Joe Biden 2021

[Gengs1 2583]

5 hours ago, washparkhorn said:

New Democratic focus groups find many voters aren't sure what the party stands for -

NBC News:  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/new-democratic-focus-groups-find-many-voters-aren-t-sure-n1269955

. . . "Voters are not hearing enough about what Democrats have accomplished, what they are fighting to accomplish, and how they are standing up for voters’ values and priorities," read a Lake Research strategy memo by Celinda Lake, David Mermin and Emily Garner, summing up their findings. 

. . . "They elect us and they expect us to get something done. And if we don't, it happens at our peril," said Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., a co-chair of the Progressive Caucus PAC. "If they can't define us well because of what we haven't gotten done, then we're even more in peril."

Pocan, who sat through some of the focus group discussions, said voters wanted the two parties to get along and find common ground — with a caveat.

"They did say they want us to work together, but they instantly moved on to, 'But you got to get things done,'" he said. "They're not going to give us a lot of latitude to say we couldn't get it done because of the Republicans, especially when Democrats are officially in charge of everything."

The memo describing the findings (source material) - https://www.scribd.com/document/511052508/Lake-Research-memo

 

News at 6, while dems have their heads in the sand the Rs will brand themselves as party of working people and it will work. Dems just can’t message and keep power 

[berlinerbaer 670]

Follow. The. Money. Seriously, everyone hates money in politics but people mistakenly think they have no means to stop it. 

Call out Manchin's ties to the Koch network. Call out Sinema's meeting with big donors where she gloated about killing $15 minimum wage.

You might find it hypocritical for Biden to call out money in politics, but I think the fact that he just raised a record BILLION DOLLARS gives him the biggest megaphone in which to do it. "Look. I raised more money than everyone else. I've been raising money for 40 years and let me tell you, folks. It can be a good thing or a bad thing. I want to get bridges built. These other guys are paid to make sure that won't happen."

As far as the rest of us go, boycotts and protest are both great ideas. There should be billboards in downtown Phoenix ripping Sinema. Investigate the Manchin family's multiple conflicts of interest. You find corporate donors and organize boycotts against those donors. Even if it is a small fraction who participate, it's the negative publicity that does the most damage.

Some of us forget the spine that Democrats suddenly grew in early 2017 once they found out what the base thought of their initial efforts to work with Trump. It's easy to forget because it didn't last long.

[washparkhorn 9935]

6 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

I get it, but I would hope that “not fascists” would be good enough. 

This trajectory is unsustainable.

What's the plan centrists? Seriously - all ears here. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Can you imagine the fury if Bernie or House progressives were intentionally sabotaging Biden’s agenda like Manchin is?  It’s incredible this one guy from WV is putting the kibosh on generations worth of work and democrats don’t believe it should reflect poorly on them. 

[washparkhorn 9935]

4 hours ago, softlynow said:

You needn't worry that we don't understand you. We get it. You live in a fantasyland where the smart political play coming out of a global pandemic is to re-gridlock the economy with strikes and protests that become riots.

Gridlock is the primary centrist goal and ingrained in their methods. You know that. 

If one chooses to not make that choice - there are options:

• choose progress or regress
• provide a tempo: moderate or radical

Idle is not a choice at the present; it's absurd given the circumstances.

 

[washparkhorn 9935]

12 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Can you imagine the fury if Bernie or House progressives were intentionally sabotaging Biden’s agenda like Manchin is?  It’s incredible this one guy from WV is putting the kibosh on generations worth of work and democrats don’t believe it should reflect poorly on them. 

It's almost like it was the plan all along. 

[washparkhorn 9935]

3 hours ago, DonkeyCigars said:

This thread has been fantastic today. Thanks to all who have contributed and keep it going.

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

This shit is all over the interwebs.  It is like people have zero concept of supply and demand.  But of course, it is all Joe Biden's fault.

 

 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

Is it pure supply and demand? In the case of lumber, probably. But also printing money, raising minimum wages drastically, and spending trillions tends to have an inflationary impact.

