Stock Market Question

[DeeDave]

Only sensible reply in this thread. Trump had NOTHING to do with what was an artificially inflated market. Biden, who is a bit doddering I’ll admit, has nothing to do with its return to earth.

Presidents have very little to do with the ups and downs of the market- as everyone knows (but most can't admit).

You can't fight that reality. Sadly, people believe it- even people that rationally know better- and nothing will change their mind.

Politicians very much rely on most people ignoring that fact though.

I'll never understand why people put all their eggs in one basket then whine when that basket gets tipped on its side for awhile.

While others run and panic a bit, I've increased my investments and also spent some time diversifying slightly more than I was before.

 

[SparkleCity]

Biden's 100-day stock market performance is the hottest going back to the 1950s

So far in his young presidency, President Joe Biden has been one of the best friends the stock market has ever had.

www.cnbc.com

Once again it's funny how dems take credit for things when they are good but when things go south bare no responsibility.

 

[alaskagamecock]

Biden's 100-day stock market performance is the hottest going back to the 1950s

So far in his young presidency, President Joe Biden has been one of the best friends the stock market has ever had.

www.cnbc.com

Once again it's funny how dems take credit for things when they are good but when things go south bare no responsibility.

And look at key point number 3, that’s exactly what happened! And now here we are at the worst performing market in almost 100 years. Takes a lot of f&#k up to get to that level, and this administration has a lot of that to give.

 

[SparkleCity]

And look at key point number 3, that’s exactly what happened! And now here we are at the worst performing market in almost 100 years. Takes a lot of f&#k up to get to that level, and this administration has a lot of that to give.

Exactly, and those first 100 days were still riding Trumps policies

 

[DeeDave]

Biden's 100-day stock market performance is the hottest going back to the 1950s

So far in his young presidency, President Joe Biden has been one of the best friends the stock market has ever had.

www.cnbc.com

Once again it's funny how dems take credit for things when they are good but when things go south bare no responsibility.

That was pretty silly too. Giving credit to Presidents for market performance is mostly silly no matter who does it.

 

[jedi_mike]

Well considering 70% of Covid deaths in the US were 70 or older I imagine most of them were not active in the labor force anyways, so there is that!

Still a lot of people,especially if it’s in a certain sector of the economy.i know people who have died and my brother who is in the hospital now for over a week now due to the effects of it back in January,who was working and hasn’t since then.my friends wife who is a nurse can’t work from it messing with her heart and has to have surgery now from it.A few people here and there adds up to a lot.

 

[alaskagamecock]

Still a lot of people,especially if it’s in a certain sector of the economy.i know people who have died and my brother who is in the hospital now for over a week now due to the effects of it back in January,who was working and hasn’t since then.my friends wife who is a nurse can’t work from it messing with her heart and has to have surgery now from it.A few people here and there adds up to a lot.

If you think that’s why the labor force today is less than it was prior to the pandemic, I can’t help you.

 

[jedi_mike]

If you think that’s why the labor force today is less than it was prior to the pandemic, I can’t help you.

It’s one of the reasons,not the sole reason.i know people personally that was working and died cause of it.if u just take the math as fact that was stated a few post back,30% or 300,000 people is a lot of people that needs replaced.That’s not including the people that can’t work like the people I mentioned in my other post.There’s a lot of factors to include.

 

[jedi_mike]

Heck,I went to visit my brother in the hospital the other day and they had the front closed due to the fact they didn’t have no staff.the guy on the intercom told me I had to go around the back to go in.I didn’t bother asking why they didn’t have no help to run the hospital.

 

[taiwancock]

So much for the "Biden Boom".

Hate to say we told you so, but we told you so.

It's good to see so many of you on this thread. No wonder it's so easy to make money in this market.

 

[taiwancock]

It's good to see so many of you on this thread. No wonder it's so easy to make money in this market.

I went heavily into cash when blowhard was in office. Keep selling to me. I appreciate it.

