RIGOLO wrote: » The bill was passed by a bi-partisan majority 386 to 14 including democrat support. This is the THIRD time Ive posted that information. I dont see how constantly asking the question 'What happened to the bill ' for a bill that has been passed thru the House is in any way conducive to a discussion.
spacecoyote wrote: » @Rigolo, Trumpists in general Its all well and good for the US at the moment, given USD is, in essence the main global reserve currency. This allows them to service their debt relatively cheaply as there is significant demand for US bonds, etc... If things carry on as they are, and US debt continues to spiral & spiral out of control (as basically every economist seems to be predicting. Other users here have thrown out some numbers already), eventually there is a strong possibility that we will reach a tipping point whereby people will say...do we need an alternative reserve currency?(be that EUR, CNY, etc...) If the global economy suddenly starts to pump their safety net cash into other currencies, the Fed will have to increase the yield they offer on their treasuries which will just increase their debt even more significantly. With Trillions of national debt already, if you suddenly have to offer just an extra 50bps a year in order to generate enough interest to raise the cash required to service that debt, its just a matter of time before the whole great American Ponzi scheme collapses in on itself. But hey, there's too much winning to be done toda, to worry about the collapse of tomorrow and King Donald will likely be long gone, with his families coffers lined for life by then, so who cares, right??? Also, how is a strong dollar going to help the economy keep growing. All its doing is making US exports even more expensive. Trump has said it multiple times over his presidency that he wanted to keep the dollar weak.
weisses wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » The bill was passed by a bi-partisan majority 386 to 14 including democrat support. This is the THIRD time Ive posted that information. I dont see how constantly asking the question 'What happened to the bill ' for a bill that has been passed thru the House is in any way conducive to a discussion. No the 2009 Shumer bill ... from your youtube link
RIGOLO wrote: » The Shanghai Composite index has hit a 2 year low, and the bears are retreating into the cave. First blood to Trump in the trade rebalacing, it may be a mortal blow. Anyone here care to discuss the Shanghai index and the impact Trump is having on it ?
Leroy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » The bill was passed by a bi-partisan majority 386 to 14 including democrat support. This is the THIRD time Ive posted that information. I dont see how constantly asking the question 'What happened to the bill ' for a bill that has been passed thru the House is in any way conducive to a discussion. We are asking what the bills actually means. Not what happened the the path of the bill, but what that means. You seem very excited that it was passed, but since you have failed to state anything that it practically means, one can only assume that you see the fact of a bill passing as a success, what the bill actually does is not the point.
RIGOLO wrote: » If theres aspects of the bill you dont like , thats your prerogative, Im happy with it.
RIGOLO wrote: » I didnt link or refer to a Schumer bill, I posted a link to an immigration speech he gave at Chicago Law, I thought his language and terminiology was interesting. Feel free to start a discussion on Chuck Schumer and his 2009 reform efforts if you wish.
If perhaps the DNC had enacted some of their policys of one of their own senior leaders, one wonders would Trump have won in 2016.
kilns wrote: » Do Trump supporters realise that with the bills and tax cuts he has passed, he has set the National debt to increase by 20% by 2028. By that time, every 1 dollar in 5 that the federal reserve pays will be used to pay interest on this debt. This is going to have a huge impact on public spending. Are they this short sighted to see that Trump is ruining the future of their country for a short term gain?