From NYT this AM:

Economists expect a big number, with the Consumer Price Index for May predicted to have risen 4.7 percent in May versus the previous year, which would be the biggest jump since 2008. “It’s going to be another shocking report,” said Laura Rosner-Warburton, a founding partner at MacroPolicy Perspectives.

In part, this is because of technical factors, since last May’s price level was particularly depressed by pandemic lockdowns. The Times’s Ella Koeze made an excellent chart to explain how these “base effects” work:

Whatever the latest number, the debate about inflation won’t die down. A sharp increase in April was enough to make many anxious about how long a period of elevated inflation will last. Short-lived bursts of inflation that are tied to supply chain bottlenecks, as in the case of cars, or stimulus-check spending wouldn’t do lasting damage to the economy. But entrenched price rises, which would show up in things like rent, could force the Fed to cut its support of the economy sooner than expected and crimp the White House’s expansive spending plans.

Edited June 10, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

3 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Is it pure supply and demand? In the case of lumber, probably. But also printing money, raising minimum wages drastically, and spending trillions tends to have an inflationary impact.

From NYT this AM:

Economists expect a big number, with the Consumer Price Index for May predicted to have risen 4.7 percent in May versus the previous year, which would be the biggest jump since 2008. “It’s going to be another shocking report,” said Laura Rosner-Warburton, a founding partner at MacroPolicy Perspectives.

In part, this is because of technical factors, since last May’s price level was particularly depressed by pandemic lockdowns. The Times’s Ella Koeze made an excellent chart to explain how these “base effects” work:

Whatever the latest number, the debate about inflation won’t die down. A sharp increase in April was enough to make many anxious about how long a period of elevated inflation will last. Short-lived bursts of inflation that are tied to supply chain bottlenecks, as in the case of cars, or stimulus-check spending wouldn’t do lasting damage to the economy. But entrenched price rises, which would show up in things like rent, could force the Fed to cut its support of the economy sooner than expected and crimp the White House’s expansive spending plans.

Let's talk about what was going in March and April of last year vs. March and April of this year, hmmmm.  Apples to oranges.  

You a disingenuous troll.  Go fuck yourself.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

Pretty easy to tell who did not watch the press briefing wherein several of the supply chain folks were discussing various issues and the steps they are taking to remedy that. Like Penelope says: markets, how do they work?

Also, home building put on hold during the pandemic, combined with supply issues with materials, combined with a pre-existing housing shortage, combined with moves due to job loss or work from home changing factors related to suitability of location are just a great mix for prices.

In addition, some of this economic forecasting is what was actually heading our way during the Trump presidency and what I was concerned about if Biden took office because people get that stuck in their heads with the economy and the WH. Trump would not have been good for policy heading into this. Not with the way he and his favorite economists think about human capital stock.

[6th Street 6357]

What about the idiots complaining about fuel prices rising? 

[bad_teammate 13132]

10 hours ago, softlynow said:

You're boring me now. I deal with clients who have a warped view of reality on a daily basis. There's only so much of that I need to experience in a day.

this is a whimper

10 hours ago, softlynow said:

Dems simply need to get bills to the floor that Manchin and Sinema have to vote for and build a record of accomplishment to run on in '22 along with making the mid-terms a referendum on the GOP doubling down on insurrectionism and obstruction.

When you discover the answer to why that is not happening, you will discover why relying on the politician class and electoralism alone is doomed to failure.

Why is Schumer not doing this?

[Neonmoon 38127]

8 minutes ago, 6th Street said:

What about the idiots complaining about fuel prices rising? 

This makes my blood boil. And yes, both sides do it. It’s pure stupidity 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

7 minutes ago, Neonmoon said:

This makes my blood boil. And yes, both sides do it. It’s pure stupidity 

But is HEB open?

[Bateshorn 9899]

Look, I just got done Negotiating language in the China competitiveness bill:  it’s not just Manchin.  The thing I was working on was supported by virtually the entire caucus, but one liberal Senator didn’t like it, so it failed because it couldn’t move under unanimous consent.  The R’s were also supportive, but they weren’t going to just give Schumer an easy W.  
 

