Political Posts

[Grenville]

4 hours ago, dealraker said:

John, while I no longer read most posts and a few posters I do follow your output as it is an uplifting for me - being so genuine.  The point I'll debate with you here is POTUS aspirations. My thoughts aren't related to any current direction as to what is happening, it's more of a half century plus of mildly intermittent grasping for clarity observations (too many words back there...but I'm trying my best to state something).

 

My view is more that someone wakes each day with both significant anxiety even panic attacks--- and envy/ revenge obsessions -- and the day proceeds from there.  Plan?  There is none.  A lifetime of business failure coupled with successful mostly fraud and illegal survival schemes?  Add to that a skill for bullying the weaker and more ignorant? 

 

The game played is the one that's worked for 60 years.  But big plan?

 

The US will be a financial wreck when he's expired.  But his finances will...as usual...survive.

Deal, I appreciate your post and perspective! I am with you, I think folks view DJT as your average politician, he is not. He isn’t beholden to anyone so he can get more done, but in the process of getting things done whether good or bad, he is dismantling a lot of the checks and balances. There is no morality in how he is doing things and I for one agree with your view on the outcome. Please share when you can!

[no_free_lunch]

1 hour ago, John Hjorth said:

@no_free_lunch,

 

What do you mean with 'we' in your last line above? 

I guess i am following the bouncing ball as a canadian and it seems it keeps landing on the US side of the fence.  Or directly i speculate some sort of assimilation with the US will occur. 

Edited March 29, 2025 by no_free_lunch

[John Hjorth]

1 minute ago, no_free_lunch said:

I guess i am following the bouncing ball as a canadian and it seems it keeps landing on the US side of the fence.

 

, Now that's a bit funny!, @no_free_lunch,

 

Thank you.

[cubsfan]

34 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Thank you, @73 Reds,

 

Very much appreciated, actually!

 

I'm not sure [at all] that I have understood things correctly, but to me, The United States of America appears, to me, to be a deeply divided [on people level] union of states, where nobody cares about their [perhaps not so lucky [ovarial lottery and all that]], not successful neighbour, and next, fellow citizen.

 

The POTUS' adress to the Congress, recently, said it all, and demonstrated it clearly, demonstrated by the sentiment in corum, right side noisy, left side silent as a tombstone.

 

You are correct @John Hjorth. The US is a deeply divided country, much more than at any time in my lifetime.  The last 12 years or so, we have experimented and implemented the socialist playbook. We have watched the model fail in Europe, we see the model fail in the Middle East, we see the model fail in Russia.  We want no part of it - while you destroy your cultures.

 

Half the country is committed to keeping our culture and traditional values. A portion of the other half is hell bent on destroying the culture through government. The independents are moving quickly to the right, as the Left keeps moving farther left with AOC and other radicals.

DEI and the Woke movement are dying in America.  The leftist Democratic party polls at 27% approval currently, with the independents flocking to the Republicans & Trump.

 

The US choose the direction it wanted with the resounding Trump victory.  The majority wants nothing to do with our own failed move to the left. The last 4 years were hell.

 

The US will close their borders, reinstitute law and order, rebuild our industries, preserve our culture and heritage - and concentrate on improving the lives of Americans.

 

This President cares deeply about Americans first and is not a globalist.

[73 Reds]

14 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Thank you, @73 Reds,

 

Very much appreciated, actually!

 

I'm not sure [at all] that I have understood things correctly, but to me, The United States of America appears, to me, to be a deeply divided [on people level] union of states, where nobody cares about their [perhaps not so lucky [ovarial lottery and all that]], not successful neighbour, and next, fellow citizen.

 

The POTUS' adress to the Congress, recently, said it all, and demonstrated it clearly, demonstrated by the sentiment in corum, right side noisy, left side silent as a tombstone.

