?

I suggest you read them again and try to focus this time. Maybe you can
figure it out.


OK here was the original statement
"You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the
disease less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes
the vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.




Before the vaccine we needed to distance and wear a mask, After the
vaccine we need to distance and wear a mask.

A key fallacy there is that it's not "after the vaccine" now. Even most adults
have not been vaccinated.
He was talking about AFTER the vaccine.

BS. He's obviously talking about NOW, this point in time, because we''re nowhere
near the point where most Americans have been vaccinated. And bingo, again,
that's just one part why it's stupid and wrong.




If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

No, that isn't all you;ve said, not by a long shot. You've been a reliable Covid
denier since the beginning.

I haven't denied Covid is a thing. I only question the hysteria and
ever changing advice from political hacks like Fauci.

You advocated last spring that it wasn't a big deal and that we should just
let her rip. You're here now spreading FUD about the vaccines and masks.
You've made plenty of posts complaining that the death numbers must be
significantly inflated because hospitals are lying about the deaths to make
money.

Let'r rip was your characterization. I just said the draconian path
wasn't warranted and we are seeing that here now.
I won't be surprised if we see more infections after spring break but
we won't have that hospital overload everyone was predicting. In fact
there were very few remote areas that even saw anything close to that.
Even in the worst hot spot in the country, NJ/NJ they never ran out of
ventilators and they sent the hospital ship home because it wasn't
being used. By the summer ventilators were a glut on the market. I
told you before, one of my former IBM buddies sells medical equipment
and he said there were warehouses full of them they couldn't sell. It
was just another irrational response to a problem.






Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates, significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1 trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No surprise there.

You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.

Thanks for admitting it, right in the above. Like I said, you didn't complain about
the Trump tax cut and increased spending on the deficits, but now you're complaing
about it under Biden.

Again you are not reading. I have always complained about these
omnibus spending bills. That includes Trump's give away that was a
christmas tree for every left wing cause Chuck and Nancy could come up
with.

Your main problem is that I don't hate Trump enough for you.



Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.

There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.

According to you. Funny, we didn't see you here saying there was no reason for
Trump's tax cut and increased spending.

You weren't listening.




That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I haven't seen a detailed analysis of what all is in it. I know there has been
complaining because some of the money is going to projects like a bridge
in NY. But infrastructure spending is stimulative to the economy. A lot
of it is aid to cities, like NYC, that has been hit hard by Covid. The economy
has taken a big hit, so have cities. That's why I said at least Biden's deficit
increase is arguably justified. Trump did his deficit blowout with a Goldylocks
economy, steadily growing since 2009, low unemployment, low inflation,
low interest rates. There was no justification, just a pack of lies about a
terrible economy while he was running and then suddenly the same growth,
the same continuation under Trump was a great achievement. Is the new
Covid package too big? Not all going to where it should? Probably. You
can put the blame for that on yourself and the other Trumpets, who defended
every horrible, stupid thing he did while he gutted the GOP. Now the WH,
House and Senate are lost and this is the result. I predicted it 5 years ago.


I understand you and Rod think we can just keep borrowing and printing
money forever but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches us that
leads to a financial disaster.

That's a lie. I spoke out against Trump's tax cuts and increased spending,
I said it would greatly increase the deficits, that were already at $500 bil.
But at least they were steadily declining, until Trump came along.

Your ONLY complaint about the tax cut was rich people got a taste.


In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

I've said the same thing many times. I said it when Trump was cutting taxes
and increasing spending. You didn't.

Yes I did. I have said we should cut the DoD budget for years but you
still think we have that red menace and no amount is too much.
That is the elephant in the room. It is second only to the
entitlements and more than interest on the debt.

You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.

That's not true either. There was no US debt that had to be bought from
the US treasury. The FED bought the debt in the open markets, from people
already holding it, exactly as it has always done when it needs to provide liquidity,
to stimulate the economy, to lower interest rates. The US didn't suddenly
issue $4.5T of new debt.

