Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

aggrad02 said:

---

3 Toed Pete said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So how is this Trump's fault?

---

Look at 2020 deficits (a record) and monetary expansion (a record). That's Trump right there.

---

It's fair to hit Trump for spending deficits as he has been no better than the dems.

But explain what the President has to do with monetary policy (I guess other than Fed appointments). How is Trump responsible for monetary expansion?

---

Not 100% responsible, but those are his appointments just like the Supreme Court justices are his appointments.

Also you put the Fed in a bad position when deficits are run up. Deficits lead to increased Treasuries, which should in theory raise interest rates (increased supply of bonds leads to an increase in interest rates) , but if the Fed wants to keep interest rates low due to a weak economy, then to keep them low they have to buy up the excess supply by injecting money into the economy. Running deficits during Covid kind of forced the Fed's hand (Not that they needed much forcing).

Powell needs to go and Yellen too.

---

How about we just finally recognize that the Fed as an institution does more harm than good? Their job is to blow up asset bubbles, and then give us heroin on the way down so the next bubble can be even bigger. Wash, rinse, and repeat.

aggrad02 said:

---

We need true fiscal conservative leadership. Starting with this election, we need republicans to focus on cutting spending and reigning in the Fed where they can.

Then we need need a true fiscal conservative in 2024. Not a fiscal liberal like Trump.

---

How will you get that when they are insisting on ramping up international meddling and money sent, and at the same time letting uncontrolled migration add to the entitlement rolls that should be being drastically shrunk and more direction of transferred to states?

Stlkofta said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

FriscoKid said:

---

Manhattan said:

---

ITT: people who don't work in supply chain and understand that this is the result of failed leadership in 2020.

---

Republican governors wanted to cut off the money supply and force people back to work. You and your friends cried about it.

---

Governors have nothing to do with federal spending or Fed monetary policy.

This is Trump's deficits and Trump's Fed followed by Biden's just as bad policies, but if you think Trump would have made everything peachy your not thinking clearly. Trump was afraid of losing the election in the face of Covid, so he tried to buy the election with stimulus which is the cause of this inflation. Even before that he was running up deficits and expanding the money supply to pump the economy. It wasn't sound economy policies it was inflationary policies that Trump was running from the get go.

I wonder where this inflation is coming from:

https://datalab.usaspending.gov/americas-finance-guide/deficit/trends/

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM2NS

Clearly Trump 2020 plus Biden 2021.

---

Drop back another 8 years while you are at it...

Quote:

---

Barack Obama
President Obama added about $8.6 trillion, about a 74% increase, to the national debt at the end of President Bush's last budget in 2009.

• FY 2017: $671 billion
• FY 2016: $1.42 trillion
• FY 2015: $326 billion
• FY 2014: $1.09 trillion
• FY 2013: $672 billion
• FY 2012: $1.28 trillion
• FY 2011: $1.23 trillion
• FY 2010: $1.65 trillion
• FY 2009: $253 billion (Congress passed the Economic Stimulus Act, which spent $253 billion)11

---

https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

I know Trump is a JFK Democrat at his core. JFK Democrats love to spend money. All true.

But to ignore Obama in this calculation when the same folks in charge then are running the country now strikes me as a failure to tell the whole story. Even with a second Trump term as part of the equation, his spending still falls well short of what Obama/Biden have been doing.

Reagan added more to the debt than either Obama or Trump. But at least we got something in return for that: the end of the Cold War and the need for the massive military complex associated with it. Not his fault his successors squandered the opportunity he gave them.

---

I totally agree Obama was horrible too.

Clown Baby said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

3 Toed Pete said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So how is this Trump's fault?

---

Look at 2020 deficits (a record) and monetary expansion (a record). That's Trump right there.

---

It's fair to hit Trump for spending deficits as he has been no better than the dems.

But explain what the President has to do with monetary policy (I guess other than Fed appointments). How is Trump responsible for monetary expansion?

---

Not 100% responsible, but those are his appointments just like the Supreme Court justices are his appointments.