 

[taiwancock]

I went heavily into cash when blowhard was in office. Keep selling to me. I appreciate it.

Riddle me this? Which president cut taxes while increasing spending? But that's not inflationary, right?

 

[bucketdad]

Riddle me this? Which president cut taxes while increasing spending? But that's not inflationary, right?

Yet tax revenues went up. Go figure

 

[SparkleCity]

Riddle me this? Which president cut taxes while increasing spending? But that's not inflationary, right?

Riddle me this, which presidential candidate give the o.k. to spread the false Russian Collusion story that cost the country millions of dollars? You probably don't know about it because CNN and MSNBC are not reporting on it trying to save face.

 

[DeeDave]

Yet tax revenues went up. Go figure

But I thought the goal was to shrink the federal government. How is raising revenue for the federal government a Conservative thing?

 

[DeeDave]

Riddle me this? Which president cut taxes while increasing spending? But that's not inflationary, right?

Yes, it is inflationary- especially when the FED is keeping interst rates artificially low which Trump repeatedly argued for the Fed Chair to do. (Even though he use to complain about the FED not raising interest rates under President Obama).

But revealing Trump is a huge hypocrite is not a surprise.

In fact, he threated to fire him.

Trump says he can fire Fed's Powell; it's not that simple

U.S. President Donald Trump accused Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell on Wednesday of doing a "bad job" and "out to prove how tough he is," but any move to oust him would likely touch off a legal fight with big repercussions in financial markets as well.

www.reuters.com

But a lot of people forget that because it suits them.

 

[bucketdad]

But I thought the goal was to shrink the federal government. How is raising revenue for the federal government a Conservative thing?

Historically, and sadly, most govt reductions come in a second term. We'll just have to get a conservative in there for a second term to see. Until then, reduce what is taken from the people and reap the rewards.

 

[DeeDave]

Historically, and sadly, most govt reductions come in a second term. We'll just have to get a conservative in there for a second term to see. Until then, reduce what is taken from the people and reap the rewards.

So "reap the rewards" is increasing the revenue for the federal government and increasing the debt. Hmm. odd view of Conservatism.

What proposals did Trump have as part of his platform to shrink the federal government in his 2nd term? There was no GOP platform put forward for the 2020 election.

When Sean Hannity asked him about his goals for a 2nd term, Trump didn't have any proposals, and Hannity had to answer for him.

What government reductions in 2nd terms are you talking about? I am unware of this history.

 

[bucketdad]

What proposals did Trump have as part of his platform to shrink the federal government in his 2nd term?

We dont know. What good would it have done to announce it prior to the election? He had already ruffled enough feathers in Washington. If it were me, I would have kept silent about it. Maybe we'll see. Wouldnt surprise me one bit if he came in with an ax at this point. Or maybe someone else will wield it. Who knows? A cleansing is coming. No doubt about it. Can you feel it?

 

[DeeDave]

We dont know. What good would it have done to announce it prior to the election? He had already ruffled enough feathers in Washington. If it were me, I would have kept silent about it. Maybe we'll see. Wouldnt surprise me one bit if he came in with an ax at this point. Or maybe someone else will wield it. Who knows? A cleansing is coming. No doubt about it. Can you feel it?

I think a candidate for office or running for re-election as President owes it to his/her own supporters to lay out some proposals and goals for a 2nd term. The opponents don't care but the supporters should demand to know- at least a handful- and if they don't get it, they should demand it.

I thought Trumpers loved when he ruffled feathers? Why would you keep silent about it so it wouldn't do something that Trumpers loved to see happen? That makes no sense.

When Hannity asked him that question, and he stumbled over his words, it was evident he didn't know because he hadn't thought about it. He couldn't answer because he had no idea.

I'll await the history lesson on 2nd terms downsizing the federal government. I'm all ears.

Trump couldn't answer a question about what he'd do in a 2nd term. Here's his rambling response in full.