I really think you may be confusing the apparent divide in Congress with that of the general population.  Remember, everything you hear and see in Congress is mostly for show.  Many members actually get along and work together.  But politics requires each of them to take a side in every issue and the political system here as it is, tends to exaggerate even the smallest of differences.  To me one problem stems from extremists on both sides.  On the left, the extremists have become far more outspoken and have attracted what I consider like-minded extremists in the general population, who are equally as outspoken.  This is a relatively new phenomena as to the degree of leftist extremism.   But it is easy to mistake extremism and outspokenness with popularity.  I tend to believe that the majority of the US population is not far from center on most issues, perhaps more folks even a little center-right due to overall increasing prosperity and less young people.   Often the ways that you and I would address some of the current issues and problems of our time are far different than proposed responses by either political party, particularly if such problems were local and not national and international.   Trump attracted a more nationalistic, pro-US audience because he correctly pointed out that we spend a lot of taxpayer money in unpopular places and on unpopular causes at the expense of the average US citizen.   This is hardly a comment worth debating.  Likewise, few would argue against eliminating fraud, waste and abuse, removing illegal criminals, and simply re-establishing the former standards and values on which the US has always existed.  We can argue over the definition of what is "fraud", "waste" or even an "illegal" but when the former status quo was doing entirely nothing to address these issues, Trump's election was hardly a surprise, especially when you consider his opponent.  For the record, it is easy to understand international dismay at issues like tariffs or even his apparent position on Greenland.  Yet it would be difficult to envision any proposed or enacted tariffs will remain in place once our leader(s) believe that any resulting compromise is better than before.  Some may argue the point, but Trump does have some very intelligent people around him.  His VP's life-story is nothing short astonishing.  He crosses party lines to bring in what he believes are the best people for their jobs.  Controversial? Of course, but rarely does anything of significance get accomplished without fresh ideas and a little controversy.  

[Cigarbutt]

3 hours ago, Castanza said:

Idea of who? 

...

Perhaps it’s gone too far? 

@Spekulatius could absolutely be right in the jobs comment. 

Thank you for the interesting answer.

The root specific topic was about government employees reporting statistics concerning employment (or crime) and a presupposed "idea" that those employees, as a group,  systematically try to mislead or 'fake', isolating those employees as part of the "they" group, the "they" group to be hated.

In answer to this question, there is no substantial facts supporting the 'evil' conclusion and Spekulatius is likely right, ie it's part of the process, collecting data and revising as needed.

-----

Relevant to investing?

When spotting an opportunity, there is a process whereby info is selected from a diversity of sources and conclusions are made, requiring to positively self-correct wrong information.

-----

The government employees collecting and reporting statistical data are imperfect and make mistakes but there appears to be some kind of self-correcting mechanisms. Would you rather not bother knowing about this information even if imperfect in nature?

-----

As far as media in general, like many other similar topics, quality of reporting may have gone down but there continues to be some kind of self-correcting mechanism. A free press (independent media) is crucial in modern civilized societies.

Has it gone too far? in terms of poor information circulating? Maybe or maybe not but what is clear is that, with social media, poor information circulates faster and more widely than good information. Poor information, especially when politics or power is involved, instead of self-correcting through circulation, gets amplified (opposite of self-correction).

Some people seem to be ready to take advantage of that.

-----

Here's an extreme example but it's used as an illustration of the phenomenon. This paragraph assumes that you don't believe that the earth is flat  . There's been a growing number of people who believe or consider the possibility that the earth is flat. Why? Because if you think so and surf the internet, you're likely to enter echo-chambers that will tend to reinforce tribal thoughts, some of which are not correct and the self-amplifying phenomenon may not appeal to the better angels of our (human) nature.

'Political' discussions on this Board often reflect that..

[changegonnacome]

4 hours ago, dealraker said:

 

The US will be a financial wreck when he's expired.  But his finances will...as usual...survive.

 

Imagine being handed the United States to manage - what a set of cards!........I mean messing that up would be like messing up running a Casino....you simply can't lose.

 

31 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

with the resounding Trump victory.

 

This resounding win and mandate talk is a twisting of reality @cubsfan - the last election across the WH, Senate, Congress was a resoundingly close affair.....historically so in the Presidential and Congressional sense.

 

Let's look at them with FACTS-

 

Presidential:

 

The electoral college was not close. However the popular vote (where true mandates for radical change are made IMO) was amongst the closest in history. Indeed you need to go back to Presidential races in 1960, 1968 and the most recent Gore v Bush election to find a race closer than this one. The margin was simply tiny.

 

Put another way of the 32 total Presidential elections of the 20th and 21st century....Trump v Harris is 4th tightest....which is to say that 27 of the last 32 Presidential races had BIGGER "mandates" than Trump has.

Closest Presidential Elections by Popular Vote (1900–2024):

1. 1960: John F. Kennedy vs. Richard Nixon — 0.17%

2. 2000: George W. Bush vs. Al Gore — 0.51%

3. 1968: Richard Nixon vs. Hubert Humphrey — 0.70%

4. 2024: Donald Trump vs. Kamala Harris — 1.48%

5. 1976: Jimmy Carter vs. Gerald Ford — 2.06%

6. 2004: George W. Bush vs. John Kerry — 2.46%

7. 1916: Woodrow Wilson vs. Charles Hughes — 3.12%

This not what resounding mandate looks like. I'm sorry

 

Congress:

 

This one is slam dunk to smash the mandate talk. Its the smallest congressional majority since the 1931 congress. Placing it in the 0% percentile for majorities in Congressional history.