Also you put the Fed in a bad position when deficits are run up. Deficits lead to increased Treasuries, which should in theory raise interest rates (increased supply of bonds leads to an increase in interest rates) , but if the Fed wants to keep interest rates low due to a weak economy, then to keep them low they have to buy up the excess supply by injecting money into the economy. Running deficits during Covid kind of forced the Fed's hand (Not that they needed much forcing).

Powell needs to go and Yellen too.

---

How about we just finally recognize that the Fed as an institution does more harm than good? Their job is to blow up asset bubbles, and then give us heroin on the way down so the next bubble can be even bigger. Wash, rinse, and repeat.

---

Bingo. But if you recognize that, you sure can make some decent money.

BusterAg,

Thanks, that explains it.

Clown Baby said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

Clown Baby said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

We need true fiscal conservative leadership. Starting with this election, we need republicans to focus on cutting spending and reigning in the Fed where they can.

Then we need need a true fiscal conservative in 2024. Not a fiscal liberal like Trump.

---

Outside of Rand Paul, this person literally doesn't not exist on the federal level. The two party system, as it's currently constructed, has no incentive whatsoever to fix spending. Republican or Democrat. More people need to start waking up this this, and quick.

---

I'll take Rand 1000%. I fought my face off for Ron in 2008, and supported Rand in 2016. I'll do it again.

---

Same here. We desperately need another Ron Paul-like revolution.

What's so frustrating is, everyone who laughs at the Pauls or others like them, will never actually go toe to toe with you on their predictions. It seems just about every prediction Rand has made in the past couple of years has come true. Any that's why nobody can have a substantive conversation with him. He's too honest (for a politician at least), and he turns out to be right about 90% of the time.

---

Rand was my first choice in 2016. He just couldn't connect with the average voter unfortunately. So many of the points he'd make simply go over people's heads.

Spot on about how he's "too honest" - but it's time we had a leader like that. Trump was that way on several issues, but certainly not all of them.

BusterAg said:

---

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

---

Is this true? Seeing the dollar pegged to passage of time is a new angle. Does this argue against savings?

---

Best hedge against inflation is real estate and commodities. Just make sure you can service your debt on the real estate.

Best strategy is to take out a fixed rate mortgage before the inflation hits, and watch your net worth go up as your debt becomes worthless and your land appreciates.

By the way, 20% inflation per year for 5 years = (1/1.2)^5 = $0.40

---

so how EXACTLY does your mortgage debt become "worthless"

do you mean "worth less"?

of course, that only works if your salary is increasing. if you make the same income, you have the same DEBT from your mortgage and fewer dollars in your bank account to pay it off.

inflation only helps debt if you are getting commensurate wage gains- which the USA is not seeing!

FriscoKid said:

---

Manhattan said:

---

ITT: people who don't work in supply chain and understand that this is the result of failed leadership in 2020.

---

Republican governors wanted to cut off the money supply and force people back to work. You and your friends cried about it.

---

Also, a huge factor is Biden's energy policy. We'd be fine right now if Trump's plan was left alone.

nortex97 said:

---

15% using 1994 methodology.

**** Joe Biden and anyone who voted for any democrat ever.

---

FIFY

LMCane said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

---

Is this true? Seeing the dollar pegged to passage of time is a new angle. Does this argue against savings?

---

Best hedge against inflation is real estate and commodities. Just make sure you can service your debt on the real estate.

Best strategy is to take out a fixed rate mortgage before the inflation hits, and watch your net worth go up as your debt becomes worthless and your land appreciates.

By the way, 20% inflation per year for 5 years = (1/1.2)^5 = $0.40

---

so how EXACTLY does your mortgage debt become "worthless"

do you mean "worth less"?

of course, that only works if your salary is increasing. if you make the same income, you have the same DEBT from your mortgage and fewer dollars in your bank account to pay it off.

inflation only helps debt if you are getting commensurate wage gains- which the USA is not seeing!

