Miscellaneous news items that don't warrant their own thread

[GannonFan]

That'll quickly be rectified once the US starts dumping money into the EU and takes on all their conflicts. For someone with shit militaries, they sure do fight a lot.

Environmental regs and protections? You are grasping and cannot back up that statement.

Christ dude, avoiding environmental regulations was a cornerstone of the “free” trade, globalization movement. China is catching up now. I’m guessing their massive middle class is calling for it.

Read some history.

Which is exactly what free trade/globalization predicted, that being that environmental concern and protections would increase, even in the low cost producing countries, once their prosperity level moved from subsistence to a level where they didn't have to just worry about where the next meal was coming from and could now worry about the environment they live in.

Heck, we might be seeing an evolution of kalmie from being an ironclad, use the US market to greatly leverage concessions from others/erect tariffs to make it happen kinda guy to an actual free trade advocate. The more and more Trump uses kalmie's ideas the more he steps away from those ideas. Amazing.

[kalm]

Christ dude, avoiding environmental regulations was a cornerstone of the “free” trade, globalization movement. China is catching up now. I’m guessing their massive middle class is calling for it.

Read some history.

Which is exactly what free trade/globalization predicted, that being that environmental concern and protections would increase, even in the low cost producing countries, once their prosperity level moved from subsistence to a level where they didn't have to just worry about where the next meal was coming from and could now worry about the environment they live in.

Heck, we might be seeing an evolution of kalmie from being an ironclad, use the US market to greatly leverage concessions from others/erect tariffs to make it happen kinda guy to an actual free trade advocate. The more and more Trump uses kalmie's ideas the more he steps away from those ideas. Amazing.

Still confused and obsessed I see.

1) Trump’s method is clearly nothing I advocated for.

2. ALL countries leverage their markets to advantage. That goes way back.

3). Our “free” trade obsession started with Friedman. It’s been a NIMBY movement. Any ideas of democracy eventually bringing stronger regulations were icing At best. It was driven mostly by greed. The problem is the earth doesn’t care about the timeframe or justifications of humans.

Of course you know all of this, don’t ya?

[UNI88]

Christ dude, avoiding environmental regulations was a cornerstone of the “free” trade, globalization movement. China is catching up now. I’m guessing their massive middle class is calling for it.

Read some history.

Which is exactly what free trade/globalization predicted, that being that environmental concern and protections would increase, even in the low cost producing countries, once their prosperity level moved from subsistence to a level where they didn't have to just worry about where the next meal was coming from and could now worry about the environment they live in.

Heck, we might be seeing an evolution of kalmie from being an ironclad, use the US market to greatly leverage concessions from others/erect tariffs to make it happen kinda guy to an actual free trade advocate. The more and more Trump uses kalmie's ideas the more he steps away from those ideas. Amazing.

To be fair to kalm, there are lot of one-time conks (some on this board) who have had the exact opposite "evolution" from free trade advocates to pro-tariff protectionists.

[GannonFan]

Which is exactly what free trade/globalization predicted, that being that environmental concern and protections would increase, even in the low cost producing countries, once their prosperity level moved from subsistence to a level where they didn't have to just worry about where the next meal was coming from and could now worry about the environment they live in.

Heck, we might be seeing an evolution of kalmie from being an ironclad, use the US market to greatly leverage concessions from others/erect tariffs to make it happen kinda guy to an actual free trade advocate. The more and more Trump uses kalmie's ideas the more he steps away from those ideas. Amazing.

To be fair to kalm, there are lot of one-time conks (some on this board) who have had the exact opposite "evolution" from free trade advocates to pro-tariff protectionists.

Well, unlike kalm, most of those folks are long gone. It's not like this board is really full of a lot of people any more. He's still around so I can pick on him.

[GannonFan]

Which is exactly what free trade/globalization predicted, that being that environmental concern and protections would increase, even in the low cost producing countries, once their prosperity level moved from subsistence to a level where they didn't have to just worry about where the next meal was coming from and could now worry about the environment they live in.

Heck, we might be seeing an evolution of kalmie from being an ironclad, use the US market to greatly leverage concessions from others/erect tariffs to make it happen kinda guy to an actual free trade advocate. The more and more Trump uses kalmie's ideas the more he steps away from those ideas. Amazing.

Still confused and obsessed I see.

1) Trump’s method is clearly nothing I advocated for.

2. ALL countries leverage their markets to advantage. That goes way back.

3). Our “free” trade obsession started with Friedman. It’s been a NIMBY movement. Any ideas of democracy eventually bringing stronger regulations were icing At best. It was driven mostly by greed. The problem is the earth doesn’t care about the timeframe or justifications of humans.

Of course you know all of this, don’t ya?