In the House it’s open partisan warfare.  Losing a floor vote is like losing to OU.  You’ll swallow your concerns to get the W.  The senate was already a deeply anti-democratic institution where the members are used to having a voice or finger in every issue.  There is so much ass fuckery going on behind the scenes on a million different issues.  Manchin is just the most public face of it because:

A. He’s a press hound

B. I tend to believe he’s a naive fool.

I think a lot of members believe the claptrap about the old timey senate of LBJ and Richard Russell cutting deals over drinks.  It’s mostly bullshit and is revisionist history, but it infects thinking all across the chamber.  Say what you want about McConnell and Harry Reid, they saw the institution for what it is.

Edited June 10, 2021 by Bateshorn

[DonkeyCigars 144]

1 hour ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Let's talk about what was going in March and April of last year vs. March and April of this year, hmmmm.  Apples to oranges.  

You a disingenuous troll.  Go fuck yourself.

Did you read the post? Nobody, except you, is making a definitive statement— there is just a possibility it’s not as black and white as your cringe Twitter clap tried to suggest. So either you are the troll or your brain is broken and you can’t think critically anymore, if you ever could.

[bad_teammate 13132]

31 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

Look, I just got done Negotiating language in the China competitiveness bill:  it’s not just Manchin.  The thing I was working on was supported by virtually the entire caucus, but one liberal Senator didn’t like it, so it failed because it couldn’t move under unanimous consent.  The R’s were also supportive, but they weren’t going to just give Schumer an easy W.  

This is a great example of them working on a bill that the people at large don't really care about. The stakes are virtually non-existent for them and they can happily just kill things entirely because it threatens disruption in their institutional culture. If there were tremendous external pressure, this wouldn't be so easy for them to do.

Which is why we need massive, constant popular pressure demanding these politicians do what we want them to do.

[Dahobbs 17447]

27 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Did you read the post? Nobody, except you, is making a definitive statement— there is just a possibility it’s not as black and white as your cringe Twitter clap tried to suggest. So either you are the troll or your brain is broken and you can’t think critically anymore, if you ever could.

She is entirely right. You have no idea what you're talking about. Do you actually even understand what that chart you quoted is showing you? It is about change compared to the prior year. Notice how during this same point in 2020 there was essentially no inflation? Those spikes are just the economy playing catch up, which is literally what the article you quoted was saying. 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

21 minutes ago, Dahobbs said:

She is entirely right. You have no idea what you're talking about. Do you actually even understand what that chart you quoted is showing you? It is about change compared to the prior year. Notice how during this same point in 2020 there was essentially no inflation? Those spikes are just the economy playing catch up, which is literally what the article you quoted was saying. 

Yea, I read the article of which I quoted. The topic of discussion was the part I bolded, which I did as people do, to bring attention to the point. We all understand the basics of economics and supply and demand, what we want to keep an eye on is the inflationary indicators...things which policy can sometimes affect.

And if, indeed, we are seeing inflation, then what does that mean for future-looking and roadmap policy?

While not necessarily a reality today, at this moment, it is worth thinking about and thinking about those questions IMO.

Edited June 10, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[GRHorn 105]

2 hours ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Is it pure supply and demand? In the case of lumber, probably. But also printing money, raising minimum wages drastically, and spending trillions tends to have an inflationary impact.

From NYT this AM:

Economists expect a big number, with the Consumer Price Index for May predicted to have risen 4.7 percent in May versus the previous year, which would be the biggest jump since 2008. “It’s going to be another shocking report,” said Laura Rosner-Warburton, a founding partner at MacroPolicy Perspectives.

In part, this is because of technical factors, since last May’s price level was particularly depressed by pandemic lockdowns. The Times’s Ella Koeze made an excellent chart to explain how these “base effects” work:

Whatever the latest number, the debate about inflation won’t die down. A sharp increase in April was enough to make many anxious about how long a period of elevated inflation will last. Short-lived bursts of inflation that are tied to supply chain bottlenecks, as in the case of cars, or stimulus-check spending wouldn’t do lasting damage to the economy. But entrenched price rises, which would show up in things like rent, could force the Fed to cut its support of the economy sooner than expected and crimp the White House’s expansive spending plans.

the Econ discussion happens in another forum here. The meme has been that this is all transitory. TBD. Transitory or not it has been running higher than market expectations. 
 