---

I think he's simply pointing out that you are paying a fixed debt amount back in dollars that are worth significantly less now. Inflation is always good for anyone or anything that has a **** ton of fixed rate debt. It's partially why the government isn't doing a damn thing about it.

aggrad02 said:

---

I totally agree Obama was horrible too.

---

I understand what you are saying here. There is a downside to Trump policy-wise that can't be ignored. There is a faith in both government and those in the government that failed him time and time again.

He never quite got the Reagan/Goldwater/Friedman understanding of government (similar to that of the Founding Fathers) being a necessary evil requiring limitation on multiple fronts.

Thing is I got more from him as a conservative than I got from both Bushes combined. Bush 41 destroyed the Reagan legacy. Bush 43 handed the Democrats a means to control the domestic population and an excuse to engage in spending like total meth-heads.

Has he learned his lessons regarding government and its use from his first term?

Can a JFK Democrat change an article of faith that easily? Took Reagan years to move from FDR liberal to GOP conservative.

Gigem314 said:

---

Clown Baby said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

Clown Baby said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

We need true fiscal conservative leadership. Starting with this election, we need republicans to focus on cutting spending and reigning in the Fed where they can.

Then we need need a true fiscal conservative in 2024. Not a fiscal liberal like Trump.

---

Outside of Rand Paul, this person literally doesn't not exist on the federal level. The two party system, as it's currently constructed, has no incentive whatsoever to fix spending. Republican or Democrat. More people need to start waking up this this, and quick.

---

I'll take Rand 1000%. I fought my face off for Ron in 2008, and supported Rand in 2016. I'll do it again.

---

Same here. We desperately need another Ron Paul-like revolution.

What's so frustrating is, everyone who laughs at the Pauls or others like them, will never actually go toe to toe with you on their predictions. It seems just about every prediction Rand has made in the past couple of years has come true. Any that's why nobody can have a substantive conversation with him. He's too honest (for a politician at least), and he turns out to be right about 90% of the time.

---

Rand was my first choice in 2016. He just couldn't connect with the average voter unfortunately. So many of the points he'd make simply go over people's heads.

Spot on about how he's "too honest" - but it's time we had a leader like that. Trump was that way on several issues, but certainly not all of them.

---

Rand was my choice as well. He simply couldn't dumb down his message.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

Screw all them poor people, am I right!

This is exactly like when Nero threw a giant Pride parade while Rome burned.

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

Screw all them poor people, am I right!

This is exactly like when Nero threw a giant Pride parade while Rome burned.

---

Didn't Rome also become seriously obsessed with gender right near the end as well? I could be wrong.

Clown Baby said:

---

Ol_Ag_02 said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

Screw all them poor people, am I right!

This is exactly like when Nero threw a giant Pride parade while Rome burned.

---

Didn't Rome also become seriously obsessed with gender right near the end as well? I could be wrong.

---

I don't know. I just know social issue voters are almost always emotional women that fail to understand logic and / or think rationally.

SouthTex99 said:

---

Fed is going to go 100 basis points at July meeting. Hell they might go 125.

---

May have been posted already as I haven't read through the rest of the thread. But yep. The probabilities before the last Fed meeting were 80% chance for a 50bp hike in July. That moved to 90% chance for a 75bp hike as of yesterday. Now a 50% chance for a 100bp hike.

https://www.cmegroup.com/trading/interest-rates/countdown-to-fomc.html

Stlkofta said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

I totally agree Obama was horrible too.

---

I understand what you are saying here. There is a downside to Trump policy-wise that can't be ignored. There is a faith in both government and those in the government that failed him time and time again.

He never quite got the Reagan/Goldwater/Friedman understanding of government (similar to that of the Founding Fathers) being a necessary evil requiring limitation on multiple fronts.

Thing is I got more from him as a conservative than I got from both Bushes combined. Bush 41 destroyed the Reagan legacy. Bush 43 handed the Democrats a means to control the domestic population and an excuse to engage in spending like total meth-heads.

Has he learned his lessons regarding government and its use from his first term?

