Stock Market Update (Where's Eduardo?)

[The Spin Meister]

At the same time tariffs went up Hoover/Congress also increased income taxes from 25% to over 60%. Really killed the consumer. Which killed retailers. Which killed producers.

And the economy was recovering by 1936 but FDR passed a lot of other taxes and restrictions that drove the economy back down.

Add this:


There’s no doubt that Roosevelt changed the character of the American government—for the worse. Many of the reforms of the 1930s remain embedded in policy today: acreage allotments, price supports and marketing controls in agriculture, extensive regulation of private securities, federal intrusion into union-management relations, government lending and insurance activities, the minimum wage, national unemployment insurance, Social Security and welfare payments, production and sale of electrical power by the federal government, fiat money—the list goes on.

Roosevelt’s revolution began with his inaugural address, which left no doubt about his intentions to seize the moment and harness it to his purposes. Best remembered for its patently false line that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” it also called for extraordinary emergency governmental powers…..

…..
Invoking the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, Roosevelt declared that “all banking transactions shall be suspended.” Banks were permitted to reopen only after case-by-case inspection and approval by the government, a procedure that dragged on for months. This action heightened the public’s sense of crisis and allowed him to ignore traditional restraints on the power of the central government.

In their understanding of the Depression, Roosevelt and his economic advisors had cause and effect reversed. They did not recognize that prices had fallen because of the Depression. They believed that the Depression prevailed because prices had fallen. The obvious remedy, then, was to raise prices, which they decided to do by creating artificial shortages. Hence arose a collection of crackpot policies designed to cure the Depression by cutting back on production. The scheme was so patently self-defeating that it’s hard to believe anyone seriously believed it would work

How FDR Made the Depression Worse: News Article – Independent Institute

Franklin Roosevelt “did bring us out of the Depression,” Newt Gingrich told a group of Republicans after the recent election, and that makes

www.independent.org

 

[PSUWrestlingFanSince2011]

Breaking: US President accepts bribe from foreign government in order to provide them with a sweetheart economic deal. Trumpettes like PSUWrestlingFanSince2011 scream "we love corruption and treason!"

I swear you guys make everything out to be negative. Not sure what makes you happy? I guess Biden who does nothing is your preference.

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

I swear you guys make everything out to be negative. Not sure what makes you happy? I guess Biden who does nothing is your preference.

Well, so far the outcome of his economic plans is that he gets a free plane and you get 2 dolls…

 

[PSUWrestlingFanSince2011]

Well, so far the outcome of his economic plans is that he gets a free plane and you get 2 dolls…

Deal after deal is being made right now. I prefer that.

 

[NewEra 2014]

Don't look now but Tesla stock is back to $342. It was just over a month ago that Tim Walz was boasting about how Tesla was at $225 and falling.

I don't know enough about Tesla but I struggle to buy a company trading at 196 x earnings. EV tax credits and mandates are going away and I don't think many Musk haters are going to be lining up to buy one. Investors must think Tesla is going to make a killing in AI/Robotics.

I bought TSLA about a year ago at $170 because of AI and robotics, as integrated into Tesla’s self-driving platform. The prospects of TSLA’s automobile business were not a huge factor for me.

My position in TSLA is about 1% of my portfolio. But there is a chance that TSLA becomes multiples more valuable than its current position. I suppose it is a high-risk position to take, but if you believe in the future of AI/robotics/self-driving tech, TSLA seems like the best option for innovation in those areas to me.

 

[junior1]

Well, so far the outcome of his economic plans is that he gets a free plane and you get 2 dolls…

no, no, no, now dolls for everybody! you get a doll, you get a doll etc

Aren't you a little old for playing with dolls?

just asking

 

[junior1]

I bought TSLA about a year ago at $170 because of AI and robotics, as integrated into Tesla’s self-driving platform. The prospects of TSLA’s automobile business were not a huge factor for me.

My position in TSLA is about 1% of my portfolio. But there is a chance that TSLA becomes multiples more valuable than its current position. I suppose it is a high-risk position to take, but if you believe in the future of AI/robotics/self-driving tech, TSLA seems like the best option for innovation in those areas to me.

took a different route with Tesla, went with options.

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

Deal after deal is being made right now. I prefer that.

I see Trump capitulating to China without getting any concessions. Great deal, huh?

 

[The Spin Meister]

I bought TSLA about a year ago at $170 because of AI and robotics, as integrated into Tesla’s self-driving platform. The prospects of TSLA’s automobile business were not a huge factor for me.