kilns wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » The Shanghai Composite index has hit a 2 year low, and the bears are retreating into the cave. First blood to Trump in the trade rebalacing, it may be a mortal blow. Anyone here care to discuss the Shanghai index and the impact Trump is having on it ? The Dow too was on its biggest losing streak for 10 years up until Friday, I wonder why that was? It is due to suffer again today if the futures are any indication. Ultimately the US are in a stronger position than China in that not as many US companies are dependent on China as Chinese companies are on the US, mainly due to the fact to restrictions of entry (eg. Google) but Apple and GM have alot to lose in China and if they start to suffer then they will start to put serious pressure on Trump. GM sold 4 million cars in China last year, which is a huge percentage of their output. There will be no winner in a trade war. October is going to be a huge month when the US treasury goes to the markets to sell bonds, what if the largest purchaser of these decides not to buy, where does that leave the US treasury, they will have to raise the yields to sell. As for commodities and oil, yes USD is the base currency but if this uncertainty continues it may well move away from the USD as it continues to get less and less relevant in the industry. Already Putin is establishing a RUB based pricing system for oil and if you remember it was actually Gadafi who before the invasion into Libya was leading the push for African countries to move away from the USD and establish their own base (most likely the Euro) before he was conviently overthrown
RIGOLO wrote: » Leroy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » The bill was passed by a bi-partisan majority 386 to 14 including democrat support. This is the THIRD time Ive posted that information. I dont see how constantly asking the question 'What happened to the bill ' for a bill that has been passed thru the House is in any way conducive to a discussion. We are asking what the bills actually means. Not what happened the the path of the bill, but what that means. You seem very excited that it was passed, but since you have failed to state anything that it practically means, one can only assume that you see the fact of a bill passing as a success, what the bill actually does is not the point. Yes I was super excited it passed. One of the best days in his Presidency. Anyone who does anything to halt this epidemic is welcome . And yes I see it as a success, getting bi-partisan support , and also i see it as a big marketing tool come November for the campaign trail. Add the pressure of the bill plus the class action suits many states are taking (with the support of the US AG) against big pharma on this issue , its all moving in the right direction . If HRC lost the election because of 79,000 votes (i believe to swing the electoral colleges she needed something of this order) then she lost those votes on this topic in my opinion. Trump hammered this message home on his campaign. It was item number 2 in his campaign. If you think he kept 60,000 people cheering in a stadium in rural states for 2 hours by just repeating the wall the wall, you were misled by your media outlet. He gave a significant proportion of his speeches over to fighting this plague, and that made a difference at the poll. Im also a fan of the whitehouse.gov homepage and how the banner line has 'The Opioid Crisis' as one its items, shows how serious him and his administration take this issue. Is the bill perfect , no , will it solve the crisis today, no. Im a realist . If theres aspects of the bill you dont like , thats your prerogative, Im happy with it.
weisses wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » I didnt link or refer to a Schumer bill, I posted a link to an immigration speech he gave at Chicago Law, I thought his language and terminiology was interesting. Feel free to start a discussion on Chuck Schumer and his 2009 reform efforts if you wish. Well you said a lot more then referring to language and terminology If perhaps the DNC had enacted some of their policys of one of their own senior leaders, one wonders would Trump have won in 2016. What happened to the C.I.R bill ? Look it up and then tell me how the DNC could have enacted on this policy.
RIGOLO wrote: » Those are fair comments you have made. The US market retreat was mostly an ancilliary effect of Shanghai Composite collapse, there wasnt any fundamental issue with the US. US domestic oil production is hitting record bpd the US has become less and less dependant on OPEC supply and is less and less at the whim of OPEC. If there is a trend away from US dominance of international trade then I dont see a problem here but if that day arrives I suspect the EU would prefer the $ than the RUB. Are you sure you want to bring up Libya, and Ghaddafis overthrow. Under Obama and HRC Secretary of State and we all know how well that went. (For the record before im accussed of bringing up Obama in the Trump discussion thread, Im merely responding to a post directed to me that brought up the previous administrations actions. ) Apple , given Tim cook has spent 3 years lambasting Trump, and Apple were a dominant corporation at keeping their earnings away from US taxman, it will be an interesting conversation if Tim cook has to ring Trump due to china embargos. Besides people on the left should be welcoming Apple cutting back on China labour force, wasnt it reknowned for poor working conditions. Theres a very long game at play here. I dont see one win or loss as being decisive . I think liberals and Democrats are too hung up on finding one battle to win that will win their war. (infectious militaria strikes again)
RIGOLO wrote: » Given you brought it up, and you seem keen to discuss it , why dont you tell us your version of what happened to it.For future reference instead of asking someone 5 or 6 times , what about the bill, the bill the bill, without actually mentioning the bill your talking about, , in this case the C.I.R bill, you should really state that at the begining . It seems to have taken 2 days and 5 posts for you to say your talking about the CIR bill. It would save alot of posts and head scratching as to what bill your talking about. It will help the discussion flow better.