Can a JFK Democrat change an article of faith that easily? Took Reagan years to move from FDR liberal to GOP conservative.

---

To change Trump would need different principles and his principles will not change.

Here is my honest take on Trump, why I don't support him:

He is a person that takes his value out of the way the world reflects his image back at him. This is both negative and a positive quality. Negative because there is no bedrock principle, positive because to have a positive image he must "succeed" and "win" which can be a strong driving force.

You can see these qualities in his they way he has acted throughout his life. From his successful businesses and they way he ran those businesses, to the way he had built the Trump brand, to his interactions with his mother, to his multiple wives.

As a politician this is also positive and negative. He will do his damndest to have America "win" because this is Trump winning. But it also means that he will not protect our democracy and will do what ever he can to "win". If tearing up the constitution means Trump wins, then he will. If lowering taxes means winning fine, if raising taxes means winning, fine. The principle is Trump success.

The problem with this is that it is short sighted. It "wins" in the short term and devastates in the long-term.

Trump mean tweets: "Excites rabid social conservatives" (even though Trump has rarely exhibited socially conservative values in his life), wins in short term -long term loses the Presidency after 4 years. (After Obama, R's should have had a lock on the presidency for at least 12 years).

Trump tax cuts without spending cuts: short term economic boost- long term deficits leading to inflation.

Trump 2020 Covid spending: tries to save 2020 election (win) by paying people off, long-term 9% inflation.

Trump false election claims: in the short term keeps Trump relevant, in the long terms harms our democracy.

Even Jan 6 was short sighted. He didn't plan it, but he embraced it because it Fed his ego, then it got out of control and now is hung around his neck long term.

He may not exist outside of Rand but we need principled conservatives.

Regan was principled, even Bush W was principled (though a principled expansionist neocon).

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

---

Is this true? Seeing the dollar pegged to passage of time is a new angle. Does this argue against savings?

---

well, its not worthless, i just cant buy what i purchased today. if I only have a $1 in 5 years, Im screwed, I cant buy anything that was a dollar today, it'll take $2.

aggrad02 said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So how is this Trump's fault?

---

Look at 2020 deficits (a record) and monetary expansion (a record). That's Trump right there.

---

Are you taking into account all the money that was pulled OUT of the economy due to all the shutdowns?

The problem really starts in 2021 as the economy is getting back to normal(ish) and yet that monetary expansion continued - twice. All that money from the shutdowns was back in the economy and yet more money kept getting dumped into it...

Ag with kids said:

---

aggrad02 said:

---

aginlakeway said:

---

So how is this Trump's fault?

---

Look at 2020 deficits (a record) and monetary expansion (a record). That's Trump right there.

---

Are you taking into account all the money that was pulled OUT of the economy due to all the shutdowns?

The problem really starts in 2021 as the economy is getting back to normal(ish) and yet that monetary expansion continued - twice. All that money from the shutdowns was back in the economy and yet more money kept getting dumped into it...

---

Yes It's included.

Here is the M2 Chart:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM2NS

In 2020 M2 increased 3.9 Trillion alone.

Yes 2021 policies were bad too.

But price increases (inflation) are not instantaneous with monetary supply increases, it takes time for money to move through the economy and for fractional reserve banking to exponentialize the problem.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

That's for sure...an invasion due to open border policies, stomping on second ammendment rights, disastrous energy policies due to climate change bs, terrible foreign policy, etc.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

You should bring this back up around Thanksgiving this year. I will be curious how many people don't vote for the economy. This November should be a good test.

Marcus Brutus said:

---

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

---

Is this true? Seeing the dollar pegged to passage of time is a new angle. Does this argue against savings?

---

well, its not worthless, i just cant buy what i purchased today. if I only have a $1 in 5 years, Im screwed, I cant buy anything that was a dollar today, it'll take $2.

---

Understood. So it does indeed work out that some purchases, that you `know' you will be getting sooner or later, it might make sense to seize it now after all.

LMCane said:

---

BusterAg said:

---

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

---

Is this true? Seeing the dollar pegged to passage of time is a new angle. Does this argue against savings?