My position in TSLA is about 1% of my portfolio. But there is a chance that TSLA becomes multiples more valuable than its current position. I suppose it is a high-risk position to take, but if you believe in the future of AI/robotics/self-driving tech, TSLA seems like the best option for innovation in those areas to me.

Closed at over $347 today. Nice pick.

Timmy Walz is crying! 😢

 

[bdgan]

Breaking: US President accepts bribe from foreign government in order to provide them with a sweetheart economic deal. Trumpettes like PSUWrestlingFanSince2011 scream "we love corruption and treason!"

What's the sweetheart economic deal?

 

[bdgan]

I see Trump capitulating to China without getting any concessions. Great deal, huh?

30% tariffs, more on aluminum & steel, plus no de minimis exemption is capitulating? Please explain.

 

[bdgan]

Add this:


There’s no doubt that Roosevelt changed the character of the American government—for the worse. Many of the reforms of the 1930s remain embedded in policy today: acreage allotments, price supports and marketing controls in agriculture, extensive regulation of private securities, federal intrusion into union-management relations, government lending and insurance activities, the minimum wage, national unemployment insurance, Social Security and welfare payments, production and sale of electrical power by the federal government, fiat money—the list goes on.

Roosevelt’s revolution began with his inaugural address, which left no doubt about his intentions to seize the moment and harness it to his purposes. Best remembered for its patently false line that “the only thing we have to fear is fear itself,” it also called for extraordinary emergency governmental powers…..

…..
Invoking the Trading with the Enemy Act of 1917, Roosevelt declared that “all banking transactions shall be suspended.” Banks were permitted to reopen only after case-by-case inspection and approval by the government, a procedure that dragged on for months. This action heightened the public’s sense of crisis and allowed him to ignore traditional restraints on the power of the central government.

In their understanding of the Depression, Roosevelt and his economic advisors had cause and effect reversed. They did not recognize that prices had fallen because of the Depression. They believed that the Depression prevailed because prices had fallen. The obvious remedy, then, was to raise prices, which they decided to do by creating artificial shortages. Hence arose a collection of crackpot policies designed to cure the Depression by cutting back on production. The scheme was so patently self-defeating that it’s hard to believe anyone seriously believed it would work

How FDR Made the Depression Worse: News Article – Independent Institute

Franklin Roosevelt “did bring us out of the Depression,” Newt Gingrich told a group of Republicans after the recent election, and that makes

www.independent.org

I don't have a problem with Social Security. The way I look at it is we have two choices. One is to say tough shyt to people who failed to save for retirement. The other is to force them to save for retirement. I prefer the latter.

The problem with SS is that the government immediately started paying benefits to people who never contributed which effectively turned it into a ponzi scheme. Then the added benefits like marital & disability with no way to pay for it. Now we're in a world of trouble.

 

[The Spin Meister]

I don't have a problem with Social Security. The way I look at it is we have two choices. One is to say tough shyt to people who failed to save for retirement. The other is to force them to save for retirement. I prefer the latter.

The problem with SS is that the government immediately started paying benefits to people who never contributed which effectively turned it into a ponzi scheme. Then the added benefits like marital & disability with no way to pay for it. Now we're in a world of trouble.

SS was a small part of what was posted.

 

[Dixi]

Welp, it turns out I left some on on bone, but I'm okay with being mostly in cash and sitting this out. I have little confidence in Trump's fiscal policy measures going forward. Speaking with many of my friends, it's a pretty common theme.

 

[LionDeNittany]

Welp, it turns out I left some on on bone, but I'm okay with being mostly in cash and sitting this out. I have little confidence in Trump's fiscal policy measures going forward. Speaking with many of my friends, it's a pretty common theme.

TDS has no cure.

 

[MacNit2.0]

Ever hear of the parade of the Grand Army of the Republic in 1865? Was that ok?

 

[BringBackStoneys]

Ever hear of the parade of the Grand Army of the Republic in 1865? Was that ok?

The Grand Review of 1865 was a victory parade for the Union Army. This is self aggrandizement for a draft dodger.

 

[junior1]

I don't have a problem with Social Security. The way I look at it is we have two choices. One is to say tough shyt to people who failed to save for retirement. The other is to force them to save for retirement. I prefer the latter.

The problem with SS is that the government immediately started paying benefits to people who never contributed which effectively turned it into a ponzi scheme. Then the added benefits like marital & disability with no way to pay for it. Now we're in a world of trouble.

it's easier to give benefits than take them away...both parties

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

30% tariffs, more on aluminum & steel, plus no de minimis exemption is capitulating? Please explain.

