Silent For Too Long said:

---

Im not sure what you said is true. I've seen estimates around 8.4 trillion for Trumps first term, 3.6 trillion was directly COVID related.

Biden increased the debt by 12 trillion...

---

Yes.

They both screwed us in that regard.

Trump spent more in 4 yrs than Obama's dip**** ass did in 8. Ridiculous.

Take away COVID, you're just a hater

KerrAg76 said:

---

Take away COVID, you're just a hater

---

You can't, his response to it was idiotic. Biden turned that to 11ty.


And, yes, I hate fiscal liberalism.

HTownAg98 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

jamey said:

---

I think you guys are splitting hairs between the definion of inflation and an increase in prices showing up in CPI and PCE data.

---

Definitions matter.

---

You can call it whatever you'd like, but people don't like it when stuff gets more expensive, whether it's from pumping dollars into the money supply or because of a tariff.

---

If wages go up more than inflation, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive"
If inflation is 2-3 percent, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive".

Both are happening as we speak. People are happy.

Science Denier said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

jamey said:

---

I think you guys are splitting hairs between the definion of inflation and an increase in prices showing up in CPI and PCE data.

---

Definitions matter.

---

You can call it whatever you'd like, but people don't like it when stuff gets more expensive, whether it's from pumping dollars into the money supply or because of a tariff.

---

If wages go up more than inflation, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive"
If inflation is 2-3 percent, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive".

Both are happening as we speak. People are happy.

---

Median wage annualized and in 2024 dollars is about 1.5% above median wage in 2024. Inflation is 2.4% annualized.

People do give a ****.

Obama's last budget was a deficit of $665 billion, Trumps first was a deficit of $779 billion and next was $985 billion, this was all pre pandemic. His spending habits aren't just COVID related.

I also don't think you can wipe all of COVID off of Trump. He loved sending those checks in the mail, even after we clearly didn't need them. The small business loans had so much fraud, and by the time they came up with all the ways to forgive them, they were basically free money. All due to something he calls a hoax, but he can't have it both ways. Either it was hoax that he mismanaged and allowed Fauci to control, or it was legitimate and the spending was necessary. Also don't think we can sit here and wipe COVID off his debt list when his predecessors had the financial crisis and a war.

He's a spender, he's already tied with Obama and has four years left with a projected $1.7 trillion deficit in the coming budget. We have a republican president and congress and no interest in even trying to get this under control.

Now do price increases on materials passed on to consumers.

All the dunking on a govt agency claiming its policies aren't impacting the economy because they can classify price bloat and taxation as something else is hilarious.

Republicans have become fiscal liberals

Logos Stick said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

jamey said:

---

I think you guys are splitting hairs between the definion of inflation and an increase in prices showing up in CPI and PCE data.

---

Definitions matter.

---

You can call it whatever you'd like, but people don't like it when stuff gets more expensive, whether it's from pumping dollars into the money supply or because of a tariff.

---

If wages go up more than inflation, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive"
If inflation is 2-3 percent, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive".

Both are happening as we speak. People are happy.

---

Median wage annualized and in 2024 dollars is about 1.5% above median wage in 2024. Inflation is 2.4% annualized.

People do give a ****.

---

According to AI,
Median weekly wage May 2024 = 1139
Median weekly wage May 2025 = 1194

That's an increase of 4.8%

Logos Stick said:

---

Science Denier said:

---

HTownAg98 said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

jamey said:

---

I think you guys are splitting hairs between the definion of inflation and an increase in prices showing up in CPI and PCE data.

---

Definitions matter.

---

You can call it whatever you'd like, but people don't like it when stuff gets more expensive, whether it's from pumping dollars into the money supply or because of a tariff.

---

If wages go up more than inflation, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive"
If inflation is 2-3 percent, people DGAF about "stuff getting more expensive".

Both are happening as we speak. People are happy.

---

Median wage annualized and in 2024 dollars is about 1.5% above median wage in 2024. Inflation is 2.4% annualized.

People do give a ****.

---

And that 2.4% is total, unadulterated, bull**** . Anyone that buys anything knows it. Govt data is garbage. Even now.

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Now do price increases on materials passed on to consumers.