Bull****, Nobody was holding that $4.5T they bought. It went straight
from the treasury to the fed. (or vice versa depending on how you look
at the phony bookkeeping).
If Bernie Maydolf could have just printed the money to cover his debts
he would still be in Palm Beach sipping Pina Coladas.



I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

They will pay for it the same way that all US spending in excess of revenue
is paid for, by issuing new debt.

At a certain point who is buying it? We are reaching the point that
there is not that much liquidity in the world economy. That is why the
fed needs to print more money. At what point will people start to
realize the money supply far outweighs the value of goods and
services, then the central bank's thumb on the inflation scale will
not be enough to hold it down.
We don't even have to go back a half century to see that happen.

Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

That's wrong too. What the US is doing is on the books, available for all to see.
Banks, institutions, world banks, all see it, they know exactly what the US govt
is doing. Bernie was a lying crook who issued totally made up financial statements.


All can see but if you really look, what you see looks a lot like what
Bernie did. We have trillions that we say is a trust fund but it is
really just debt. The fed prints money to cover debt the treasury
can't sell on the market. Most people just believe that because the
government says this is OK, that it is. You are one of them.
Google up Weimar Republic and see what happens when debts overwhelm a
country's ability to pay.

At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On that point, you're correct, that interest rates will rise at some point.
Hopefully Treasury has the vast majority of debt in 20+ maturities, in which
case the immediate impact won't be severe.

They don't
There are about $5T in bills that expire in weeks or months
There is $11T in Notes that may only last 2 years, 10 max
$2.9T is in T bonds.
Most of the T bonds are held by SS/MC.
$6.4T is in "Series" bonds. (the kind regular folks buy)
The rest is a mix of other paper.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/...cipal_debt.htm

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:25:37 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:16:42 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 05:02:45 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 1:14:29 AM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 21:34:12 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 3/15/2021 8:23 PM, wrote:



If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years, Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

But it is an even worse pandemic than the spanish flu, ****wit.

Yeah, when people stop wanting to loan us money at 2% the economy may
crash but Biden did stick his TWO TRILLION DOLLAR finger in the dike
after the flood.


Taxes. There is no free lunch even if Trump is treating. Looks like
his tax breaks may be going away and a bit more added.
That ends up being an easy number to talk about. The bulk of taxes is
the $1.9T from individual income tax and that just about covers
Biden's give away bill.

That's an exaggeration. Individual income tax accounts for just over half
of revenue, so there is a lot of additional revenue.
Yeah I said that. It is the payroll tax but that doesn't even cover
the expenses tied to it so it is a wash. You are left with the 15%
that is other than those two.
If we double the income tax across the board
just to pay for that one give away, it puts us where we were in
February, roughly a trillion dollar deficit.

That's BS. The deficit in 2019, the last pre-Covid year was $1 tril. If you
doubled individual income taxes, using your number above, we'd have
a $900 bil SURPLUS.
But the income tax is about the same as the giveaway, ($1.9T) Read for
content.

We;re not doing an extra $1.9T spending bill every year, so comparing it
to one year's personal income tax revenue is largely meaningless.


I was just giving perspective to how much money we are talking about
in comparison to revenue.





The other big income source is the $1.34T payroll tax but it doesn't
even cover what they are paying out.
That is roughly 85% of our total revenue.

Just exactly where do you think that deep pocket Joe is going to pick
might be? If you doubled all excise, corporate and other taxes it
would barely pay the interest on the debt. What are you going to do
with the rest of the government?

I know, we will keep borrowing like a crack addict until nobody will
lend us any more money.

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.
You just don't read what is written. I have explained this to you many
times and you have yet to show me where I said the tax cut was a good
idea. I am still waiting.
All I ever said was it helped the working man. I didn't say it was a
good idea.
You can't make **** up and then use it as your argument.

Thanks again for confirming what I said. I said it's funny you weren't making posts
complaining about the Trump tax cut and increased spending. You just responded
saying;

"All I ever said was it helped the working man. I didn't say it was a good idea.'