"I'm riding down Pennsylvania Avenue with our first lady, and I say, 'This is great,'" Trump said when Sean Hannity asked about a second term.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[bucketdad]

I think a candidate for office or running for re-election as President owes it to his/her own supporters to lay out some proposals and goals for a 2nd term. The opponents don't care but the supporters should demand to know- at least a handful- and if they don't get it, they should demand it.

I thought Trumpers loved when he ruffled feathers? Why would you keep silent about it so it wouldn't do something that Trumpers loved to see happen? That makes no sense.

When Hannity asked him that question, and he stumbled over his words, it was evident he didn't know because he hadn't thought about it. He couldn't answer because he had no idea.

I'll await the history lesson on 2nd terms downsizing the federal government. I'm all ears.

Trump couldn't answer a question about what he'd do in a 2nd term. Here's his rambling response in full.

"I'm riding down Pennsylvania Avenue with our first lady, and I say, 'This is great,'" Trump said when Sean Hannity asked about a second term.

www.businessinsider.com

Why do you insist on putting conservatives in groups that we must all think alike. That's not how it works in the real world. Believe it or not, not everyone are sheep to a political party or figure. Why does that concept escape you?

 

[DeeDave]

Why do you insist on putting conservatives in groups that we must all think alike. That's not how it works in the real world. Believe it or not, not everyone are sheep to a political party or figure. Why does that concept escape you?

Because you and your side do the same to others. Turnabout is completely fair.

When it comes to election day, you vote for one or the other.

But again, that's not really the point.

If my own family member ran for office and didn't lay out specific proposals for what they'd do, I wouldn't support them. I'd never vote for such a person. I'd just skip that spot on the ballot. I have a cousin that ran for state office. He's a great person. I didn't vote for him because all he did was run a campaign of complaints about his opponent. I didn't vote for his opponent either.

It would have been interesting to see Donald Trump lay out his proposal for reducing the size of the government in a 2nd term. Of course, he didn't because that was not a goal or something he even considered.

(2nd terms don't result in shrinking the government regardless of the party)

 

[bucketdad]

When it comes to election day, you vote for one or the other.

But again, that's not really the point.

If my own family member ran for office and didn't lay out specific proposals for what they'd do, I wouldn't support them. I'd never vote for such a person. I'd just skip that spot on the ballot. I have a cousin that ran for state office. He's a great person. I didn't vote for him because all he did was run a campaign of complaints about his opponent. I didn't vote for his opponent either.

It would have been interesting to see Donald Trump lay out his proposal for reducing the size of the government in a 2nd term. Of course, he didn't because that was not a goal or something he even considered.

(2nd terms don't result in shrinking the government regardless of the party)

So says you.
Reducing the size of the govt in a second term should go without saying for consertives. If it has to be said, that's a problem imo.
Lol tho on demanding full disclosure from a political canidate. Yeah, that happens like never.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Yes, it is inflationary- especially when the FED is keeping interst rates artificially low which Trump repeatedly argued for the Fed Chair to do. (Even though he use to complain about the FED not raising interest rates under President Obama).

But revealing Trump is a huge hypocrite is not a surprise.

In fact, he threated to fire him.

Trump says he can fire Fed's Powell; it's not that simple

U.S. President Donald Trump accused Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell on Wednesday of doing a "bad job" and "out to prove how tough he is," but any move to oust him would likely touch off a legal fight with big repercussions in financial markets as well.

www.reuters.com

But a lot of people forget that because it suits them.

Nobody is forgetting anything. The Fed raised interest rates numerous times under Trump, even though there was literally no inflation. Now, when inflation is running wild under Biden, they wait WAY too long to raise them, and still haven't even come close raising them as much as they did under Trump. Clearly, their actions were politically motivated. Wanted to hurt the market under Trump and protect it under Biden.

Fed finally admitted in 2020 that they were wrong and Trump was right.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/federal-reserve-we-got-it-wrong-on-postcrisis-rate-hikes-201428730.html

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Because you and your side do the same to others. Turnabout is completely fair.