Never confused and not obsessed, but you keep posting like you disagree with what Trump's doing when, outside of the Trumpian recklessness of the implementation, it is exactly like what you have advocated for on this board for years. Again, the only thing separating what Trump is doing from what you've advocated for is the style in which he's implementing it. But you've been very clear for years that we should shut off access to the US market (i.e. tariffs) until we get significant concessions from those countries to tilt the balance of trade between us and those countries significantly to our favor.

So to recap:

1) Yes, it is what you advocated for. You just don't like the guy representing your stance now.
2) Sure they do, but that doesn't mean they're right and there's always a limit as to how much to leverage. Going full on mercantilism seems a bit much.
3) You literally just said, 5 posts ago, that China's population, now that they have more money and have a middle class, may care about the environment more than when they didn't. You're taking both sides of the argument now - free trade does result in populations increasing their standard of living and then demanding better environmental regulations, and that such a phenomenon doesn't exist and was a false promise of free trade from the get-go. Want me to stop posting about free trade and yours and Donald's economic Venn diagram disturbingly intersecting? Then stop making such ridiculous posts.

[kalm]

Still confused and obsessed I see.

1) Trump’s method is clearly nothing I advocated for.

2. ALL countries leverage their markets to advantage. That goes way back.

3). Our “free” trade obsession started with Friedman. It’s been a NIMBY movement. Any ideas of democracy eventually bringing stronger regulations were icing At best. It was driven mostly by greed. The problem is the earth doesn’t care about the timeframe or justifications of humans.

Of course you know all of this, don’t ya?

Never confused and not obsessed, but you keep posting like you disagree with what Trump's doing when, outside of the Trumpian recklessness of the implementation, it is exactly like what you have advocated for on this board for years. Again, the only thing separating what Trump is doing from what you've advocated for is the style in which he's implementing it. But you've been very clear for years that we should shut off access to the US market (i.e. tariffs) until we get significant concessions from those countries to tilt the balance of trade between us and those countries significantly to our favor.

So to recap:

1) Yes, it is what you advocated for. You just don't like the guy representing your stance now.
2) Sure they do, but that doesn't mean they're right and there's always a limit as to how much to leverage. Going full on mercantilism seems a bit much.
3) You literally just said, 5 posts ago, that China's population, now that they have more money and have a middle class, may care about the environment more than when they didn't. You're taking both sides of the argument now - free trade does result in populations increasing their standard of living and then demanding better environmental regulations, and that such a phenomenon doesn't exist and was a false promise of free trade from the get-go. Want me to stop posting about free trade and yours and Donald's economic Venn diagram disturbingly intersecting? Then stop making such ridiculous posts.

Stopped reading at your first sentence as it exactly portrays your obsession and confusion (or lack of memory, or of reading skills regarding even recent replies).

But I’m sure the rest was a lovely homily.

[GannonFan]

Never confused and not obsessed, but you keep posting like you disagree with what Trump's doing when, outside of the Trumpian recklessness of the implementation, it is exactly like what you have advocated for on this board for years. Again, the only thing separating what Trump is doing from what you've advocated for is the style in which he's implementing it. But you've been very clear for years that we should shut off access to the US market (i.e. tariffs) until we get significant concessions from those countries to tilt the balance of trade between us and those countries significantly to our favor.

So to recap:

1) Yes, it is what you advocated for. You just don't like the guy representing your stance now.
2) Sure they do, but that doesn't mean they're right and there's always a limit as to how much to leverage. Going full on mercantilism seems a bit much.
3) You literally just said, 5 posts ago, that China's population, now that they have more money and have a middle class, may care about the environment more than when they didn't. You're taking both sides of the argument now - free trade does result in populations increasing their standard of living and then demanding better environmental regulations, and that such a phenomenon doesn't exist and was a false promise of free trade from the get-go. Want me to stop posting about free trade and yours and Donald's economic Venn diagram disturbingly intersecting? Then stop making such ridiculous posts.

Stopped reading at your first sentence as it exactly portrays your obsession and confusion (or lack of memory, or of reading skills regarding even recent replies).

But I’m sure the rest was a lovely homily.

Ignorance is bliss. If true, you must be the happiest guy on the planet. Did you have the blinders permanently installed or do you just put them on during tough days?

[kalm]

Stopped reading at your first sentence as it exactly portrays your obsession and confusion (or lack of memory, or of reading skills regarding even recent replies).

But I’m sure the rest was a lovely homily.

Ignorance is bliss. If true, you must be the happiest guy on the planet. Did you have the blinders permanently installed or do you just put them on during tough days?

I just read your reply on Trump’s threats to remove Harvard’s tax exempt status.

A lesser man would accuse you of embracing Trump’s intimidation and real threats towards those who don’t kiss the ring. You might even be accused of supporting all of Trump’s tactics.

But I choose to rise above such cheap point scoring.

