Political Posts

[dealraker]

2 hours ago, Sweet said:

 

Well, I am a scientist of 20 years... so it's OK that you disagree.

You are a Trumper thus being a "scientist" is meaningless.  

[dealraker]

1 hour ago, 73 Reds said:

The Federal Reserve, for whatever it is worth which is debatable, should remain independent and free of political influence - period.

The hosts and commentators disagree.  I was simply amused that their view was 100% based on Mr. Market.

[Sweet]

51 minutes ago, dealraker said:

You are a Trumper thus being a "scientist" is meaningless.  

Not true.  It’s sad what happened to you and others on this board.

[cubsfan]

Just now, Sweet said:

Not true.  It’s sad what happened to you and others on this board.

 

What's sad is there really are very few Trumpers on this board. More like a few that actually agree with SOME of his policies - but dislike his personality or methods.

 

I've worked for enough asshole bosses to know it's their strategic thinking and results that really matter, not whether I want to have dinner with them every night.

[Gregmal]

49 minutes ago, dealraker said:

The hosts and commentators disagree.  I was simply amused that their view was 100% based on Mr. Market.

This is just unfortunately how it is, 1000000x over and it’s never gonna change. I used to get a smidge involved in more direct corporate activism. Even at times with names I’ve owned and discussed, when “stock green” no one, and I mean no one, feels any need to address things that are debatable even if addressing them has tremendous value. It’s always when things turn that we want to ask the “why didn’t we do xyz back when we could’ve” type yearnings pop up. 
 

In sports they say winning is the best deodorant. In the stock market, fluctuations in the upward direction are like perfume on a porn star after a few drinks. The participant is all too happy to accept that they’re content with a distorted reality, and impaired vantage point, cuz…well, look! It’s all good.

[Spooky]

1 hour ago, cubsfan said:

 

https://wolfstreet.com/2026/01/09/job-growth-in-the-private-sector-massive-job-losses-at-federal-state-governments-in-h2-2025/

 

You can make statistics lie anyway you like.

 

It's extremely gratifying to see those useless government jobs take the bulk of the hit - which has always been part of the plan:

 

Job Growth in the Private-Sector, Massive Job Losses at Federal & State Governments in H2 2025

by Wolf Richter • Jan 9, 2026 • 62 Comments

The Fed should look at private-sector employment. Layoffs at the government are a political decision, not the result of economic weakness.

Still doesn’t bode well for the economy in the near term. Those federal employees spend money in the real economy. 
 

 

[flesh]

6 minutes ago, Spooky said:

Still doesn’t bode well for the economy in the near term. Those federal employees spend money in the real economy. 
 

 

In the link you can see the massive ramp up in fed employees under Biden, clearly they can't all be necessary. Of course this ramp up made his job numbers look good. If spending is what you need, don't hire fed employees, lower taxes with the equivalent money, this allocation will compound at higher rates. 

 

In the near term, taxes have been lowered. Although I wouldn't have done that myself, but would've fired more fed employees. We're in a serious hole. 

 

In general, you guys are really mean to each other. I like to imagine I'm sitting next to a smart guy, as most of you are, having a conversation. If you wouldn't sit next to him, why post to him. If fighting words would end in a fight, maybe you wouldn't use them. 

[cubsfan]

12 minutes ago, Spooky said:

Still doesn’t bode well for the economy in the near term. Those federal employees spend money in the real economy. 

 

OF course you are correct. Not being American, you fail to understand how pissed off the average working American is at the Federal Government.

Before the Presidential election, the disapproval of government was at 70%. It grew larger with the DOGE activities that uncovered stunning waste, corruption, and abuse.  Then of course, the Dems and lazy Republicans forced DOGE out - and all we see now is the largest welfare fraud in the country's history.  Americans are furious at being ripped off.

 

And, yes, it will be a long hard road for Trump to reverse this - in the short term - there will obviously be pain - but it's pain dished out to corrupt individuals and organizations that are looting the US Treasury and useless government bureaucrats.

 

It's definitely a winning issue and one that helped Trump win the election.