---

Best hedge against inflation is real estate and commodities. Just make sure you can service your debt on the real estate.

Best strategy is to take out a fixed rate mortgage before the inflation hits, and watch your net worth go up as your debt becomes worthless and your land appreciates.

By the way, 20% inflation per year for 5 years = (1/1.2)^5 = $0.40

---

so how EXACTLY does your mortgage debt become "worthless"

do you mean "worth less"?

of course, that only works if your salary is increasing. if you make the same income, you have the same DEBT from your mortgage and fewer dollars in your bank account to pay it off.

inflation only helps debt if you are getting commensurate wage gains- which the USA is not seeing!

---

Inflation is the increase in asset values and expenses.

Real estate is an asset.

If you have $100 in fixed rate debt and your house is worth $120, and then we have 20% inflation for 5 years, your house is worth $300, and you owe something like $95. That is and additional $185 to your net worth. Now, you deflate that to real dollars from year 0, and that additional $185 is only worth $74 in year 0 dollars. But, your real net worth did change, because your asset value went up, and your liability did not.

You still aren't in as good of a position if you haven't gotten any raises. But the real estate was a hedge. Hedges are not usually perfect, but they do make a difference.

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

The party that champions for the poor and oppressed ladies and gentlemen.

The 930 show is the same as the 730 show. You've been great!

titan said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

titan said:

---

Quote:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

---

Is this true? Seeing the dollar pegged to passage of time is a new angle. Does this argue against savings?

---

well, its not worthless, i just cant buy what i purchased today. if I only have a $1 in 5 years, Im screwed, I cant buy anything that was a dollar today, it'll take $2.

---

Understood. So it does indeed work out that some purchases, that you `know' you will be getting sooner or later, it might make sense to seize it now after all.

---

Yes.

aggrad02 said:

---

Ag87H2O said:

---

Please. It's the result of failed leadership alright, but it started on April 21, 2021.

The Trump administration owns this, lock, stock, and barrel. [Edited by Aggrad02]

---

FIFY

Data sucks huh:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/WM2NS

https://datalab.usaspending.gov/americas-finance-guide/deficit/trends/

---

Trump ran a huge deficit in 2020 because he was afraid of COVID and the elections, and rightfully so. He would have been better off fighting legal battles about mail-in voting than listening to Fauci, but that is that. No one thinks he handled COVID well, except for his operation warp speed, which was a huge success.

But then, after Biden:

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/09/congress-government-funding-package-00014322

"House Dems clear $1.5T spending deal after stripping Covid aid"

We didn't have inflation in 2020 to speak of. We are drowning in it now.

Deficits were at least under control until COVID. We treated COVID like a crisis. You are actually arguing about Trump's COVID response, not his fiscal policies, which were (excluding COVID) no worse than Obama's or GWB.

But, Biden and the Dems fully embraced modern monetary theory, and we are sunk now thanks to that.

You mean "just as worse" as Obama and Bush W.

Everything else you said, I've already said. You just have a different opinion of Trumps part in.

And once again, price increases are not instantaneous with monetary increases. 3.9 Trillion in 2020 was going to and did cause inflation.

Stlkofta said:

---

TXAGFAN said:

---

Marcus Brutus said:

---

Under the Carter era definition, that is almost 20%. At this rate, a dollar I earn today is worthless in 5 years!

Dude still has almost 40% approval! Psycho liberals, especially the white liberals.

---

Not everyone votes for economy. Republicans should take note.

---

Not everyone votes to validate male pregnancy. You should take note.

---

ZING!!

Ag87H2O said:

---

Manhattan said:

---

ITT: people who don't work in supply chain and understand that this is the result of failed leadership in 2020.

---

Please. It's the result of failed leadership alright, but it started on January 21, 2021.

Libs can never accept the consequences of their horrible policy decisions. So typical to blame it on everyone else but themselves. The Biden administration owns this, lock, stock, and barrel.

---

Biden wasn't in office when we all started receiving checks.