All the dunking on a govt agency claiming its policies aren't impacting the economy because they can classify price bloat and taxation as something else is hilarious.

Republicans have become fiscal liberals

---

They've been there.

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Now do price increases on materials passed on to consumers.

All the dunking on a govt agency claiming its policies aren't impacting the economy because they can classify price bloat and taxation as something else is hilarious.

Republicans have become fiscal liberals

---

Debt under Democrats: 📈 ⬆️
Debt under Republicans: 📈 ⬆️

Neither of the major parties has been successful so far in addressing this issue. pic.twitter.com/ZxFUsWGnfC

— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole84) June 30, 2025

In your case, if the prices of things that use Steele go up, the prices of other things will go down, unless the money supply expands.

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Now do price increases on materials passed on to consumers.

All the dunking on a govt agency claiming its policies aren't impacting the economy because they can classify price bloat and taxation as something else is hilarious.

Republicans have become fiscal liberals

---

Debt under Democrats: 📈 ⬆️
Debt under Republicans: 📈 ⬆️

Neither of the major parties has been successful so far in addressing this issue. pic.twitter.com/ZxFUsWGnfC

— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole84) June 30, 2025

---

That's a feature, not a bug. What's shocking is that spending is up over 50% since 2019. Where the hell did those dollars go? We implemented a lot of emergency spending measures during COVID which was appalling but not surprising. It dipped some in the aftermath but is nearly back up to that level already.

This quote is in the Treasury website that tracks and presents spending.

Quote:

---

The U.S. government has spent $4.85 trillion in fiscal year 2025 to ensure the well-being of the people of the United States.

---

Along with this one.

Quote:

---

According to the Constitution's Preamble, the purpose of the federal government is "…to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." These goals are achieved through government spending.

---

That's everything you need to know. They think their spending is what secures the Blessings of Liberty and ensures our wellbeing.

Spending by category
Social Security 21%
Medicare 14%
Net Interest 14%
Health 13%
Defense 13%
Income Security 11%
Others 14%

More than 59% is redistribution of wealth and interest is second largest category. This is why we won't see meaningful change and DOGE was never going to accomplish anything substantial. We aren't cutting into that 59% in any meaningful way and the interest is what it is. Roughly 75% of spending is untouchable.

Meanwhile defense, the one thing on this list explicitly mandated by the Constitution, is down to 13% of the budget. Prior to LBJ defense was 50% of the budget, by the way. And we had no debt.

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/

This chart needs to be updated to reflect the BBB but it illustrates the problem. Also, it's important to note that it appears the Biden stimulus expenditure includes the CARES Act that was signed by Trump so it would more accurately be labeled the "COVID Era Spending Orgy."

LOYAL AG said:

---

Who?mikejones! said:

---

Ag_of_08 said:

---

Now do price increases on materials passed on to consumers.

All the dunking on a govt agency claiming its policies aren't impacting the economy because they can classify price bloat and taxation as something else is hilarious.

Republicans have become fiscal liberals

---

Debt under Democrats: 📈 ⬆️
Debt under Republicans: 📈 ⬆️

Neither of the major parties has been successful so far in addressing this issue. pic.twitter.com/ZxFUsWGnfC

— The Rabbit Hole (@TheRabbitHole84) June 30, 2025

---

That's a feature, not a bug. What's shocking is that spending is up over 50% since 2019. Where the hell did those dollars go? We implemented a lot of emergency spending measures during COVID which was appalling but not surprising. It dipped some in the aftermath but is nearly back up to that level already.

This quote is in the Treasury website that tracks and presents spending.

Quote:

---

The U.S. government has spent $4.85 trillion in fiscal year 2025 to ensure the well-being of the people of the United States.

---

Along with this one.

Quote:

---

According to the Constitution's Preamble, the purpose of the federal government is "…to establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity." These goals are achieved through government spending.

---

That's everything you need to know. They think their spending is what secures the Blessings of Liberty and ensures our wellbeing.

Spending by category
Social Security 21%
Medicare 14%
Net Interest 14%
Health 13%
Defense 13%
Income Security 11%
Others 14%

More than 59% is redistribution of wealth and interest is second largest category. This is why we won't see meaningful change and DOGE was never going to accomplish anything substantial. We aren't cutting into that 59% in any meaningful way and the interest is what it is. Roughly 75% of spending is untouchable.