[73 Reds]

1 hour ago, changegonnacome said:

 

Well for the vast majority of credit card users its an excellent option which allows them in a cash flow pinch to access 45 day interest free credit, beyond 45 days your paying high rates but the 'loan' is fully pre-payable at anytime.........now a small portion of those same group of people turn out to be credit alcoholics that get into payment/cash flow trouble such that they end up in bankruptcy and unable to access credit....you might not like it but its a darwinian process that weeds them out and correctly excludes them from accessing credit again (recidivism is one of the great heuristics in life).....given you dont know ex-ante who those credit alcoholics are you need to charge high headline rates to compensate for future losses.

 

That credit degens end up getting burned by CC's (but even then they've got the bankruptcy route) is kind of like saying we should close all the bars because 2% of the population can't handle alcohol...what about the 98% who can and enjoy it???!?!?!?!??!...credit cards are the same deal.....I thought the GOP was about keeping the nanny state out of people's lives.....the credit card system works great for the vast majority of its customers, it works great for retailers and economy and you want to torch it to protect what 2-3% of the credit card customer pool who are morons. Yeah thats not how things should work.

 

 

 

 

For me this has entirely nothing to do with politics.  The issue is not responsible CC users.  The issue is those who are most vulnerable for many reasons and who under no circumstances can afford 20%+ interest rates wind up on the short end.  Its that simple.  If CC companies provided a secured credit line to those with little credit, no credit or bad credit guess what - the write off rate would be -0-.  

[Spooky]

31 minutes ago, cubsfan said:

 

OF course you are correct. Not being American, you fail to understand how pissed off the average working American is at the Federal Government.

Before the Presidential election, the disapproval of government was at 70%. It grew larger with the DOGE activities that uncovered stunning waste, corruption, and abuse.  Then of course, the Dems and lazy Republicans forced DOGE out - and all we see now is the largest welfare fraud in the country's history.  Americans are furious at being ripped off.

 

And, yes, it will be a long hard road for Trump to reverse this - in the short term - there will obviously be pain - but it's pain dished out to corrupt individuals and organizations that are looting the US Treasury and useless government bureaucrats.

 

It's definitely a winning issue and one that helped Trump win the election.

 

I wasn't making a political statement, just an observation. Seems like your views on the economy are tinted by your political affiliation. It is the same story on tariffs, they aren't having a beneficial impact on the economy - just less bad than was feared. Best thing that could happen for the economy would be for the Supreme Court to overturn the tariffs.

[Spooky]

11 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

For me this has entirely nothing to do with politics.  The issue is not responsible CC users.  The issue is those who are most vulnerable for many reasons and who under no circumstances can afford 20%+ interest rates wind up on the short end.  Its that simple.  If CC companies provided a secured credit line to those with little credit, no credit or bad credit guess what - the write off rate would be -0-.  

 

I'm with Reds from a moral perspective - it is not right to trap people with credit card debt that they can never dig themselves out of that is compounding at a rate of 20%.

[73 Reds]

1 minute ago, Spooky said:

 

I wasn't making a political statement, just an observation. Seems like your views on the economy are tinted by your political affiliation. It is the same story on tariffs, they aren't having a beneficial impact on the economy - just less bad than was feared. Best thing that could happen for the economy would be for the Supreme Court to overturn the tariffs.

@Spooky the role of tariffs was the carrot and stick.  

[dwy000]

13 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

For me this has entirely nothing to do with politics.  The issue is not responsible CC users.  The issue is those who are most vulnerable for many reasons and who under no circumstances can afford 20%+ interest rates wind up on the short end.  Its that simple.  If CC companies provided a secured credit line to those with little credit, no credit or bad credit guess what - the write off rate would be -0-.  

What youre saying is that the most vulnerable (however you want to define that) should not be offered credit, or only secured credit (secured by what if they are that vulnerqble?)

[Spooky]

1 minute ago, 73 Reds said:

@Spooky the role of tariffs was the carrot and stick.  

 

Doesn't seem to have worked other than to piss off all the US's trading partners.