So, you don't deny that you didn't complain about it at the time, like I said.
And I guess piling up national debt to "help the working man" is a good idea
by you. Prior to Trump, the GOP claimed that was what the Democrats do.
Another conversion by Trump.

So you admit, any post where I don't say I hate Trump, you won't read
for content.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:50:56 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:56:22 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask"

.... before it was a pandemic.......

to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

.... after it became a pandemic and hundreds of thousands of people
died because they were too stupid to wear masks.

Is that too hard to understand?
[]'s

The only flaw in your logic is the number of covid infected
people who were wearing their mask and got it anyway.

No one ever said masks are guaranteed to stop you getting infected, ****wit.

I doubt we will ever get decent statistics on this because when
they polled, they didn't get the answers they were hoping for.
They stopped asking the question.

More utterly mindless bull****.

We did see a large number of the staff in our hospitals
in Melbourne Australia infected in the second wave.
They were all obviously wearing masks all the time.
It is clear that that was due to spread by aerosols.

https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/5/4/e006577
proves that they are a lot better than no mask.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.
Biden has saddled our kids with a third of Trump's debt in less than 2
months. He says he is not through yet.
He wants us to eat another $Trillion or so in student debt. He still
hasn't made good on his reparations promise, That is a few hundred
$Billion. It is unclear his tax plan will actually raise much revenue
but it will certainly drive a lot of capital offshore and that might
even reduce revenue.
Then we can expect a war or two. My guess is Iran but he might not be
done with Syria/Iraq and Afghanistan.
What did I forget?
I guess we will have to wait to see what Chuck and Nancy come up with
next for him. A few more bills like ARP and Trump's $6+T will be a
fond memory.

wrote in message
...
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:19:39 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:10:55 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 04:46:00 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Monday, March 15, 2021 at 6:25:48 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 09:46:55 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Sunday, March 14, 2021 at 12:58:23 PM UTC-4,
wrote:
On Sun, 14 Mar 2021 06:44:11 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 3:15:19 PM UTC-5,
wrote:
On Sat, 13 Mar 2021 09:40:46 -0800 (PST), trader_4
wrote:

On Saturday, March 13, 2021 at 12:02:18 PM UTC-5, rbowman
wrote:
On 03/13/2021 05:04 AM, wrote:
You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes
the disease
less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It
makes the
vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick
but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.

What am I missing?

Nothing, you're just too stupid to comprehend.
What did he say that was stupid?

Keep thinking, maybe you'll figure it out. Probably not though,
because you've
posted similar.

If it is a vaccine that doesn't end the masks and lockdowns, what
is
it good for?

As usual, now you're trying to move the goal posts. This is what was
stated:

Do you read your quotes or do you just pop off insults blindly like
Rod?
Read the 2 quotes above and below this that you cited and tell me
where the goal posts moved?

I suggest you read them again and try to focus this time. Maybe you can
figure it out.


OK here was the original statement
"You are ill-informed about what the vaccine does. It makes the
disease less severe for the person who has had the vaccine. It makes
the vaccine recipient _less_ contagious.
That's not a great selling point -- you'll still get sick but there is
an 80% chance you won't get as sick. But since you're still
susceptible
you'll need to wear one or two masks and keep you distance.




Before the vaccine we needed to distance and wear a mask, After the
vaccine we need to distance and wear a mask.

A key fallacy there is that it's not "after the vaccine" now. Even most
adults
have not been vaccinated.
He was talking about AFTER the vaccine.

BS. He's obviously talking about NOW, this point in time, because we''re
nowhere
near the point where most Americans have been vaccinated. And bingo,
again,
that's just one part why it's stupid and wrong.




If we are still locked down in 2020 the democrats will pay for it.
That is all I said. I don't think Biden can print enough money to
change that and some day we are going to pay the price for that too.

No, that isn't all you;ve said, not by a long shot. You've been a
reliable Covid
denier since the beginning.

I haven't denied Covid is a thing. I only question the hysteria and
ever changing advice from political hacks like Fauci.