Christy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » Leroy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » The bill was passed by a bi-partisan majority 386 to 14 including democrat support. This is the THIRD time Ive posted that information. I dont see how constantly asking the question 'What happened to the bill ' for a bill that has been passed thru the House is in any way conducive to a discussion. We are asking what the bills actually means. Not what happened the the path of the bill, but what that means. You seem very excited that it was passed, but since you have failed to state anything that it practically means, one can only assume that you see the fact of a bill passing as a success, what the bill actually does is not the point. Yes I was super excited it passed. One of the best days in his Presidency. Anyone who does anything to halt this epidemic is welcome . And yes I see it as a success, getting bi-partisan support , and also i see it as a big marketing tool come November for the campaign trail. Add the pressure of the bill plus the class action suits many states are taking (with the support of the US AG) against big pharma on this issue , its all moving in the right direction . If HRC lost the election because of 79,000 votes (i believe to swing the electoral colleges she needed something of this order) then she lost those votes on this topic in my opinion. Trump hammered this message home on his campaign. It was item number 2 in his campaign. If you think he kept 60,000 people cheering in a stadium in rural states for 2 hours by just repeating the wall the wall, you were misled by your media outlet. He gave a significant proportion of his speeches over to fighting this plague, and that made a difference at the poll. Im also a fan of the whitehouse.gov homepage and how the banner line has 'The Opioid Crisis' as one its items, shows how serious him and his administration take this issue. Is the bill perfect , no , will it solve the crisis today, no. Im a realist . If theres aspects of the bill you dont like , thats your prerogative, Im happy with it. That is an impressive wall of text to have with no detail on the bill you love so much.
weisses wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » Those are fair comments you have made. The US market retreat was mostly an ancilliary effect of Shanghai Composite collapse, there wasnt any fundamental issue with the US. US domestic oil production is hitting record bpd the US has become less and less dependant on OPEC supply and is less and less at the whim of OPEC. If there is a trend away from US dominance of international trade then I dont see a problem here but if that day arrives I suspect the EU would prefer the $ than the RUB. Are you sure you want to bring up Libya, and Ghaddafis overthrow. Under Obama and HRC Secretary of State and we all know how well that went. (For the record before im accussed of bringing up Obama in the Trump discussion thread, Im merely responding to a post directed to me that brought up the previous administrations actions. ) Apple , given Tim cook has spent 3 years lambasting Trump, and Apple were a dominant corporation at keeping their earnings away from US taxman, it will be an interesting conversation if Tim cook has to ring Trump due to china embargos. Besides people on the left should be welcoming Apple cutting back on China labour force, wasnt it reknowned for poor working conditions. Theres a very long game at play here. I dont see one win or loss as being decisive . I think liberals and Democrats are too hung up on finding one battle to win that will win their war. (infectious militaria strikes again) Sooo US markets goes down because of Shanghai Composite collapse which is a result of Trumps trade wars ... And that is positive for the US How ? Why is the long play (as you described it ) not valid for the SSE ?
RIGOLO wrote: » Feel free to post your own wall of test of the opioid crisis. I have an immediate family member affected by this. Id be interested in what posters find so inadequate, offensive and lacking in Trumps strategy on attacking opioid abuse. If you wish to discuss the minutiae of one detail of a 58 bill package, then again post your own wall of text but for me . Im happy with the Trump administration strategy and the inroads they have made over the last 18 months on opioid abuse , and not just last weeks bill. Ive posted a number of times on the opioid epidemic out of concern, if you are genuinely concerned about it what have you posted on it other than badgering for a nitpicking whataboutery tit for tat.
Leroy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » Those are fair comments you have made. The US market retreat was mostly an ancilliary effect of Shanghai Composite collapse, there wasnt any fundamental issue with the US. US domestic oil production is hitting record bpd the US has become less and less dependant on OPEC supply and is less and less at the whim of OPEC. If there is a trend away from US dominance of international trade then I dont see a problem here but if that day arrives I suspect the EU would prefer the $ than the RUB. Are you sure you want to bring up Libya, and Ghaddafis overthrow. Under Obama and HRC Secretary of State and we all know how well that went. (For the record before im accussed of bringing up Obama in the Trump discussion thread, Im merely responding to a post directed to me that brought up the previous administrations actions. ) Apple , given Tim cook has spent 3 years lambasting Trump, and Apple were a dominant corporation at keeping their earnings away from US taxman, it will be an interesting conversation if Tim cook has to ring Trump due to china embargos. Besides people on the left should be welcoming Apple cutting back on China labour force, wasnt it reknowned for poor working conditions. Theres a very long game at play here. I dont see one win or loss as being decisive . I think liberals and Democrats are too hung up on finding one battle to win that will win their war. (infectious militaria strikes again) Haha, this is too funny. You are the first to come congraatulating Trump on whatever the latest news you have heard. These bills are great, tax cuts are great etc. Now you want to play the long game. OK, so long game is that even based on the current growth projections the national debt, as per the links already posted, is set to reach levels not seen since the 1930's. That Trump is relying on levels of growth that would be both unheard of and unhealthy since the people simply doesn't exist to cover the jobs (unless we start letting Mexicans in again but they are all criminals) The trend so far is that corporations are using the bonus for the tax cuts to undertake massive and record setting stock buy backs. That the money is not going to large job increases (the job number continue on the trend set by Obama) and wage growth is nowhere near the levels of the tax cuts.
