Trump

[AquaMan]

This is now officially a discussion of politics, not the original post about financial lunacy, stock market manipulation etc. you referenced. See, when you are an avowed republican apologist you simply cannot fathom any other choice even when that choice is better. Then everything revolves around supporting that illogical action.

[erfalf]

Running an analysis that Trump is going to run up the debt another five trillion while pushing us into recession might push a lot of people to donate to Clinton.

Now you get it.

Ratings agencies rarely analyse reality. Or at least the last 10 years they haven't.

[swake]

Now you get it.

Ratings agencies rarely analyse reality. Or at least the last 10 years they haven't.

It more seems you don't believe any expert that disagrees with your world view, which when it comes to Trump is just about all of them.

Reality distortion field.

[heironymouspasparagus]

How does one have to do with the other?

It's kind of self-explanatory....

[heironymouspasparagus]

This is how I can justify voting against Hillary Clinton. It's not Clinton or Trump that scare me the most, it is the people they will pick and choose to do their bidding.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-09-30/furious-rick-santelli-rages-janets-jawboning-please-dont-help-anymore

If this doesn't alarm any of you, well, I don't know what that says about you or me I guess.



"She's wrong on policy, but she's a darn good, decent, wonderful person." Richard W. Fisher, Pres of Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.

Her recent actions seem to have confirmed Mr. Fisher's opinion.

So, do you vote for the "good person" or the right policy?

In this case both.  Because you can.   Good person who has the right policy.

All that Santellini noise might make some sense IF - and it is the biggest IF in the financial/economic world - there was a balance to the situation.  We chose to elect people starting in 1981 that turned the fox loose in the chicken coop across an extremely WIDE array of areas.   We elected people to disassemble a huge amount (most?) of the protections that had been in the system to prevent the kind of catastrophic meltdown the the Herbert Hoover school of thought gave us.  And the entire history of our country before that, where we went through depression after depression every very few years. 

It one stands back and looks at the overall situation, you seem to be advocating a hard landing back in 2008 that would have  brought about another worldwide depression on the order of 1929.  That is a stupid approach to take when a little bit of distasteful government meddling can steer us away from that.  Easy call.

[AquaMan]

que Don on Monday Night Football,  "The party's over...."

Little D's tax returns were just leaked to the NYT. He (likely)hasn't paid taxes in twenty years. Freeloading 47%er. I'll leave the details to others, but he is not denying them. Politicians under use the tax code because they know its pr suicide to not pay any taxes at all. Even Romney paid taxes. Clinton's and Obama's sure did. But even though D had been anticipating a run in politics for years, he greedily continued to pay ZERO taxes. Gag on it republicans and those who just can't bring themselves to vote for a more qualified candidate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html?_r=0

edit: I read the article and there were some presumptions. He lost 961,000,000 from casino's. large enough he likely carried that loss forward to offset income for twenty years.

[erfalf]

In this case both.  Because you can.   Good person who has the right policy.

All that Santellini noise might make some sense IF - and it is the biggest IF in the financial/economic world - there was a balance to the situation.  We chose to elect people starting in 1981 that turned the fox loose in the chicken coop across an extremely WIDE array of areas.   We elected people to disassemble a huge amount (most?) of the protections that had been in the system to prevent the kind of catastrophic meltdown the the Herbert Hoover school of thought gave us.  And the entire history of our country before that, where we went through depression after depression every very few years. 

It one stands back and looks at the overall situation, you seem to be advocating a hard landing back in 2008 that would have  brought about another worldwide depression on the order of 1929.  That is a stupid approach to take when a little bit of distasteful government meddling can steer us away from that.  Easy call.

I really get what you are saying, but that thud that you think I may be for will only be bigger the next time, because we keep adjusting the safety net to allow for wilder and more erratic behavior. I honestly think a bigger thud was necessary. I also think hundreds if not thousands of people should have been in prison for double dealing and screwing their customers over. In the housing crisis, the banks more or less were protected on several fronts. They sold the crap to their investors, then shorted it, and then the government backed them for the rest of it. The mortgages themselves didn't get a bailout. The owners of the Mortgage backed securities didn't either. Only the morons that were holding CDO's worth billions that had to pay because those mortgages, and therefore mortgage securities became worth nothing. The changes I'm saying may happen with stock purchases ability just go to exacerbate the problem even further and in the end screw you and I even more. Plus it completely wrecks the whole notion of price discovery in an open market. Is it worth it? Do you disagree with my outlook?