[73 Reds]

Just now, Spooky said:

 

Doesn't seem to have worked other than to piss off all the US's trading partners.

I think that was a known ahead of time and the jury is still out on how effective the ploy turns out.  Years from now no one will care whether someone's feelings got hurt.

[Spooky]

Just now, 73 Reds said:

I think that was a known ahead of time and the jury is still out on how effective the ploy turns out.  Years from now no one will care whether someone's feelings got hurt.

 

Canada is taking real actions now to diversify its export markets from the US. Carney is headed to Beijing on his way to Davos.

[dwy000]

1 minute ago, Spooky said:

 

Canada is taking real actions now to diversify its export markets from the US. Carney is headed to Beijing on his way to Davos.

Europe just signed a free trade agreement with the 3 largest south American economies.  

[changegonnacome]

5 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

The issue is those who are most vulnerable for many reasons and who under no circumstances can afford 20%+ interest rates wind up on the short end.  Its that simple.

 

The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many?

 

Very woke, bleeding heart liberal of you...know you said this isnt political and totally get you on this is specific issue your basically just like I find this distasteful or whatever. Fair enough.

 

Given that you might spare a thought then for the libtards out there who think like this all the time on various issues......these 'woke' agendas can all be seen in the context of the needs of the few outweighing the many. Its just amusing to see Trump pivot to a behavior that mimics so much of the wokeness he sought to destroy.

[dwy000]

1 minute ago, changegonnacome said:

 

The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many?

 

Very woke, bleeding heart liberal of you...know you said this isnt political and totally get you on this is specific issue your basically just like I find this distasteful or whatever. Fair enough.

 

Given that you might spare a thought then for the libtards out there who think like this all the time on various issues......these 'woke' agendas can all be seen in the context of the needs of the few outweighing the many. Its just amusing to see Trump pivot to a behavior that mimics so much of the wokeness he sought to destroy.

Except he also removed caps on overdraft charges which harm the exact same people most affected by high credit card rates.  Go figure. 

[73 Reds]

4 minutes ago, Spooky said:

 

Canada is taking real actions now to diversify its export markets from the US. Carney is headed to Beijing on his way to Davos.

OK, if they truly believe Beijing is a superior trading partner we vastly overestimated them.

[Spooky]

3 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

Europe just signed a free trade agreement with the 3 largest south American economies.  

 

Probably the biggest mistake Obama made was pulling out of the Trans Pacific Partnership.

[73 Reds]

3 minutes ago, changegonnacome said:

 

The needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many?

 

Very woke, bleeding heart liberal of you...know you said this isnt political and totally get you on this is specific issue your basically just like I find this distasteful or whatever. Fair enough.

 

Given that you might spare a thought then for the libtards out there who think like this all the time on various issues......these 'woke' agendas can all be seen in the context of the needs of the few outweighing the many. Its just amusing to see Trump pivot to a behavior that mimics so much of the wokeness he sought to destroy.

A few?  On the contrary its only a few (the vulnerable) who are affected - in a positive way.  Labels by you and others don't change the real issue.  Again, could care less how it is viewed politically or who it aligns with for any or no reason.

[73 Reds]

2 minutes ago, Spooky said:

 

Probably the biggest mistake Obama made was pulling out of the Trans Pacific Partnership.

Yeah but Canada still shares our border.  Rhetorically I asked a while back how Canadians would feel if the US ceased to exist.  Crickets for a response.

[dwy000]

Just now, 73 Reds said:

A few?  On the contrary its only a few (the vulnerable) who are affected - in a positive way.  Labels by you and others don't change the real issue.  Again, could care less how it is viewed politically or who it aligns with for any or no reason.

Over half of Americans carry credit card debt.

[Spooky]

2 minutes ago, 73 Reds said:

OK, if they truly believe Beijing is a superior trading partner we vastly overestimated them.

 

The US has shown itself to be an unreliable partner - Trump is still talking about walking away from NAFTA (I don't even know what its real name is any longer). These actions have long term consequences. Trump and the administration don't understand basic game theory - we are playing a series of repeat games. Not a one off game.