The CR angle is pretty simple. Dems will downplay it. Rs will emphasize it. But these are the current numbers. 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

3 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Yea, I read the article of which I quoted. The topic of discussion was the part I bolded, which I did as people do, to bring attention to the point. We all understand the basics of economics and supply and demand, what we want to keep an eye on is the inflationary indicators...things which policy can sometimes affect.

And if, indeed, we are seeing inflation, then what does that mean for future-looking and roadmap policy?

While not necessarily a reality today, at this moment, it is worth thinking about and thinking about those questions IMO.

From the article you posted...

In part, this is because of technical factors, since last May’s price level was particularly depressed by pandemic lockdowns. 

I don't have an economics degree (only three hours short of one actually because I think intermediate micro is fucking painful and I didn't want to give up my Spring Break to take it, but that is a whole story), but you are full of shit.

[Dahobbs 17447]

9 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Yea, I read the article of which I quoted. The topic of discussion was the part I bolded, which I did as people do, to bring attention to the point. We all understand the basics of economics and supply and demand, what we want to keep an eye on is the inflationary indicators...things which policy can sometimes affect.

And if, indeed, we are seeing inflation, then what does that mean for future-looking and roadmap policy?

While not necessarily a reality today, at this moment, it is worth thinking about and thinking about those questions IMO.

What do you think the part you bolded was saying? Here, let me post it again:

Short-lived bursts of inflation that are tied to supply chain bottlenecks, as in the case of cars, or stimulus-check spending wouldn’t do lasting damage to the economy. But entrenched price rises, which would show up in things like rent, could force the Fed to cut its support of the economy sooner than expected and crimp the White House’s expansive spending plans.

How does that contradict anything Penelope said? She was entirely right in her twitter clapback. The price if lumber isn't rising due to long term inflationary pressure. It is rising due to supply chain issues. Yes, it is that black and white. It is also really fucking obvious. You're just throwing out generalities like "printing money, raising minimum wages drastically, and spending trillions tends to have an inflationary impact" to confuse the issue. You haven't actually connected any of those things to the rise in lumber prices, and neither did that article.

 

[Bateshorn 9899]

If there is inflation, we won’t know for certain until late fall/early winter. An economy reopening from shutdown is going to do weird shit. 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

8 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

From the article you posted...

In part, this is because of technical factors, since last May’s price level was particularly depressed by pandemic lockdowns. 

I don't have an economics degree (only three hours short of one actually because I think intermediate micro is fucking painful and I didn't want to give up my Spring Break to take it, but that is a whole story), but you are full of shit.

Do you think I'm crafting and pitching an original opinion here? I'm literally quoting and repeating the NYT. Are they full of it?

Again to quote from: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/10/business/consumer-price-index-may-2021.html?campaign_id=4&emc=edit_dk_20210610&https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/10/business/consumer-price-index-may-2021.html

"Prices are rising for everything from airfares to used cars, and the data released on Thursday offers policymakers and investors another chance to assess whether that pickup is likely to be short-lived — or is poised to be the kind of lasting inflation that officials would worry about."

"But the strong monthly figure for May, which came on the heels of a sharp rise in April, showed that prices have been moving up quickly for more than just technical reasons. The critical question is whether that is a transient trend tied to reopening or something more persistent."

Again it's an open ended question that is wholly valid and worthy of discussion, IMO, that you seem to want to shout down because you disagree. I guess my only mistake is bringing it up on this thread because it's a thread that's deteriorated to being a) Democrats to eat their own and b) JS1's trolling. 

Edited June 10, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

Honestly, I am not sure how DonkeyCigars and GRHorn are even still on this site.  They add nothing to anything at all.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

Just now, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Honestly, I am not sure how DonkeyCigars and GRHorn are even still on this site.  They add nothing to anything at all.