Look there was bad behavior all around, but just as we hold politicians to a higher standard (let the jokes begin), I hold professional bankers to a bit of a higher standard as well. Goldman, who you and I both know is all kinds of tied up with Washington, came out of 2008 scot free.

And it will happen again, CDO's are being sold again. Banks are being risky again, and they will never stopped double dealing if it serves their interest. Look at the market run up s

And honestly, I have never advocated for any of Trump's position. It is just so much easier to critique Clinton as she is (less) of a moving target. Her positions change but not near as rapidly. I still don't take Trump seriously. I do think there would be some differences to a Trump candidacy, particular in the staffing of his administrations, judges, etc.

Part of me knows we are too far down the rabbit hole. But the other part hopes that there are enough people who care. DJI is up 65% over the last five years, and on what? Do you really see the lives of John & Jane Taxpayer improving by that margin?

[erfalf]

que Don on Monday Night Football,  "The party's over...."

Little D's tax returns were just leaked to the NYT. He (likely)hasn't paid taxes in twenty years. Freeloading 47%er. I'll leave the details to others, but he is not denying them. Politicians under use the tax code because they know its pr suicide to not pay any taxes at all. Even Romney paid taxes. Clinton's and Obama's sure did. But even though D had been anticipating a run in politics for years, he greedily continued to pay ZERO taxes. Gag on it republicans and those who just can't bring themselves to vote for a more qualified candidate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/02/us/politics/donald-trump-taxes.html?_r=0

edit: I read the article and there were some presumptions. He lost 961,000,000 from casino's. large enough he likely carried that loss forward to offset income for twenty years.

The first part of your post (before the edit) will be how it is reported. But as you know upon inspection there is really absolutely nothing of interest in them. He hasn't been bashful about how he avoids paying taxes. He seems to have done it within the bounds of the law. I don't think this surprises anyone, and likely disappoints the hell out of the "birthers of the returners". I agree the net loss carry forward thing seems really crappy, and the times makes it out to be something that it's a "rich person loophole" of sorts, but why don't you ask the proprietor that lost it all, and then would have had to pay income taxes next April when he is still trying to put it all back together. It is there for a reason, and generally speaking a pretty good one. You pay taxes on income, why should losses not get the same treatment?

Who here pays extra on their return? cause I sure as hell don't. And pretty much every person I know brags about paying as little as humanly possible.

Please don't construe any of what I just said as an endorsement to Trump's incredible values/business acumen/whatever else pops in your head that I never actually said.

[erfalf]

It more seems you don't believe any expert that disagrees with your world view, which when it comes to Trump is just about all of them.

Reality distortion field.

I know experts are never EVER wrong. Except when they are and the "little people" get hurt.

The company has no cred. They rated junk bonds as AAA for years, with warnings. They never read anything. They got paid. And never went to prison for fraud too by the way.

This guy in particularly is saying Clinton's plan will be a good thing for the economy based on Immigration and Minimum Wage? Is he using the same formula's that created the hockey stick global warming chart?

[AquaMan]

The first part of your post (before the edit) will be how it is reported. But as you know upon inspection there is really absolutely nothing of interest in them. He hasn't been bashful about how he avoids paying taxes. He seems to have done it within the bounds of the law. I don't think this surprises anyone, and likely disappoints the hell out of the "birthers of the returners". I agree the net loss carry forward thing seems really crappy, and the times makes it out to be something that it's a "rich person loophole" of sorts, but why don't you ask the proprietor that lost it all, and then would have had to pay income taxes next April when he is still trying to put it all back together. It is there for a reason, and generally speaking a pretty good one. You pay taxes on income, why should losses not get the same treatment?

Who here pays extra on their return? cause I sure as hell don't. And pretty much every person I know brags about paying as little as humanly possible.

Please don't construe any of what I just said as an endorsement to Trump's incredible values/business acumen/whatever else pops in your head that I never actually said.