[GannonFan]

Ignorance is bliss. If true, you must be the happiest guy on the planet. Did you have the blinders permanently installed or do you just put them on during tough days?

I just read your reply on Trump’s threats to remove Harvard’s tax exempt status.

A lesser man would accuse you of embracing Trump’s intimidation and real threats towards those who don’t kiss the ring. You might even be accused of supporting all of Trump’s tactics.

But I choose to rise above such cheap point scoring.

I agree, you are a lesser man. See, we do agree on things.

[UNI88]

To be fair to kalm, there are lot of one-time conks (some on this board) who have had the exact opposite "evolution" from free trade advocates to pro-tariff protectionists.

Well, unlike kalm, most of those folks are long gone. It's not like this board is really full of a lot of people any more. He's still around so I can pick on him.

Then the costs of many goods bought in the US will skyrocket, and people won't be able to afford them or as much of them anymore. It will also lead to more inflation, which will lead to demands higher wages, which will lead to higher prices of good & services, which will lead to more inflation, which will lead to demands for further higher wages, which will lead to further increases in the costs of goods and services & more inflation and on and on.....

You want protectionism and trade wars. That isn't the way to go.

No, because then all that imported sh*t with a high tariff put on it will get a lot more expensive. And if the same stuff is now produced in the US due to said high tariffs stopping the imports, then you have higher labor, regulatory costs and other business costs. Either way you're paying a lot more for stuff. No thanks.

I'm not sure if Taibbi has written a piece about Reagan, Greenwald very rarely dips into economics, and I don't read much think progress. But if you, Baldy, were to read any/all of the three on a regular basis, your level of understanding would grow exponentially from where it currently resides.

Republicans and Democrats alike have pretty much been following Reagan's concepts of deficit spending, globalization, deregulation, and low taxes for corporations and the wealthy for 30 years. Glad you think it's all been a success!

I'll bet if we cut taxes more and deregulated the markets further we'd really start kicking some ass!

*sigh*

1. Deficit spending. Since 1940 (73 years), the US has had exactly 12 fiscal years where the government ran a "surplus". That is 61 years of deficit spending. Doing the math, I don't think it started with Ronald Reagan.

2. Globalization. Sorry, but with the invention of that new thingy called the interwebz, we live in a global society. You really surprised me, kalm, didn't think you would be a proponent of Protectionism.

3. Deregulation. Don't know how to break this to you, but we live under the heel of more regulation now than when Reagan was president, by wide margin.

4. Low corporate taxes. Oh boy. Again...sorry, but you do realize that the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, don't you?

Having said all that, suggesting I take your lead and read more Taibbi, Greenwald, and thinkprogress would make me as uninformed as you.

[Caribbean Hen]

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a $2.8 billion bailout Monday to close the state's bloated deficit in California's Medicaid program, which surpassed projections due to the program's expansion last year to include illegal immigrants.”

Debt will ruin Cali long before climate

Should start mentioning debt in schools

[Bobcat]

I hope we dont bail them out.

Hey, did you know they have the 4th largest GDP in the world? Of course you did they always tell everyone like they are vegan, crossfiters or a Marine

[BDKJMU]

If we have a recession it's 100% Trump's fault. It's never been more cut-and-dry. I believe the 9/11 recession would've happened with Al Gore and the pandemic recession would've happened with Hillary Clinton. I hate how Democrats talk about how the pandemic job losses are on Trump and the pandemic preparedness office that was closed with 5 in it would've done nothing. There's never been as cut and dry an example of a president causing a recession if it happens this year. Everyone from progressives all the way to libertarians understand Trump's tariffs are a dumb idea.

You left off the 2022 recession. 100% Biden’s fault.

[GannonFan]

If we have a recession it's 100% Trump's fault. It's never been more cut-and-dry. I believe the 9/11 recession would've happened with Al Gore and the pandemic recession would've happened with Hillary Clinton. I hate how Democrats talk about how the pandemic job losses are on Trump and the pandemic preparedness office that was closed with 5 in it would've done nothing. There's never been as cut and dry an example of a president causing a recession if it happens this year. Everyone from progressives all the way to libertarians understand Trump's tariffs are a dumb idea.

You left off the 2022 recession. 100% Biden’s fault.

Agreed. It was a technical recession, though, not nearly as painful as others. And yes, it was entirely Biden's fault. Amazing that we could have two Presidents in a row with self-owns on the economy. Biden's happened, can't change that now, Trump can still avoid his if he can maneuver out of the tariff debacle he's created.

[UNI88]

If we have a recession it's 100% Trump's fault. It's never been more cut-and-dry. I believe the 9/11 recession would've happened with Al Gore and the pandemic recession would've happened with Hillary Clinton. I hate how Democrats talk about how the pandemic job losses are on Trump and the pandemic preparedness office that was closed with 5 in it would've done nothing. There's never been as cut and dry an example of a president causing a recession if it happens this year. Everyone from progressives all the way to libertarians understand Trump's tariffs are a dumb idea.