I mean, I went to the beach on Spring Break once too.

[jimmyjazz 45557]

16 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

The CR angle is pretty simple. Dems will downplay it. Rs will emphasize it. But these are the current numbers. 

It's silly to put much emphasis on the idea that what we are seeing is typical inflation given the giant elephant in the room.  That's not "downplaying" it, that's saying "well, the most obvious explanation is X, so until that clears, let's not get ahead of ourselves".  

Republicans are weaponizing CPI, in spite of that elephant in the room.  This is not a #bothsides issue, despite your predictable effort to make it such.  Negged.

[Js1 85109]

Larry Summers is a Republican now? 

Because he hasn't shut the fuck up about it.  

[DonkeyCigars 144]

2 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's silly to put much emphasis on the idea that what we are seeing is typical inflation given the giant elephant in the room.  That's not "downplaying" it, that's saying "well, the most obvious explanation is X, so until that clears, let's not get ahead of ourselves".  

Republicans are weaponizing CPI, in spite of that elephant in the room.  This is not a #bothsides issue, despite your predictable effort to make it such.  Negged.

This is a serious question and I realize it's really more to understand your personality more than anything, but: 

Are you saying that you are unwilling to entertain or keep as a possibility that some of the political policy (e.g. stimulus, minimum wage, etc.) is not at least contributing to an inflationary phenomenon above and beyond a transitory, re-opening short term spike that will level off? You are 100% satisfied with the elephant in the room being the reasoning?

[jimmyjazz 45557]

Just now, DonkeyCigars said:

This is a serious question and I realize it's really more to understand your personality more than anything, but: 

Are you saying that you are unwilling to entertain or keep as a possibility that some of the political policy (e.g. stimulus, minimum wage, etc.) is not at least contributing to an inflationary phenomenon above and beyond a transitory, re-opening short term spike that will level off? You are 100% satisfied with the elephant in the room being the reasoning?

It doesn't take any effort whatsoever to keep it "on the list" as a possibility.  As a layman, I'm not doing economic analysis, and I see no reason to put much thought into the idea, given the overwhelming odds that most of the current inflationary pressure is due to an economic reboot.  When someone like @GRHorn comes along and basically says the odds are even, it's political gamesmanship, and it deserves scorn.

[bad_teammate 13132]

8 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

This is a serious question and I realize it's really more to understand your personality more than anything, but: 

Are you saying that you are unwilling to entertain or keep as a possibility that some of the political policy (e.g. stimulus, minimum wage, etc.) is not at least contributing to an inflationary phenomenon above and beyond a transitory, re-opening short term spike that will level off? You are 100% satisfied with the elephant in the room being the reasoning?

Just Asking Questions!

[DonkeyCigars 144]

1 minute ago, jimmyjazz said:

It doesn't take any effort whatsoever to keep it "on the list" as a possibility.  As a layman, I'm not doing economic analysis, and I see no reason to put much thought into the idea, given the overwhelming odds that most of the current inflationary pressure is due to an economic reboot.  When someone like @GRHorn comes along and basically says the odds are even, it's political gamesmanship, and it deserves scorn.

You said it; as a layman. When economists and leaders are published and quoted as saying "hey, we should keep an eye on this because it looks like it could potentially be a bigger deal, however unlikely" I think it's fair and apolitical to take note and even start thinking and having discussions about it. 

What's happened here is like if you had meteorologists saying "hey we see something that may or may not turn into a system that could affect this area in a few weeks; maybe it's nothing and just standard weather pattern, but let's keep an eye on it" and having people for political reasons want to deny a potentiality because either a) it's not raining on them yet or b) because they dislike the politics of the guy who told them what the weatherman was saying on the news.

[DonkeyCigars 144]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Just Asking Questions!

jaja. good one comrade.