 

So small they've had to pull Stefankik going to the UN cause its so "fragile"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-reveals-why-he-pulled-stefaniks-un-ambassador-nomination-cannot-take-chance

 

Senate:

 

Less historically narrow margin here - given that the Senate has 100 seats, a 53-seat majority represents a 6-seat advantage over the opposition. Therefore, the current 53-seat majority falls within the lower range of historical majorities, indicating a relatively narrow control Republican.

[cubsfan]

^^^ Say what you like.  The Democratic Party is in meltdown mode as reasonable people flee to the right.  The large base of independents in this country want nothing to do with this party anymore

as they double down on woke & DEI.  For the time being, the Democrats are done and the Party of Trump is solidly in charge.

 

That's what I call resounding. Try and hold an election today, and it would be a wipeout.

[changegonnacome]

16 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

Try and hold an election today, and it would be a wipeout.

Really? Then tell me why Trump and the Republican Party is terrified to hold a by-election for Elise Stefanik’s seat right now? if wipeouts are on the cards sounds like a perfect time to do it?…they aren’t…it’s why they’ve pulled her nomination to the U.N. and asked her to sit tight in Congress to shore up the tiny majority there.

[cubsfan]

3 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

Really? Then tell me why Trump and the Republican Party is terrified to hold a by-election for Elise Stefanik’s seat right now? if wipeouts are on the cards sounds like a perfect time to do it?…they aren’t…it’s why they’ve pulled her nomination to the U.N. and asked her to sit tight in Congress to shore up the tiny majority there.

 

He's already raided the House for a number of candidates, so yeah, the majority is razor thin.

Why on earth would he want to endanger the majority?  Very smart move.

 

Like I said - the Democratic party is in total destruction mode. You can't find dumber leadership than a party continues to double down on woke BS - which is an 70/30 issue for the country.

Independents want nothing to do with the loon party gone crazy.

[Spekulatius]

6 hours ago, 73 Reds said:

Respectfully (again), your lifetime master's in counseling may have missed the mark.  In any event, I look at, and vote for policies, not people/tenants.  Few would argue we had poor choices last POTUS election and several prior to that.  Nonetheless, policy, direction, and moral values are what withstand elections and those are what matter most.  

This debatable a view. if you agree with the policies of a person but that person has a personality that you think is unsuited for public office at the same time, than it is dangerous to vote for this person.

 

 

 

 

 

[73 Reds]

13 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

This debatable a view. if you agree with the policies of a person but that person has a personality that you think is unsuited for public office at the same time, than it is dangerous to vote for this person.

 

 

 

 

 

Debatable, yes, but danger is all relative.  How dangerous is it to vote for policies you believe are unsuitable?  Personally the last election was easy for me from a policy standpoint.  And as an aside I don't usually care about congressional hearings because they are typically more grandstanding than anything useful.  However, I have always found Supreme Court nomination hearings utterly fascinating.  The democratic candidate's performance at Justice Kavanaugh's judicial hearing was one of the most embarrassing, offensive displays by a public official I have ever seen.  I would call it, and her "dangerous" and thank the Democrats for hiding Biden's mental deficiencies until it was too late for him to be replaced.

Edited March 29, 2025 by 73 Reds
words

[LC]

1 hour ago, Spekulatius said:

This debatable a view. if you agree with the policies of a person but that person has a personality that you think is unsuited for public office at the same time, than it is dangerous to vote for this person.

 

 

It goes beyond that. Bad people cloud themselves in "policies" and "issues". The catholic church tried it about homosexuality: "its the sin, not the sinner". And they fool people. And before you know it, it's too late. 

 

Reminds me of this bar story:
 

Quote

 

While he was enjoying an after work beer he noticed the bartender booting out a seemingly quiet patron. This patron was wearing a jacket covered in Nazi symbolism.

When Tager asked about why he booted the guy, the bartender, a seasoned pro, said that if you let one Nazi in, slowly they replace the clientele.

“You have to nip it in the bud immediately,” he said, as Trager paraphrased. “These guys come in and it's always a nice, polite one. And you serve them because you don't want to cause a scene. And then they become a regular and after a while, they bring a friend. And that dude is cool too.”

“And then THEY bring friends and the friends bring friends and they stop being cool and then you realize, oh *****, this is a Nazi bar now,” he continued. ”And it's too late because they're entrenched and if you try to kick them out, they cause a PROBLEM. So you have to shut them down.”