When it comes to election day, you vote for one or the other.

But again, that's not really the point.

If my own family member ran for office and didn't lay out specific proposals for what they'd do, I wouldn't support them. I'd never vote for such a person. I'd just skip that spot on the ballot. I have a cousin that ran for state office. He's a great person. I didn't vote for him because all he did was run a campaign of complaints about his opponent. I didn't vote for his opponent either.

It would have been interesting to see Donald Trump lay out his proposal for reducing the size of the government in a 2nd term. Of course, he didn't because that was not a goal or something he even considered.

(2nd terms don't result in shrinking the government regardless of the party)

Not true. His budget for 2021, released right before COVID, was clearly a shot at reducing the size of the Federal government with huge cuts in spending. Of course, COVID blew that up and turned in a Democrat-fueled spending spree.

https://www.heritage.org/budget-and...size-federal-government-bolder-reforms-needed

But something like this will NEVER happen because the Dems want to explode the size of the Federal government and its spending. And they collude with their media stream media to lie and to demonize anybody that wants to cut anything with campaigns like a war against the poor and killing grandma by pushing her over a cliff.

 

[DeeDave]

So says you.
Reducing the size of the govt in a second term should go without saying for consertives. If it has to be said, that's a problem imo.
Lol tho on demanding full disclosure from a political canidate. Yeah, that happens like never.

Yes- I said it- actually said it a few times.

It doesn't happen. You can't point out an example when I gave you the opportunity.

But I am still waiting if you want to point out which Republican presidents reduced the size of the government in their 2nd term. Start by mentioning one in the last 50 years? You can't do it.

 

[DeeDave]

Not true. His budget for 2021, released right before COVID, was clearly a shot at reducing the size of the Federal government with huge cuts in spending. Of course, COVID blew that up and turned in a Democrat-fueled spending spree.

https://www.heritage.org/budget-and...size-federal-government-bolder-reforms-needed

But something like this will NEVER happen because the Dems want to explode the size of the Federal government and its spending. And they collude with their media stream media to lie and to demonize anybody that wants to cut anything with campaigns like a war against the poor and killing grandma by pushing her over a cliff.

Thanks for posting the Heritage Foundation analysis. LOL. But they were honest enough to mention that Trump's budget proposal abandoned the bi-partisan agreement that Congress reached with the White House over non defense program appropriations- meaning even Republicans wouldn't go along with it.

In other words, even Trump knew Congress- including Republicans- wouldn't go along with the budget so the result is it won't pass and the size of the government doesn't shrink at all.

His budget didn't reduce the size of the federal government in his 2nd term. Proposing some budget cuts and raising the budget for other programs doesn't equal shrinking the size of the federal government.

That's the same damn trick politicians have played for years. They convince people that laying out some budget that cuts some money here and there reduces the size of the government. It doesn't. It never has meant that.

 

[DeeDave]

Nobody is forgetting anything. The Fed raised interest rates numerous times under Trump, even though there was literally no inflation. Now, when inflation is running wild under Biden, they wait WAY too long to raise them, and still haven't even come close raising them as much as they did under Trump. Clearly, their actions were politically motivated. Wanted to hurt the market under Trump and protect it under Biden.

Fed finally admitted in 2020 that they were wrong and Trump was right.

https://www.yahoo.com/now/federal-reserve-we-got-it-wrong-on-postcrisis-rate-hikes-201428730.html

When the Fed started raising interest rates in 2015 - under President Obama (a fact you can't seem to understand) Trump cheered them.

The hypocrite liar then reversed course immediately assuming office.

“Mr. Trump was under the category of standard conservative politicians who were very much upset that the Fed was holding rates low during the Obama administration and then became enamored with low rates after [he] took office,” Tim Duy says, economics professor at the University of Oregon who authors a blog titled “Fed Watch.”

 

[bucketdad]

Yes- I said it- actually said it a few times.