[jimmyjazz 45557]

3 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

What's happened here is like if you had meteorologists saying "hey we see something that may or may not turn into a system that could affect this area in a few weeks; maybe it's nothing and just standard weather pattern, but let's keep an eye on it" and having people for political reasons want to deny a potentiality because either a) it's not raining on them yet or b) because they dislike the politics of the guy who told them what the weatherman was saying on the news.

You have it backwards.  @GRHorn (and you to some extent) want to make the odds even, when they aren't.

Doctors have a saying:  "when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras".  Same thing here.  Yes, schooled economists are saying we should remain open to the idea that we might be seeing inflation that is not wholly due to the reboot of our economy.  I don't have a problem with that.  What I have a problem with is the spin that says it's as or more likely a more ominous trend.  I see it in social media, because the strategy has worked.  "OMG Biden is causing prices to explode " when in point of fact any component of inflation not due to the pandemic is (a) not numerically large, (b) not uncommon, and (c) as much due to Trump as Biden.  I mean, prices tend to creep upward in healthy economies.  We've become so accustomed to zero or near-zero inflation that ANY year-over-year creep is startling.

[SydneyCarton 47876]

 

40 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Honestly, I am not sure how DonkeyCigars and GRHorn are even still on this site.  They add nothing to anything at all.

Because unlike the fascists/racists/authoritarians they admire, this website doesn't just remove people willy nilly from the community simply because we don't like or agree with them. Even if that's what they want to to minorities and liberals in our society. 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

Just now, SydneyCarton said:

 

Because unlike the fascists/racists/authoritarians they admire, this website doesn't just remove people willy nilly from the community simply because we don't like or agree with them. Even if that's what they want to to minorities and liberals in our society. 

I know, but we can neg bomb the shit out of them.  And I know both have generated a lot of those because they are trolls.

[GRHorn 105]

39 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

Honestly, I am not sure how DonkeyCigars and GRHorn are even still on this site.  They add nothing to anything at all.

I posted the latest CPI numbers and gave the obvious reaction that both political parties and their followers will have. For some reason that was upsetting to you. 
 

31 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

It's silly to put much emphasis on the idea that what we are seeing is typical inflation given the giant elephant in the room.  That's not "downplaying" it, that's saying "well, the most obvious explanation is X, so until that clears, let's not get ahead of ourselves".  

Republicans are weaponizing CPI, in spite of that elephant in the room.  This is not a #bothsides issue, despite your predictable effort to make it such.  Negged.

 

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You have it backwards.  @GRHorn (and you to some extent) want to make the odds even, when they aren't.

Doctors have a saying:  "when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras".  Same thing here.  Yes, schooled economists are saying we should remain open to the idea that we might be seeing inflation that is not wholly due to the reboot of our economy.  I don't have a problem with that.  What I have a problem with is the spin that says it's as or more likely a more ominous trend.  I see it in social media, because the strategy has worked.  "OMG Biden is causing prices to explode " when in point of fact any component of inflation not due to the pandemic is (a) not numerically large, (b) not uncommon, and (c) as much due to Trump as Biden.  I mean, prices tend to creep upward in healthy economies.  We've become so accustomed to zero or near-zero inflation that ANY year-over-year creep is startling.

To me, the elephant in the room is the expansion of the monetary base that occurred under Trump and will continue going forward under Biden (although less so).
 

My analysis of how the parties and their followers would view the numbers is pretty straight forward and self explanatory. You’re trying to make my post partisan when it’s not. 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

7 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

You have it backwards.  @GRHorn (and you to some extent) want to make the odds even, when they aren't.

Doctors have a saying:  "when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras".  Same thing here.  Yes, schooled economists are saying we should remain open to the idea that we might be seeing inflation that is not wholly due to the reboot of our economy.  I don't have a problem with that.  What I have a problem with is the spin that says it's as or more likely a more ominous trend.  I see it in social media, because the strategy has worked.  "OMG Biden is causing prices to explode " when in point of fact any component of inflation not due to the pandemic is (a) not numerically large, (b) not uncommon, and (c) as much due to Trump as Biden.  I mean, prices tend to creep upward in healthy economies.  We've become so accustomed to zero or near-zero inflation that ANY year-over-year creep is startling.