You advocated last spring that it wasn't a big deal and that we should
just
let her rip. You're here now spreading FUD about the vaccines and masks.
You've made plenty of posts complaining that the death numbers must be
significantly inflated because hospitals are lying about the deaths to
make
money.

Let'r rip was your characterization. I just said the draconian path
wasn't warranted and we are seeing that here now.
I won't be surprised if we see more infections after spring break but
we won't have that hospital overload everyone was predicting. In fact
there were very few remote areas that even saw anything close to that.
Even in the worst hot spot in the country, NJ/NJ they never ran out of
ventilators and they sent the hospital ship home because it wasn't
being used. By the summer ventilators were a glut on the market. I
told you before, one of my former IBM buddies sells medical equipment
and he said there were warehouses full of them they couldn't sell. It
was just another irrational response to a problem.






Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates,
significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1
trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now
suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No
surprise there.

You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.

Thanks for admitting it, right in the above. Like I said, you didn't
complain about
the Trump tax cut and increased spending on the deficits, but now you're
complaing
about it under Biden.

Again you are not reading. I have always complained about these
omnibus spending bills. That includes Trump's give away that was a
christmas tree for every left wing cause Chuck and Nancy could come up
with.

Your main problem is that I don't hate Trump enough for you.



Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no
reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid
disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth
since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.

There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.

According to you. Funny, we didn't see you here saying there was no
reason for
Trump's tax cut and increased spending.

You weren't listening.




That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I haven't seen a detailed analysis of what all is in it. I know there has
been
complaining because some of the money is going to projects like a bridge
in NY. But infrastructure spending is stimulative to the economy. A
lot
of it is aid to cities, like NYC, that has been hit hard by Covid. The
economy
has taken a big hit, so have cities. That's why I said at least Biden's
deficit
increase is arguably justified. Trump did his deficit blowout with a
Goldylocks
economy, steadily growing since 2009, low unemployment, low inflation,
low interest rates. There was no justification, just a pack of lies
about a
terrible economy while he was running and then suddenly the same growth,
the same continuation under Trump was a great achievement. Is the new
Covid package too big? Not all going to where it should? Probably. You
can put the blame for that on yourself and the other Trumpets, who
defended
every horrible, stupid thing he did while he gutted the GOP. Now the WH,
House and Senate are lost and this is the result. I predicted it 5 years
ago.


I understand you and Rod think we can just keep borrowing and printing
money forever but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches us that
leads to a financial disaster.

That's a lie. I spoke out against Trump's tax cuts and increased
spending,
I said it would greatly increase the deficits, that were already at $500
bil.
But at least they were steadily declining, until Trump came along.

Your ONLY complaint about the tax cut was rich people got a taste.


In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

I've said the same thing many times. I said it when Trump was cutting
taxes
and increasing spending. You didn't.

Yes I did. I have said we should cut the DoD budget for years but you
still think we have that red menace and no amount is too much.
That is the elephant in the room. It is second only to the
entitlements and more than interest on the debt.

You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.

That's not true either. There was no US debt that had to be bought from
the US treasury. The FED bought the debt in the open markets, from people
already holding it, exactly as it has always done when it needs to provide
liquidity,
to stimulate the economy, to lower interest rates. The US didn't suddenly
issue $4.5T of new debt.

Bull****, Nobody was holding that $4.5T they bought. It went
straight from the treasury to the fed. (or vice versa depending
on how you look at the phony bookkeeping).

Bull****, that isnt what happened.

I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

They will pay for it the same way that all US spending in excess of
revenue
is paid for, by issuing new debt.

At a certain point who is buying it?

Those with nowhere else safe enough for their money, like China.

We are reaching the point that there is not
that much liquidity in the world economy.

BULL****.

That is why the fed needs to print more money.

More mindless bull****.

At what point will people start to realize the money
supply far outweighs the value of goods and services,
then the central bank's thumb on the inflation scale
will not be enough to hold it down.

More mindless bull****.

We don't even have to go back a half century to see that happen.

Never happened in the USA.

Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

That's wrong too. What the US is doing is on the books, available for all
to see.
Banks, institutions, world banks, all see it, they know exactly what the
US govt
is doing. Bernie was a lying crook who issued totally made up financial
statements.