 

 

 

 

[Milu]

Big turnout here today at the Tesla protest in Ireland. 
 

“But there was little sign of any disturbance in Sandyford on Saturday as two uniformed Garda officers sitting in patrol car down the street from the Tesla showroom, and a further two officers in an unmarked car at the other end of the street, almost outnumbered the protesters.”

 

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2025/03/29/just-six-people-turn-up-for-tesla-protest-in-dublin/

 

 

 

 

[LC]

8 hours ago, Spooky said:

The key issue in my mind is really the US' imbalances vis a vis China. Since a) Chinese citizens do not have robust employment laws / rights, unions, etc. and b) the Chinese government massively subsidizes certain key industries, it is nearly impossible for the US to compete directly in those industries

 

Instead of letting China win the "no human rights, all cheap labor" game, it seems this US administration would rather torpedo the wealth and quality of life of its own citizens, to gain level footing. All to compete over who can make the best $3 bbq tongs.

Sorry - $3.50 bbq "trump tongs"

Edited March 29, 2025 by LC

[John Hjorth]

28 minutes ago, Milu said:

Big turnout here today at the Tesla protest in Ireland. 
 

“But there was little sign of any disturbance in Sandyford on Saturday as two uniformed Garda officers sitting in patrol car down the street from the Tesla showroom, and a further two officers in an unmarked car at the other end of the street, almost outnumbered the protesters.”

 

https://www.irishtimes.com/ireland/2025/03/29/just-six-people-turn-up-for-tesla-protest-in-dublin/

 

, @Milu,

 

It's almost killing me!  - The masses of six persons on a tear, creating a rebellion.

 

Work by reporting person Tom O'Brien for The Irish Times however seems incomplete.

 

I mean : From the two photos included in the piece it seems like the weather actually was good under the session.

I mean : What did the weather forecast say for the day? - Perhaps Ireland is like Denmark : 'A revolution is never going to happen on a rainy day.'

Edited March 29, 2025 by John Hjorth

[Milu]

12 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

, @Milu,

 

It's almost killing me!  - The masses of six persons on a tear, creating a rebellion.

 

Work by reporting person Tom O'Brien for The Irish Times however seems incomplete.

 

I mean : From the two photos included in the piece it seems like the weather actually was good under the session.

I mean : What did the weather forecast say for the day? - Perhaps Ireland is like Denmark : 'A revolution is never going to happen on a rainy day.'

I think the first photo is from a protest in London where it looks sunny. Then the second photo of the smiling lady on her bike is from Dublin.

[DooDiligence]

All he has to do is continue the present course and the dollar will devalue on its own. Toss in a US bankruptcy filing to speed things up.

[TwoCitiesCapital]

1 hour ago, John Hjorth said:

 

, @Milu,

 

It's almost killing me!  - The masses of six persons on a tear, creating a rebellion.

 

Work by reporting person Tom O'Brien for The Irish Times however seems incomplete.

 

I mean : From the two photos included in the piece it seems like the weather actually was good under the session.

I mean : What did the weather forecast say for the day? - Perhaps Ireland is like Denmark : 'A revolution is never going to happen on a rainy day.'

 

I think the primary protest has been 1) not buying Teslas and 2) defacing of Teslas on the streets. 

 

Nobody is gonna march about this - they're just gonna starve Tesla of revenue and give others with less conviction reasons to shop elsewhere 

[Spekulatius]

8 hours ago, SharperDingaan said:

The reality is that when a Canada (any exporter) sells a tariffed good/service into the US, CANADA (any exporter) has the incentive to devalue its currency relative to USD; even more so when the big product export categories are primarily priced in USD, and the production costs are in CAD (Oil, Electricity, Potash, etc.). Little that the US can actually do about it, other than the usual threat and bluster.

 

To devalue a reserve currency, it has to be made less attractive versus other reserve alternatives. The obvious solution is a restructuring of US debt, and extensive use of zero-coupon debt. The obvious alternative is USD debt backed by a BTC standard at 20:1 plus. The obvious negotiation 'spin' is to demand global compliance ... or we do it ourselves, 'cause you made us! Sound familiar?     

 

Every 100,000 BTC priced at a peg of 'X' (250K for example purposes), backing 25 Billion of debt. Once the deed is done, BTC rapidly moves past 250K which becomes the floor price. There is a reason for the chatter around stable coin, the 'crypto' summits, and why Orange Boy wants the US to be the king of crypto. 

 

Same as every other magician ... it's all about bluff and distraction. Have to think that the US is having trouble financing its debt rollovers; hence the scramble for cash, and pressing need to change the terms of trade .... while it still can.