RIGOLO wrote: » And the debt level continues on the trend also set by Obama. Numbers are my forte , and anyone can twist a number to their own agenda. Are we talking dollar debt increase or percentage debt increase. Much of the numbers people are using are coming out of the CBO , again using their numbers to set their agenda. It reminds me of how the blind who were leading the blind back in Ireland in Celtic tiger days and everyone was using the ESRI numbers to say things were grand. Do the rules allow a person to play both games , the short and the long, after all diffenrent elements of society move at different paces, some items play out short term and some play out on a longer term. And yes long term, you have your projections , I have mine. Considering Im old enough to have lived thru a number of trends and cycles , and survived most by trusting my own instinct and number crunching, im content to follow the same instinct on this one, long term. Neither of us will have a definitive answer today , tomorrow or next month, we will have some but its going to take more time for the full reveal. For now just make your pension decisions , cash, equities, us , emerging, bonds etc
Leroy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » Feel free to post your own wall of test of the opioid crisis. I have an immediate family member affected by this. Id be interested in what posters find so inadequate, offensive and lacking in Trumps strategy on attacking opioid abuse. If you wish to discuss the minutiae of one detail of a 58 bill package, then again post your own wall of text but for me . Im happy with the Trump administration strategy and the inroads they have made over the last 18 months on opioid abuse , and not just last weeks bill. Ive posted a number of times on the opioid epidemic out of concern, if you are genuinely concerned about it what have you posted on it other than badgering for a nitpicking whataboutery tit for tat. So to summarise your position. You like Trumps strategy, but not enough to actually give any detail. We don't need to post anything, you claimed it was one of the best days of his presidency, so this isn't some run of the mill bill. This is a game changer. This bill is going to mean the end of the crisis. Great, how? Does it deal with all the areas that you wanted? What level of support does it give to those already affected? What regulations has it brought in to reduce the issue going forward (and which regulations were got rid of since two need to go for every new one brought in.) Will drug companies need to go back to self reporting any unusual trends? Have the FDA been given extra resources to investigate not only the self reporting but to undertake additional audits. Will all treatments be mandated to be covered under healthcare plans. What if the person loses their job, and thus healthcare, can they still avail of the treatments direct from the state? Does each state have to abide by the same regulations or is it a state by state option. What happens if you move state? Who is going to pay for all of this, what part of the budget is it coming from. These are not particularly difficult questions, and seeing as you have direct experience surely you want to know that these, and far more, is being done to actually deal with the issue rather than just talk about it. What is the cost of the opioid crisis to the US each year, and how much has Trump diverted to tackle it?
Leroy42 wrote: » RIGOLO wrote: » And the debt level continues on the trend also set by Obama. Numbers are my forte , and anyone can twist a number to their own agenda. Are we talking dollar debt increase or percentage debt increase. Much of the numbers people are using are coming out of the CBO , again using their numbers to set their agenda. It reminds me of how the blind who were leading the blind back in Ireland in Celtic tiger days and everyone was using the ESRI numbers to say things were grand. Do the rules allow a person to play both games , the short and the long, after all diffenrent elements of society move at different paces, some items play out short term and some play out on a longer term. And yes long term, you have your projections , I have mine. Considering Im old enough to have lived thru a number of trends and cycles , and survived most by trusting my own instinct and number crunching, im content to follow the same instinct on this one, long term. Neither of us will have a definitive answer today , tomorrow or next month, we will have some but its going to take more time for the full reveal. For now just make your pension decisions , cash, equities, us , emerging, bonds etc So in summary, you have an opinion and all arguments against that are just biased. We can't possibly know the answer, but Trump is going great. Is that pretty much it?