He doesn't deserve your gymnastic rationalizing. I have used the tax provision myself. It is not a loophole, its there for a reason. However, I wasn't required to and neither was he. I also could have sued the city and county of Tulsa but I didn't because it would have other ramifications. So yes, people do pass on opportunities, they do pass on using any and all tax provisions, especially when running for political office.

It will be of great interest to those who surmise he never paid taxes and now is too cowardly to admit that his tremendous mismanagement of others money allowed him to do so. His only goal in life is wealth growth and he does it not so much by increasing value as he does it by taking from others. The taxes will show that. So, even though he knew the potential down side his undisciplined, greedy personality just couldn't resist reaching in to the cookie jar.

It also puts in to question why, if it is now common knowledge and he broke no laws, he doesn't release the other years. There are undoubtedly charities he supposedly contributed to who would like to see them. So, yes, it is of great interest.

[patric]

This was so good:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nQGBZQrtT0

How many of you old folks got the nod to Gene Wilder at the beginning?

[AquaMan]

That was hilarious. I didn't see the Gene Wilder nod. They were good at their impressions. My favorite, "I'm going to be president!"

[Conan71]

Oh come on.  How about Angela Merkel?  That one popped up right away for me.  And I'm not even in government.

She was the first that came to mind after a bit of mind searching, but I can't even say I respect her necessarily.  Perhaps Johnson doesn't find her as hot as you do.  She's got that Mrs. Doubtfire thing going for her that just doesn't do it for me 

I trust that most any candidate is going to strive not to make the same mistakes Bush II did in terms of foreign policy and even if the next President's foreign policy is seen as being as tepid as Obama's, overall, Obama's FP doesn't seem to have anyone outraged other than proposing to allow un-vetted Middle Eastern refugees settle in the US or the decision to send briefcase loads of cash repatriate money to Iran during the time a very unpopular nuke deal was signed with them.

Fiscally, Johnson is making a lot of sense.  He and Weld have done a very good job as governors which is some good real world experience for leading government.  Aside from world issues, we have a lot of housekeeping state-side for which I think Johnson has great answers.

Am I concerned about foreign policy?  Certainly.  We have one candidate who appears to have a pay to play issue from her days as SOS, and the other is so impulsive with his temper nad mouth, it scares the living Hell out of me.  Johnson freezing under the lights now that he is finally getting attention is nothing new for someone finally being considered at least some sort of a factor in the race.

The media crucifying someone for the most minor of infractions is getting really old and stale for me. They want to make him out to be a crazy out-lier.  Believe that if you like, but the guy is making a lot of sense to me.

[heironymouspasparagus]

I really get what you are saying, but that thud that you think I may be for will only be bigger the next time, because we keep adjusting the safety net to allow for wilder and more erratic behavior. I honestly think a bigger thud was necessary. I also think hundreds if not thousands of people should have been in prison for double dealing and screwing their customers over. In the housing crisis, the banks more or less were protected on several fronts. They sold the crap to their investors, then shorted it, and then the government backed them for the rest of it. The mortgages themselves didn't get a bailout. The owners of the Mortgage backed securities didn't either. Only the morons that were holding CDO's worth billions that had to pay because those mortgages, and therefore mortgage securities became worth nothing. The changes I'm saying may happen with stock purchases ability just go to exacerbate the problem even further and in the end screw you and I even more. Plus it completely wrecks the whole notion of price discovery in an open market. Is it worth it? Do you disagree with my outlook?

Look there was bad behavior all around, but just as we hold politicians to a higher standard (let the jokes begin), I hold professional bankers to a bit of a higher standard as well. Goldman, who you and I both know is all kinds of tied up with Washington, came out of 2008 scot free.

And it will happen again, CDO's are being sold again. Banks are being risky again, and they will never stopped double dealing if it serves their interest. Look at the market run up s

And honestly, I have never advocated for any of Trump's position. It is just so much easier to critique Clinton as she is (less) of a moving target. Her positions change but not near as rapidly. I still don't take Trump seriously. I do think there would be some differences to a Trump candidacy, particular in the staffing of his administrations, judges, etc.

Part of me knows we are too far down the rabbit hole. But the other part hopes that there are enough people who care. DJI is up 65% over the last five years, and on what? Do you really see the lives of John & Jane Taxpayer improving by that margin?