Gotcha and I like that doctors saying. I'm not so political and not trying to say we aren't in the midst of a normal re-opening spike, I'm just quoting an interesting article that seems to cast an eye on the possibility that we will be dealing with some inflationary pressures above and beyond supply-chain disruptions.

Why does this matter and why this thread? Namely because I'm interested in hearing what people smarter than me think it could mean for Biden's stated and aspirational legislation-- what does it mean for both the volume and sheer amount of spending and the kind of spending? 

Further, it seems to me that politically the quicker you can get some of this legislation passed, you take the risk off the table in the off chance that there is some inflation-public-perception blowback down the line. Maybe negotiating to get something done now is better than getting your whole proposal crapped on if inflation is real.

 

[Continental Op 3934]

Quit engaging with GRHorn and TahoeDonkey and his "Aw, shucks!" horseshit you fucking morons.  Neither one of them has the slightest bit of interest in being intellectually honest.  

[GRHorn 105]

2 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

 

Because unlike the fascists/racists/authoritarians they admire, this website doesn't just remove people willy nilly from the community simply because we don't like or agree with them. Even if that's what they want to to minorities and liberals in our society. 

Yes, you’ve got me figured out, I want to remove liberals and minorities from society. 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

2 minutes ago, PenelopeWitherspoon said:

I know, but we can neg bomb the shit out of them.  And I know both have generated a lot of those because they are trolls.

Wah, please neg bomb and ban Donkey because I don't like his views and cannot separate his views from any conversation ever!

This is more pathetic than when people go to twitter and try to get things cancelled and it doesn't work.

[GRHorn 105]

1 minute ago, Continental Op said:

Quit engaging with GRHorn and TahoeDonkey and his "Aw, shucks!" horseshit you fucking morons.  Neither one of them has the slightest bit of interest in being intellectually honest.  

I posted government data. 

[PenelopeWitherspoon 19093]

2 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Quit engaging with GRHorn and TahoeDonkey and his "Aw, shucks!" horseshit you fucking morons.  Neither one of them has the slightest bit of interest in being intellectually honest.  

Precisely.  

[Js1 85109]

TahoeDonkey got his fee fees hurt. 

I bet he's one of the "omg negging in the CR is so lame!" as he negs people for calling out his trollish behavior. 

Edited June 10, 2021 by Js1

[DonkeyCigars 144]

3 minutes ago, Js1 said:

TahoeDonkey got his fee fees hurt. 

I bet he's one of the "omg negging in the CR is so lame!" as he negs people for calling out his trollish behavior. 

Oh listen to this above ^^ Clang Clang Clang goes the troll-y!

Nothing is funnier than you getting called out for being a troll all day yesterday, then retreating under your troll bridge with your "fee fees" as you call them, and now coming back because you think everyone forgot you were exposed as a troll. 

 

[Bateshorn 9899]

40 minutes ago, Continental Op said:

Quit engaging with GRHorn and TahoeDonkey and his "Aw, shucks!" horseshit you fucking morons.  Neither one of them has the slightest bit of interest in being intellectually honest.  

[bad_teammate 13132]

this is fun guys but our democracy doesn't work and "shut up and vote!" isn't the answer

 

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

Dammit, 

This is the Joe Biden thread and he's overseas, having just survived the Flight of the Cicadas and you all are cluttering up the thread with economic policy (has its own topic) and Congress (probably has its own topic or should).

He's heading into the G7 Conference and you've got the avatar with Pinocchio of the long nose attempting to figure out why the NYT would have an article on the economy when the press briefing on Monday was about.....the economy.

I've said my piece and counted to three.

[elfenix 34171]

2 hours ago, Bateshorn said:

If there is inflation, we won’t know for certain until late fall/early winter. An economy reopening from shutdown is going to do weird shit. 

oh it'll be further out than that.  

 

gonna flog this again:

https://www.marketplace.org/shows/make-me-smart-with-kai-and-molly/whos-scared-of-a-little-inflation/

Edited June 10, 2021 by elfenix