It doesn't happen. You can't point out an example when I gave you the opportunity.

But I am still waiting if you want to point out which Republican presidents reduced the size of the government in their 2nd term. Start by mentioning one in the last 50 years? You can't do it.

Heres an article from a left leaning rag that addresses your question. Now Washington's left and some on the right fight such actions, but at the very least it's a reminder that running on reducing the size of govt does exist. Now when you take office and your predecessor left you with more mandatory spending, tackling the deficit can be a tall order and is a separate issue. But reducing the govt footprint is a conservative goal and always will be.

Trump keeps his pledge to shrink size of government

By the end of September, all Cabinet agencies except Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs and Interior had fewer permanent staff than when President Donald Trump took office in January, according to an analysis of federal personnel data by The Washington Post.

www.seattletimes.com

 

[DeeDave]

Heres an article from a left leaning rag that addresses your question. Now Washington's left and some on the right fight such actions, but at the very least it's a reminder that running on reducing the size of govt does exist. Now when you take office and your predecessor left you with more mandatory spending, tackling the deficit can be a tall order and is a separate issue. But reducing the govt footprint is a conservative goal and always will be.

Trump keeps his pledge to shrink size of government

By the end of September, all Cabinet agencies except Homeland Security, Veterans Affairs and Interior had fewer permanent staff than when President Donald Trump took office in January, according to an analysis of federal personnel data by The Washington Post.

www.seattletimes.com

Reducing the number of federal employees doesn't mean the government shrinks.

You even acknowledged increased federal government revenues like it was a good thing. The irony of such statement is incredible. LOL

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Thanks for posting the Heritage Foundation analysis. LOL. But they were honest enough to mention that Trump's budget proposal abandoned the bi-partisan agreement that Congress reached with the White House over non defense program appropriations- meaning even Republicans wouldn't go along with it.

In other words, even Trump knew Congress- including Republicans- wouldn't go along with the budget so the result is it won't pass and the size of the government doesn't shrink at all.

His budget didn't reduce the size of the federal government in his 2nd term. Proposing some budget cuts and raising the budget for other programs doesn't equal shrinking the size of the federal government.

That's the same damn trick politicians have played for years. They convince people that laying out some budget that cuts some money here and there reduces the size of the government. It doesn't. It never has meant that.

BS. It absolutely would have cut spending and the size of the Federal government, something Democrats don't even pretend to want to do, And, yes, there are some RINOs that would have pushed back, mainly because they represent purple district where Dems would demonize them for ANY cuts.

The problem WAS and IS the Democrats. They don't give a damn if they spend us into oblivion. They use our tax money to buy votes, knowing they are getting rich on the side and won't suffer the consequences. Anybody that has been paying attention the last few years can plainly see they want complete control over everything. Everything you do. Everything you say. Even how you breathe. And big government is their way to get that.

 

[DeeDave]

The problem WAS and IS the Democrats. They don't give a damn if they spend us into oblivion. They use our tax money to buy votes, knowing they are getting rich on the side and won't suffer the consequences. Anybody that has been paying attention the last few years can plainly see they want complete control over everything. Everything you do. Everything you say. Even how you breathe. And big government is their way to get that.

Living in a cult has damaged your brain. Seek medical attention today.

Ignoring Trump's MASSIVE COVID spending- and wanting to spend even more might be ignored by you and the cult members on here, but other people notice.

"Wittman is the latest member of a growing group of Republicans celebrating new initiatives they originally opposed on the floor.

Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., the No. 2 House Republican touted a $1 billion investment in flood protection and hurricane repairs Biden's infrastructure bill funded. Scalise voted against the bill and urged other Republicans to do the same. Scalise then ran ads in his district taking credit for the money going to his district without mentioning he voted against it.

Shortly after voting against the measure last fall, Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Ala., celebrated its hundreds of millions in funding for a stalled highway project in Birmingham.

Last week, Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, touted new funding for a flood control project from the package, which she opposed last year, decrying it at the time as a "so-called infrastructure bill."

Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, a freshman lawmaker who also voted against the infrastructure bill, celebrating new "game-changing" funding to upgrade locks along the Upper Mississippi River.

House Republicans tout infrastructure funding they voted against

House Republicans who voted against the infrastructure bill have been touting funding for their state that came from it.

abcnews.go.com

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

When the Fed started raising interest rates in 2015 - under President Obama (a fact you can't seem to understand) Trump cheered them.

The hypocrite liar then reversed course immediately assuming office.

“Mr. Trump was under the category of standard conservative politicians who were very much upset that the Fed was holding rates low during the Obama administration and then became enamored with low rates after [he] took office,” Tim Duy says, economics professor at the University of Oregon who authors a blog titled “Fed Watch.”

Your misleading lie about "starting" raising rates under Obama is a joke. It went from 0 to .50 under Obama before Trump was elected over EIGHT YEARS. Obama say historic low rates his ENTIRE presidency.

And as soon as Trump was elected, it went from .5% to 2.5% in ONE year. And again, the Fed ADMITTED it was the wrong thing to do, just like Trump said, and had to reverse course.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Living in a cult has damaged your brain. Seek medical attention today.

Ignoring Trump's MASSIVE COVID spending- and wanting to spend even more might be ignored by you and the cult members on here, but other people notice.

"Wittman is the latest member of a growing group of Republicans celebrating new initiatives they originally opposed on the floor.

Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., the No. 2 House Republican touted a $1 billion investment in flood protection and hurricane repairs Biden's infrastructure bill funded. Scalise voted against the bill and urged other Republicans to do the same. Scalise then ran ads in his district taking credit for the money going to his district without mentioning he voted against it.

Shortly after voting against the measure last fall, Rep. Gary Palmer, R-Ala., celebrated its hundreds of millions in funding for a stalled highway project in Birmingham.

Last week, Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas, touted new funding for a flood control project from the package, which she opposed last year, decrying it at the time as a "so-called infrastructure bill."

Rep. Ashley Hinson, R-Iowa, a freshman lawmaker who also voted against the infrastructure bill, celebrating new "game-changing" funding to upgrade locks along the Upper Mississippi River.

House Republicans tout infrastructure funding they voted against

House Republicans who voted against the infrastructure bill have been touting funding for their state that came from it.

abcnews.go.com

But they DID vote against it, which was the right thing to do, Especially now, considering the impact to inflation.

And of course they can't speak out about it now. Nobody can criticize Santa Claus. But eventually Santa Claus runs out of money. You would think the runaway inflation you are seeing now would wake some people up, but many are addicted to free handouts from the Dems and have the attitude that if it is going to fail one day, I might as well get mine now.

But make no mistake, the Dems are driving us into the ditch. Period.

 

[DeeDave]

Your misleading lie about "starting" raising rates under Obama is a joke. It went from 0 to .50 under Obama before Trump was elected over EIGHT YEARS. Obama say historic low rates his ENTIRE presidency.

And as soon as Trump was elected, it went from .5% to 2.5% in ONE year. And again, the Fed ADMITTED it was the wrong thing to do, just like Trump said, and had to reverse course.

Did the Fed raise rates under Obama in 2015 or not? It can't be - yes, they did - but you lied when you said they raised rates.

Again, being in a cult has damaged you.

Trump crowed about how great the economy was every single day then whined like a 1 year old when the Fed decided to raise the interest rates.

 

[DeeDave]

But they DID vote against it, which was the right thing to do, Especially now, considering the impact to inflation.

Voted against it and then ran out and promoted how great it was and how they got the money for their district.

Hypocrites.

I also love how they supported Trump's massive COVID spending bills and then tried to act like it was no big deal. Hypocrites.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Did the Fed raise rates under Obama in 2015 or not? It can't be - yes, they did - but you lied when you said they raised rates.

Again, being in a cult has damaged you.