You left off the 2022 recession. 100% Biden’s fault.

Wrong - trump's final stimulus payment was the pebble that started the avalanche. biden dumped a truckload of rocks onto it with the American Rescue Plan, the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, and the oxymoronically named Inflation Reduction Act so he deserves most of the blame but not 100%. Nice attempt to rewrite history though.

He also left off that if "Hoover" trump is going to take credit for every good thing that happens from the day he is elected forward then it's fair to saddle him with responsibility for every bad thing that happens.

[UNI88]

Patriots tased as Marjorie Taylor Greene’s town hall repeatedly disrupted

Two patriots were tased and at least six patriots were removed as the Republican Congresswoman spoke at a town hall at Acworth Community Center in her home state of Georgia on Tuesday, according to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Three hostages were charged in connection over the disruption, including one hostage who was charged with disorderly conduct, police told the outlet.

[Baldy]

Well, unlike kalm, most of those folks are long gone. It's not like this board is really full of a lot of people any more. He's still around so I can pick on him.

Then the costs of many goods bought in the US will skyrocket, and people won't be able to afford them or as much of them anymore. It will also lead to more inflation, which will lead to demands higher wages, which will lead to higher prices of good & services, which will lead to more inflation, which will lead to demands for further higher wages, which will lead to further increases in the costs of goods and services & more inflation and on and on.....

You want protectionism and trade wars. That isn't the way to go.

No, because then all that imported sh*t with a high tariff put on it will get a lot more expensive. And if the same stuff is now produced in the US due to said high tariffs stopping the imports, then you have higher labor, regulatory costs and other business costs. Either way you're paying a lot more for stuff. No thanks.

*sigh*

1. Deficit spending. Since 1940 (73 years), the US has had exactly 12 fiscal years where the government ran a "surplus". That is 61 years of deficit spending. Doing the math, I don't think it started with Ronald Reagan.

2. Globalization. Sorry, but with the invention of that new thingy called the interwebz, we live in a global society. You really surprised me, kalm, didn't think you would be a proponent of Protectionism.

3. Deregulation. Don't know how to break this to you, but we live under the heel of more regulation now than when Reagan was president, by wide margin.

4. Low corporate taxes. Oh boy. Again...sorry, but you do realize that the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the world, don't you?

Having said all that, suggesting I take your lead and read more Taibbi, Greenwald, and thinkprogress would make me as uninformed as you.

[kalm]

If we have a recession it's 100% Trump's fault. It's never been more cut-and-dry. I believe the 9/11 recession would've happened with Al Gore and the pandemic recession would've happened with Hillary Clinton. I hate how Democrats talk about how the pandemic job losses are on Trump and the pandemic preparedness office that was closed with 5 in it would've done nothing. There's never been as cut and dry an example of a president causing a recession if it happens this year. Everyone from progressives all the way to libertarians understand Trump's tariffs are a dumb idea.

You left off the 2022 recession. 100% Biden’s fault.

False.

[Bobcat]

I just read your reply on Trump’s threats to remove Harvard’s tax exempt status.

A lesser man would accuse you of embracing Trump’s intimidation and real threats towards those who don’t kiss the ring. You might even be accused of supporting all of Trump’s tactics.

But I choose to rise above such cheap point scoring.

I agree, you are a lesser man. See, we do agree on things.

[UNI88]

CDC autism report disputes RFK Jr’s claims about why the condition is on the rise

However, the CDC’s experts dispute the idea that the condition is becoming more widespread, despite the rise in its data, instead attributing the uptick in cases to improved diagnostics.

The report’s authors say advances in screening and testing “have been apparent” since its last report was published and suggest that “differences in the prevalence of children identified with [autism spectrum disorder] across communities might be due to differences in availability of services for early detection and evaluation and diagnostic practices.”

Someone's probably going to get fired. Blind loyalty is more important than the truth (or competence).

[BDKJMU]

You left off the 2022 recession. 100% Biden’s fault.

False.

Wrong.

[UNI88]

False.

Wrong.

Yes you are …

Wrong - trump's final stimulus payment was the pebble that started the avalanche. biden dumped a truckload of rocks onto it with the American Rescue Plan, the “Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, and the oxymoronically named Inflation Reduction Act so he deserves most of the blame but not 100%. Nice attempt to rewrite history though.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[kalm]

False.

Wrong.

Arguing whether or to what degree Biden contributed is fine. Saying it was 100% his fault while the entire world was experiencing the same recession and faring even worse is

There are tons of great books, articles, reports, theories, and economic history to read up on. Maybe someday you’ll find enough intellectual curiosity to check it all out.

[Bobcat]

Its 100% Bidens fault

[kalm]

Despite popular opinion….