All can see but if you really look, what
you see looks a lot like what Bernie did.

Only to fools that don't have a ****ing clue like you.

We have trillions that we say is a trust fund but
it is really just debt. The fed prints money to
cover debt the treasury can't sell on the market.

More mindless bull****.

Most people just believe that because the government
says this is OK, that it is. You are one of them. Google
up Weimar Republic and see what happens when
debts overwhelm a country's ability to pay.

Nothing even remotely like the situation in the first world today.

And Adolf fixed that problem anyway.

At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On that point, you're correct, that interest rates will rise at some
point. Hopefully Treasury has the vast majority of debt in 20+
maturities, in which case the immediate impact won't be severe.

They don't
There are about $5T in bills that expire in weeks or months
There is $11T in Notes that may only last 2 years, 10 max
$2.9T is in T bonds.
Most of the T bonds are held by SS/MC.
$6.4T is in "Series" bonds. (the kind regular folks buy)
The rest is a mix of other paper.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/...cipal_debt.htm

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:18:58 -0400, wrote:

It was that asshole Larry Summers along with Greenspan and Rubin that
got us into the housing mess in the first place so I am not sure
taking their advice was wise. They are the ones who convinced Clinton
to "unchain" Wall Street. (repealing most of the New Deal banking
regulations put in place after the previous depression).

I am also not sure the Constitution actually says the government can
just print trillions of dollars every time things get hard. Can you
cite that?

Interesting. You seem to sincerely care about the Constitution and what it
says, yet you had no use for the Constitution when the previous President
was being impeached and tried in the Senate. I guess that makes you
something of a fair weather Constitutional supporter.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 22:12:13 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.

Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

Wishful thinking. Trump is FAR from gone. He still controls the GOP and its
fundraising, he's hanging around and threatening to run again, and he's the
subject of multiple civil and criminal investigations. If he's gone from
your view, that's probably a result of your unwillingness to read about
current events. The rest of us will be dealing with Trump and the aftermath
of his incredible damage to the country for many years to come.

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 19:31:30 -0600, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


Being a fiscal conservative is like being pregnant. In this case, you
aren't.

Being a blabbermouth is, too! And you always are, in any case, lowbrowwoman!
BG

On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:38:42 +1100, cantankerous trolling geezer Rodent
Speed, the auto-contradicting senile sociopath, blabbered, again:

FLUSH the trolling senile asshole's latest troll**** unread

Learn to trim your quotes, you abnormal trolling senile swine from Oz!

--
The Natural Philosopher about senile Rodent:
"Rod speed is not a Brexiteer. He is an Australian troll and arsehole."
Message-ID:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 19:27:05 -0600, lowbrowwoman, the endlessly driveling,
troll-feeding, senile idiot, blabbered again:


https://slate.com/business/2021/01/b...d-to-know.html

The Dems would love to get rid of the filibuster too but Mitch the
Turtle has given them fair warning. If the Reps ever get a Senate
majority, which is a possibility in 2022, they will nuke everything the
Democrats ever did and then go on to legislate the Democrat's biggest
nightmares.

Is there ANYTHING in this big wide world that you are NOT willing to gossip
about endlessly, senile gossip? tsk

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 21:05:29 -0400, wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 14:50:56 -0300, Shadow wrote:

On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 00:56:22 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 15 Mar 2021 19:15:26 -0600, rbowman
wrote:

On 03/15/2021 08:44 AM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
CDC seems to think it will.

The CDC has thought a lot of things.

Yup, If you don't like what they are thinking wait a few days.
They have gone from "this is no big deal, you don't need to wear a
mask"

.... before it was a pandemic.......

to "Wear 2 masks" with lots of stuffer steps along the way.

.... after it became a pandemic and hundreds of thousands of people
died because they were too stupid to wear masks.

Is that too hard to understand?
[]'s

The only flaw in your logic is the number of covid infected people who
were wearing their mask and got it anyway.