Meanwhile defense, the one thing on this list explicitly mandated by the Constitution, is down to 13% of the budget. Prior to LBJ defense was 50% of the budget, by the way. And we had no debt.

https://fiscaldata.treasury.gov/americas-finance-guide/federal-spending/

---

Transfer of wealth is right.. from the taxpayer to the left voting dependent, and straight from them into the hands of the wealthy.

AJ02 said:

---

Not necessarily.

For us, we've been able to avoid any big hits bc of tariffs by:

1. Agreeing to split costs of tariffs with the manufacurer
2. Getting government exemptions on most of the tariffs
3. Getting China to lower their costs enough to offset tariffs so it's a wash
4. Creating FTZs stateside on a consignment program
5. Moving to other low cost countries like India for commodity items

---

So, none of these things couldn't have been done in the past when companies raised prices on Americans because, of "Covid, fuel prices, etc. ad nauseum"?

No Spin Ag said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

Not necessarily.

For us, we've been able to avoid any big hits bc of tariffs by:

1. Agreeing to split costs of tariffs with the manufacurer
2. Getting government exemptions on most of the tariffs
3. Getting China to lower their costs enough to offset tariffs so it's a wash
4. Creating FTZs stateside on a consignment program
5. Moving to other low cost countries like India for commodity items

---

So, none of these things couldn't have been done in the past when companies raised prices on Americans because, of "Covid, fuel prices, etc. ad nauseum"?

---

What comes next is observation of policy movements as far as I can tell, not necessarily an endorsement or rejection of the strategy.

All of those things can be done at all times. Covid was fantastic for corporate profit margins and most companies haven't let off since.

Right now the top 10% of income earners represent about 50% of consumer spending so to some degree, as a whole, they don't care as much about price increases on goods as the bottom 90% - and that supports the upward pressure on prices. When you look at the bottom 90%, you've got a huge bloc of consumers struggling to purchases essentials.

Financialization in the US has been extremely detrimental to the "middle-class" - not trying to make this a communist screed but the evidence is everywhere. To some degree, we've tried to mollify that with government spending.

Trump is trying a different tact - part of his MAGA agenda is to bring back manufacturing and blue collar jobs to the US. He knows it will make things more expensive. What he also knows, is that "more expensive" part, while impacting everyone, will disproportionately be funded by high income earners. The gamble is, to the extent he can, Trump is attempting to buoy the bottom 90% by creating jobs that will in fact be supported by price increases on the top 10%.

No Spin Ag said:

---

AJ02 said:

---

Not necessarily.

For us, we've been able to avoid any big hits bc of tariffs by:

1. Agreeing to split costs of tariffs with the manufacurer
2. Getting government exemptions on most of the tariffs
3. Getting China to lower their costs enough to offset tariffs so it's a wash
4. Creating FTZs stateside on a consignment program
5. Moving to other low cost countries like India for commodity items

---

So, none of these things couldn't have been done in the past when companies raised prices on Americans because, of "Covid, fuel prices, etc. ad nauseum"?

---

Not really. For 1, 2, 3, & 4 there was no need to because the tariffs didn't exist.

#1 - Once tariffs go away, we no longer split the cost with manufacturer. So it becomes moot bc it's just temporary. Instead of one company taking a 25% hit, it's two companies taking 12.5% and then it reverts back to "normal".

# 2 - no need for tariff exemptions if there are no tariffs. So this isn't something that could've been done prior to tariffs.

#3 - When tariffs first went into effect China got desperate and was slashing costs in an attempt just to keep their business for whenever the tariffs eventually were rescinded. Even if it meant them taking a loss for a bit. It's not a permanent reduction.

# 4 - Without a cost benefit because of the tariffs, an FTZ isn't something most people want to deal with. It's a big headache, and lots of procedures have to be put in place so people don't accidentally commit felonies by moving inventory out of the FTZ without the correct paper trail.

#5 - India is usually second cheapest behind China for what we need. But China WAS cheaper than India before tariffs. So there was no need for us to shift to India prior to that.