And that gets to the whole gist of the problem.  The controls that had been in place that gave us many decades of truly increased stability have been removed - the part that lets this particular clown show continue unabated!!  And no big banker ever had consequences.  No CEO who bankrupted a company ever had consequences - unless you count tens of millions of dollars in golden parachute a 'consequence'.  As we now see Trump has been doing.


As for Trumps positions changing - he has been consistent every step of the way.  It is the 'spin masters' who are trying to paint him as something other than he is.  He makes noise all over the map, but consistently and predictably engages in the same type of activity decade after decade.  Racist, bigoted activities to keep non-whites out of his real estate holding.  He and Daddy did this for the 60's, 70's, and 80's.  Was taken to court over it where he cut a deal.

He has cheated people out of their money time after time in each of his "business" bankruptcies.  It was investor money lost that he benefited from.

He has cheated thousands of working people out of money due them and brags about it in the debate!  "Maybe I didn't like their work..."   That is stealing.  By definition.

He has called our POW's cowards through his BS sessions about John McCain.   I don't agree, obviously, but then I have a friend who was one of those POW's and I have heard stories.  Trump is the coward through his draft-dodging in the VietNam era.

He ridicules handicapped people - one of the most disgusting, low-life, scum-sucking, boil-biting, disgusting, despicable, deplorable things a human being can do.  Just my opinion...  Can hardly wait to see his impression of an autistic person!   Or someone with Down's Syndrome...yeah, that's the ticket...I bet he could go nail it - he did such a great job on arthrogryposis!!   And yeah, I wish there were a way to emphasize disgust, scorn, and sarcasm in text so the true depth of feeling could come through!

What is most distressing is the apologists who dismiss Trump's 'stuff' as no bid deal.  Had a conversation with a guy last week and went through the entire list.  His reply, every step of the way was literally, "Well, yeah, I don't really agree with that..."     Do these people not hear themselves??




If one feels that Trump is some kind of business genius for gaming the system, they have lost ALL right to comment on someone who has  gotten welfare as "gaming the system".

[erfalf]

And that gets to the whole gist of the problem.  The controls that had been in place that gave us many decades of truly increased stability have been removed - the part that lets this particular clown show continue unabated!!  And no big banker ever had consequences.  No CEO who bankrupted a company ever had consequences - unless you count tens of millions of dollars in golden parachute a 'consequence'.  As we now see Trump has been doing.


As for Trumps positions changing - he has been consistent every step of the way.  It is the 'spin masters' who are trying to paint him as something other than he is.  He makes noise all over the map, but consistently and predictably engages in the same type of activity decade after decade.  Racist, bigoted activities to keep non-whites out of his real estate holding.  He and Daddy did this for the 60's, 70's, and 80's.  Was taken to court over it where he cut a deal.

He has cheated people out of their money time after time in each of his "business" bankruptcies.  It was investor money lost that he benefited from.

He has cheated thousands of working people out of money due them and brags about it in the debate!  "Maybe I didn't like their work..."   That is stealing.  By definition.

He has called our POW's cowards through his BS sessions about John McCain.   I don't agree, obviously, but then I have a friend who was one of those POW's and I have heard stories.  Trump is the coward through his draft-dodging in the VietNam era.

He ridicules handicapped people - one of the most disgusting, low-life, scum-sucking, boil-biting, disgusting, despicable, deplorable things a human being can do.  Just my opinion...  Can hardly wait to see his impression of an autistic person!   Or someone with Down's Syndrome...yeah, that's the ticket...I bet he could go nail it - he did such a great job on arthrogryposis!!   And yeah, I wish there were a way to emphasize disgust, scorn, and sarcasm in text so the true depth of feeling could come through!

What is most distressing is the apologists who dismiss Trump's 'stuff' as no bid deal.  Had a conversation with a guy last week and went through the entire list.  His reply, every step of the way was literally, "Well, yeah, I don't really agree with that..."     Do these people not hear themselves??




If one feels that Trump is some kind of business genius for gaming the system, they have lost ALL right to comment on someone who has  gotten welfare as "gaming the system".

Any thoughts on the other 95% of what I wrote?

I get it... Trump sucks...