 

Opportunity 

 

SD

 

 

The easiest way to devalue a reserve currency to make it not a reserve currency any more, by making it unattractive for foreigners to hold it. This will balance the trade balance..

[TwoCitiesCapital]

On 3/17/2025 at 4:49 PM, LC said:

More like if the girl you're dating suddenly develops a drug addiction, begins sleeping with her dealer, steals your stuff to buy more drugs, etc. etc....so you cut off contact and start dating a normal human being.

 

+1 

 

This isn't exactly an irrational reaction or Napoleon syndrome. This was a good relationship under basically every prior administration and is becoming a bad one under Trump for no other reason than that he's a bully. 

 

On 3/17/2025 at 8:03 PM, Ulti said:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/fact-sheets/2025/02/fact-sheet-president-donald-j-trump-imposes-tariffs-on-imports-from-canada-mexico-and-china/

 

I’m a little confused ; I thought that the tariffs were done because of illegal immigration’ and fentanyl.

 

You're approaching this as if Republican have a consistent platform that they stand for and believe in anymore. The ONLY platform is BEAT. THE. OTHER. GUY. 

 

Is why as a slightly right-of-center independent that I haven't been able to support the party since Trump's first run - was clear all principles had been abandoned. 

 

Pending the conversation, the 'other guy' evolves from Democrats, to China, to 'unfair' trade agreements (previous negotiated by Trump), to drugs, to illegals immigrants stealing their jobs, etc. They pick a boogeyman and that is the 'other guy'. 

 

 There is no consistency- just 'beat the other guy' by an means necessary. Even if that means abandoning everything you previously stood while lying about it it everything. 

 

Is why the party of balanced budgets can stand behind the largest non-recessionary deficits of all time.

 

Is why the party of family values can support the individual who has three failed marriages and steps out of his marriage to bang porn stars.

 

Is why the party of 'tough on crime' can elect a criminal. 

 

Is why party of 'good for business ' elected a man whose primary 'good business' was lying about being good at business (ghost written books and The Apprentice). 

 

Is why the party of the 'religious right'  can overlook the commandments of love your neighbor and how Jesus treated the poor to cut services for the poor while transferring payments to billionaires. 

 

There's no rationale behind it - just a party that has lost its way and supporters who aren't self-aware enough to realize they've done a 180⁰ on everything they claimed to be believe. 

 

 

[gfp]

Did this podcast already get passed around here?  This is long, maybe skip ahead to the actual interview.  But a good interview

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gStOMoLx-SQ

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2025 by gfp

[Spekulatius]

If we balance both the budget and the trade deficit, the standard of living for most people will go down, there is almost no question about it. Think about this - Both deficits mean that we can consume more than we can produce right now. It doesn’t even matter how you balance be ot  tariffs, tax consumption l tax income etc. They mean that goods will get more expensive and the average person will have to consume less.

 

Even if we manage to move manufacturing back to the US, it does not mean that the GDP will grow. It will just move some jobs from the service to the manufacturing sector for little gain in wages. I mentioned  before that the good paying manufacturing jobs really don’t exist any more. The entry level jobs in manufacturing pay about as well as service sector jobs. The only one paying better are where the unions have power (think longshoremen ). Most jobs moved to the US due to tariffs will be lower productivity jobs, otherwise they would exist already without tariffs (for the most part) 

 

It is fine if you phrase it like this and say - we have been living above our means and need to tighten our belts and  that’s just how it is. Instead Bessent talks about taking a bit of pains here but he doesn’t say pain is likely permanent.

 

The only way out of this dilemma here is a massive productivity boom, because that is what is creating wealth. Not tariffs ,  bringing manufacturing home (at higher cost= lower productivity). Deregulation could help here, new technologies  like AI potentially, new drugs like the GLP-1 (game changer for many people) or in the long run building run just build human capital (education and qualifications). The rest is just noise.

[DooDiligence]

5 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

The only way out of this dilemma here is a massive productivity boom, because that is what is creating wealth. Not tariffs ,  bringing manufacturing home (at higher cost= lower productivity). Deregulation could help here, new technologies  like AI potentially, new drugs like the GLP-1 (game changer for many people) or in the long run building run just build human capital (education and qualifications). The rest is just noise.

 

Cheeto seems intent on creating the opposite.

[Gregmal]

So the roundabout thing everyone is insinuating but no one wants to openly admit because orange man bad, is that the system is currently built on unsustainable underpinnings and that pretty much any solution in terms of fixing it causes the whole thing to collapse? Yea…