You wear a mask to prevent TRANSMITTING the disease, which if
done deliberately is manslaughter.
I can't see the flaw in your logic. You do not appear to have
any.
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 9:59:11 PM UTC-4, wrote:

You advocated last spring that it wasn't a big deal and that we should just
let her rip. You're here now spreading FUD about the vaccines and masks.
You've made plenty of posts complaining that the death numbers must be
significantly inflated because hospitals are lying about the deaths to make
money.

Let'r rip was your characterization. I just said the draconian path
wasn't warranted and we are seeing that here now.
I won't be surprised if we see more infections after spring break but
we won't have that hospital overload everyone was predicting. In fact
there were very few remote areas that even saw anything close to that.
Even in the worst hot spot in the country, NJ/NJ they never ran out of
ventilators and they sent the hospital ship home because it wasn't
being used. By the summer ventilators were a glut on the market. I
told you before, one of my former IBM buddies sells medical equipment
and he said there were warehouses full of them they couldn't sell. It
was just another irrational response to a problem.

Here you are again, Mr. Monday Quarterback, with the would have, could have,
should have, AFTER the fact. I suppose you think Trump's lie and deny was the
better approach, instead of getting the resources in place to save lives in a worst
case scenario. And you act like we were nowhere near that. NYC hospitals were
overflowing, trailers in the streets with dead bodies, field hospitals in Central Park
and Javits taking in patients. Of course if Cuomo and Di Blasio hadn't urgently
requested those resources under the conditions of the time and Covid got worse
instead of better, you'd be here blaming them for not acting.









Trump added $6 trillion in 4 years,

Funny you weren't complaining about that when he cut the tax rates, significantly
increased spending, in his first year. The deficits doubled to $1 trillion. Nor did we
see you complaining as it continued to pile up under Trump. But now suddenly under
Biden, well, now the deficits are something for you to bring up. No surprise there.

You just weren't paying attention or you consciously ignored what I
said. All I ever said was the Trump tax cut benefitted the working
class and that is undeniable. I never said it was a good idea.

Thanks for admitting it, right in the above. Like I said, you didn't complain about
the Trump tax cut and increased spending on the deficits, but now you're complaing
about it under Biden.
Again you are not reading. I have always complained about these
omnibus spending bills. That includes Trump's give away that was a
christmas tree for every left wing cause Chuck and Nancy could come up
with.

Missing in the above is complaining about Trump's tax cut. And I don't recall
you complaining about any spending under Trump either, though you may have.



Your main problem is that I don't hate Trump enough for you.

Biden has already added a third of
that in 2 months with promises of much more. It is not a good trend.

At least Biden has an arguable reason for much of it. Trump had no reason, none at all,
for most of it, starting in year one. Trump didn't come into a Covid disaster, a Covid
economy. Trump came into a Goldylocks economy. Steady economic growth since 2009,
low unemployment, low inflation, low interest rates.

There is no "reason" for a $2 Trillion give away package.

According to you. Funny, we didn't see you here saying there was no reason for
Trump's tax cut and increased spending.
You weren't listening.

Sure, it's my listening, even after you pretty much confirmed it here again yesterday,
by saying that you only pointed out that Trump's tax cut benefitted Joe Six pack too.




That lousy $1400 will be gone in a few weeks and nothing will have
changed. That was just a fraction of the spending anyway. Most had
nothing to do with the Covid thing..

I haven't seen a detailed analysis of what all is in it. I know there has been
complaining because some of the money is going to projects like a bridge
in NY. But infrastructure spending is stimulative to the economy. A lot
of it is aid to cities, like NYC, that has been hit hard by Covid. The economy
has taken a big hit, so have cities. That's why I said at least Biden's deficit
increase is arguably justified. Trump did his deficit blowout with a Goldylocks
economy, steadily growing since 2009, low unemployment, low inflation,
low interest rates. There was no justification, just a pack of lies about a
terrible economy while he was running and then suddenly the same growth,
the same continuation under Trump was a great achievement. Is the new
Covid package too big? Not all going to where it should? Probably. You
can put the blame for that on yourself and the other Trumpets, who defended
every horrible, stupid thing he did while he gutted the GOP. Now the WH,
House and Senate are lost and this is the result. I predicted it 5 years ago.