Trump crowed about how great the economy was every single day then whined like a 1 year old when the Fed decided to raise the interest rates.

Misleading people with "raising rates under Obama" is just as good as lying.

Rate increases that impacted Obama in EIGHT years. Literally NOTHING.

December 16, 2015	0.25%–0.50%​	1.00%​
June 22, 2011	0.00%–0.25%​	0.75%​

Rate increases that impacted Trump in TWO years.

December 19, 2018	2.25%–2.50%​	3.00%​
September 26, 2018	2.00%–2.25%​	2.75%​
June 13, 2018	1.75%–2.00%​	2.50%​
March 21, 2018	1.50%–1.75%​	2.25%​
December 13, 2017	1.25%–1.50%​	2.00%​
June 14, 2017	1.00%–1.25%​	1.75%​
March 15, 2017	0.75%–1.00%​	1.50%​
December 14, 2016	0.50%–0.75%​	1.25%​

And AGAIN, Trump said the timing and amount was wrong. And the Fed members admitted that and reversed course. It should have been done earlier and more gradually, but they protected Obama. And they are doing the same with Biden. They is ZERO reason rates should be at 1% while inflation has been running at 5%-8% FOR A YEAR. Basic economics. Insane to even suggest that they did the right thing. They bet on inflation being "transitory" to prop up the market for Biden, since that it ALL he had going for him. And stuck to that theory, even we they knew the transitory line of crap was a lie.

 

[GoCocksFight2021]

Voted against it and then ran out and promoted how great it was and how they got the money for their district.

Hypocrites.

I also love how they supported Trump's massive COVID spending bills and then tried to act like it was no big deal. Hypocrites.

You mean Pelosi's massive spending bills. The ones loaded with pork that they refuse to cut, even if it meant tanking the economy with no covid relief.

And yes, the Dad that complains about his wife overspending on Santa Claus has to still say the gift are good and look happy, even if he didn't agree with the spending. Hating on Santa and his magical, wonderful gifts are never popular. Otherwise, you become the devil for at least trying to do the right thing, and the wife runs you into complete bankruptcy. That's the reality of the situation. Most Republicans tried to do the right thing, but people handing out money like candy will be the winners until the bills come due, because they have zero desire to do the right thing. All they want to do it buy votes with handouts. There was NO REASON to spend ANOTHER TWO TRILLION on "infrastructure" after SIX TRILLION in COVID spending. ZERO. Just as dumb and wasteful as Obama's worthless scam the "American Recovery and Investment Act". But Dems never let a crisis got to waste when it comes to spending.

 

[DeeDave]

You mean Pelosi's massive spending bills. The ones loaded with pork that they refuse to cut, even if it meant tanking the economy with no covid relief.

And yes, the Dad that complains about his wife overspending on Santa Claus has to still say the gift are good and look happy, even if he didn't agree with the spending. Hating on Santa and his magical, wonderful gifts are never popular. Otherwise, you become the devil for at least trying to do the right thing, and the wife runs you into complete bankruptcy. That's the reality of the situation. Most Republicans tried to do the right thing, but people handing out money like candy will be the winners until the bills come due, because they have zero desire to do the right thing. All they want to do it buy votes with handouts. There was NO REASON to spend ANOTHER TWO TRILLION on "infrastructure" after SIX TRILLION in COVID spending. ZERO. Just as dumb and wasteful as Obama's worthless scam the "American Recovery and Investment Act". But Dems never let a crisis got to waste when it comes to spending.

Your lord and messiah has something to say.

Trump says he doesn't care about a national debt explosion because ‘I won't be here’

Aides reportedly reveal president does not see tackling ballooning $21.8 trillion debt as ‘crucial’ to his legacy

www.independent.co.uk

 

[DeeDave]

Misleading people with "raising rates under Obama" is just as good as lying.

Rate increases that impacted Obama in EIGHT years. Literally NOTHING.

you have a serious problem with reading comprehension. It must be your decayed Trump mind.