I understand you and Rod think we can just keep borrowing and printing
money forever but history is a cruel teacher and it teaches us that
leads to a financial disaster.

That's a lie. I spoke out against Trump's tax cuts and increased spending,
I said it would greatly increase the deficits, that were already at $500 bil.
But at least they were steadily declining, until Trump came along.

Your ONLY complaint about the tax cut was rich people got a taste.

That;s yet another lie. I spoke out against the tax cut as being irresponsible
when we already had a $500 bil deficit and the economy was doing OK.
YOU responded again and again, justifying it, saying it was going to many
Americans, not just the rich, never saying it was a bad idea. And the rich
not only got a taste, they got an order of magnitude more benefit than
Joe Sixpack.




In a way this is very much like 2007. Everyone said the housing market
could never fail and real estate was always a safe investment, until
the first house lost money. Then it was an avalanche.
We think people will always be lined up to buy our debt but as soon as
that is not true, it will be the same type of avalanche.

I've said the same thing many times. I said it when Trump was cutting taxes
and increasing spending. You didn't.

Yes I did. I have said we should cut the DoD budget for years but you
still think we have that red menace and no amount is too much.

Show us a single post where I advocated for spending more on defense.
Or where I said anything at all about the defense budget.


That is the elephant in the room. It is second only to the
entitlements and more than interest on the debt.
You could really say it started in 2009 anyway when the Fed had to buy
$4.5T of our debt with money they printed out of thin air because the
market couldn't absorb it.

That's not true either. There was no US debt that had to be bought from
the US treasury. The FED bought the debt in the open markets, from people
already holding it, exactly as it has always done when it needs to provide liquidity,
to stimulate the economy, to lower interest rates. The US didn't suddenly
issue $4.5T of new debt.

Bull****, Nobody was holding that $4.5T they bought. It went straight
from the treasury to the fed. (or vice versa depending on how you look
at the phony bookkeeping).

That's wrong too. You clearly don't understand how the FED works. The
US govt did not issue $4.5T in new debt. If they did, where did that cash go?
The deficit circa 2009 was $1.4T. That is all the new debt the govt had to issue.
The rest, the bulk of the money creation was the FED buying securities in the open
market, as they have done since day one to control the money supply. It's the
FED's Open Market Operations. And they didn't just buy US govt securites in 2009,
they bought mortgage backed securities too. Further, the FED NEVER buys
securities directly from the Treasury.



If Bernie Maydolf could have just printed the money to cover his debts
he would still be in Palm Beach sipping Pina Coladas.




I haven't seen how they paid for this latest give away since it hasn't
showed up on the deficit yet. (according to the treasury web site)

They will pay for it the same way that all US spending in excess of revenue
is paid for, by issuing new debt.

At a certain point who is buying it? We are reaching the point that
there is not that much liquidity in the world economy.

Oh please. The world economy is as liquid as it's ever been.



That is why the
fed needs to print more money. At what point will people start to
realize the money supply far outweighs the value of goods and
services, then the central bank's thumb on the inflation scale will
not be enough to hold it down.

People will realize there is a problem, when there actually is a problem,
eg inflation rising. So far, deflation has been the larger problem.


We don't even have to go back a half century to see that happen.

It's an interesting question that I've never seen an explanation to.
Which is why inflation was so bad, starting in the late 60s, worsening
in the late 70s, but not today. If we buy your govt borrowing be the
driving problem, the govt budget and balance sheet back then was
way better than it's been for the last 20 years, but we've had little
inflation. And monetary policy has never been easier than it has
been since 2009, still no inflation. The internet is one powerful force
keeping prices down, but I've never heard a real attempt at explaining
it.



Bernie Madoff went to prison for that kind of bookkeeping.

That's wrong too. What the US is doing is on the books, available for all to see.
Banks, institutions, world banks, all see it, they know exactly what the US govt
is doing. Bernie was a lying crook who issued totally made up financial statements.

All can see but if you really look, what you see looks a lot like what
Bernie did. We have trillions that we say is a trust fund but it is
really just debt. The fed prints money to cover debt the treasury
can't sell on the market.

Again, that is simply wrong. The FED never buys securities directly from the
Treasury and they are not buying them because no one else wants them.
The FED buys securities in the markets to increase or decrease the available
money supply.



Most people just believe that because the
government says this is OK, that it is. You are one of them.

That's a lie. I've spoken out against deficits and the national debt,
constantly, including when Trump irresponsibly cut taxes and increased
spending.


Google up Weimar Republic and see what happens when debts overwhelm a
country's ability to pay.
At a certain point we are going to have to start paying an interest
rate that more correctly reflects the market and that will blow out
the deficit.
If we have to pay Carter era interest it is almost all of our current
revenue without spending another dime on SS/MC, federal pensions or
any of the "discretionary" spending.
Carter isn't ancient history either. It was 45 years ago.

On that point, you're correct, that interest rates will rise at some point.
Hopefully Treasury has the vast majority of debt in 20+ maturities, in which
case the immediate impact won't be severe.
They don't
There are about $5T in bills that expire in weeks or months
There is $11T in Notes that may only last 2 years, 10 max
$2.9T is in T bonds.
Most of the T bonds are held by SS/MC.
$6.4T is in "Series" bonds. (the kind regular folks buy)
The rest is a mix of other paper.

https://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/...cipal_debt.htm

You're right about that. I guess the morons are doing the ARM mortgage deal.
Take on huge risk of interest rates rising in order to keep today's payments
low. So if rates rise, there will be an immediate impact, I see about 25%
is in Tbills, 50% in 2 to 10 year maturities.

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 10:12:34 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 16 Mar 2021 15:31:23 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 16, 2021 at 3:18:27 PM UTC-4, wrote:

Funny you weren't making posts like that when Trump gave you your tax cut
and increased spending, turning a $500 bil deficit into a $1 tril one.

Trumpets all suffer from extreme tunnel vision.
Trader has the worst tunnel vision of anyone I know. Everything is
framed around Trump., We could be talking about plywood and Trader
would try to make it about Trump.

I understand Trump is gone. Trader, not so much.

It's impossible to not frame much of what is going on around Trump, because
of the extraordinary damage he's caused to this country, ending in an insurrection.
Like I said, get over it. Trump is GONE.

You're the one that is again in denial. Trump is the undisputed head of the GOP.
Leading Republicans are still behind him, saying that the party needs him going
forward. Trump's trumptard pick, McDaniels, still runs the RNC, even after
delivering unprecedented defeat. Trumpets control the state GOPs and they
are hell bent on punishing anyone that isn't on the Trump train, that dares to
speak out against him. The Republicans want Trump to help them win 2022.



Biden has saddled our kids with a third of Trump's debt in less than 2
months. He says he is not through yet.

Again, funny how you only complain about Biden's debt. Where were all
the posts about "Trumps debt"? Hell Trump added $2.9 tril in Covid relief
in less than one year. Not a peep there, only about Biden's $1.9 tril.



He wants us to eat another $Trillion or so in student debt. He still
hasn't made good on his reparations promise, That is a few hundred
$Billion. It is unclear his tax plan will actually raise much revenue
but it will certainly drive a lot of capital offshore and that might
even reduce revenue.
Then we can expect a war or two. My guess is Iran but he might not be
done with Syria/Iraq and Afghanistan.
What did I forget?
I guess we will have to wait to see what Chuck and Nancy come up with
next for him. A few more bills like ARP and Trump's $6+T will be a
fond memory.


Whatever it is, it is. It's upon us because of the Trumpets and people like you
who excused everything he did. The net result is the loss of the WH, House
and Senate to liberal Democrats, exactly as I warned would happen for the
last 5 years. Even I didn't see it ending in an insurrection though. The Republicans
want more, they are still following Trump down the toilet. My conscience is
clear.