China changed absolutely nothing about their approach to us. Yet Americans end up paying higher taxes. Whooopeeee!! What an outcome…

 

[bdgan]

SS was a small part of what was posted.

understood

 

[bdgan]

China changed absolutely nothing about their approach to us. Yet Americans end up paying higher taxes. Whooopeeee!! What an outcome…

Most of the free world has complained about China's unfair trade practices. Foreign companies can't own land in China, forced labor, stolen intellectual property, cyber theft, dumping their own products, etc. It seems you're good with that.

Regardless you're dodging the question again. How it capitulating when Trump has a 30% tariff on China and has eliminated the exemption for low priced goods?

 

[bdgan]

China changed absolutely nothing about their approach to us. Yet Americans end up paying higher taxes. Whooopeeee!! What an outcome…

Most of the free world has complained about China's unfair trade practices. Foreign companies can't own land in China, forced labor, stolen intellectual property, cyber theft, dumping their own products, etc. It seems you're good with that.

We've been through this several times. Tariffs can definitely cause disruption and price increases. They can also generate tax revenues and encourage businesses & consumers to move to other less threatening suppliers not located in China.

Regardless you're dodging the question again. How is it capitulating when Trump has a 30% tariff on China and has eliminated the exemption for low priced goods?

 

[Obliviax]

View embedded media

Maybe Fauci can create a vaccine. One can hope.

 

[PsuLIT]

TDS has no cure.

LINK

 

[bmejnes]

43 pages and going for you TDS psychopaths!

 

[bdgan]

it's easier to give benefits than take them away...both parties

100%. That's why it's so difficult to stop government funding for NPR & PBS even though the original reason for those things no longer exists. The government expanded benefits because of Covid and now they're permanent. Small rural post offices can't be closed. And yes it's both parties. Both parties get campaign contributions from businesses/organizations who want government sponsorship.

Also consider that every organization wants to grow. I know this sounds cynical but how many times have you seen a charity advertise that "The need has never been greater"? When have organizations that support education, healthcare, agriculture, foreign aid, etc ever said "We have all the money we need"? Funding for these things grows from 100 to 200 to 300 then somebody proposes cutting it back to 250 only to get accused of not caring about kids, poor, seniors, etc.

It's almost impossible to get elected by promising to take things away. That's why we need a balanced budget amendment.

 

[The Spin Meister]

100%. That's why it's so difficult to stop government funding for NPR & PBS even though the original reason for those things no longer exists. The government expanded benefits because of Covid and now they're permanent. Small rural post offices can't be closed. And yes it's both parties. Both parties get campaign contributions from businesses/organizations who want government sponsorship.

Also consider that every organization wants to grow. I know this sounds cynical but how many times have you seen a charity advertise that "The need has never been greater"? When have organizations that support education, healthcare, agriculture, foreign aid, etc ever said "We have all the money we need"? Funding for these things grows from 100 to 200 to 300 then somebody proposes cutting it back to 250 only to get accused of not caring about kids, poor, seniors, etc.

It's almost impossible to get elected by promising to take things away. That's why we need a balanced budget amendment.

Ronald Reagan: “If you ever wondered what eternal life looks like…..just look at any federal program!

 

[Wesauking Lion]

Most of the free world has complained about China's unfair trade practices. Foreign companies can't own land in China, forced labor, stolen intellectual property, cyber theft, dumping their own products, etc. It seems you're good with that.

We've been through this several times. Tariffs can definitely cause disruption and price increases. They can also generate tax revenues and encourage businesses & consumers to move to other less threatening suppliers not located in China.

Regardless you're dodging the question again. How is it capitulating when Trump has a 30% tariff on China and has eliminated the exemption for low priced goods?

Most of the free world has complained about China's unfair trade practices. Foreign companies can't own land in China, forced labor, stolen intellectual property, cyber theft, dumping their own products, etc. It seems you're good with that.

This part can not be overlooked. I would add not following the accounting rules to being traded on US markets. The above is equally important as the tariff numbers. This part does not show on your quarterly statement. It is massive


The biggest problem with the 43 pages of chatter is..... NO one knows what was saidin the negotiations.... a 2 minute sound bite. There may be good reason for backing off the tariff and getting to the table. The haters say he caved and the non haters rationalize it. Everyone here thinks they are master negotiators because they managed to get an extra zucchini squash at the Saturday Farmers market or they have big dick energy negotiating with the local car dealer. It is much more complicated. Added to this the thought of negotiating this out in 3 days and be done. The deals take time. Each country has different exports and they want to make sure they get a good deal... just like the US. The criticism is so off the wall. It takes time and NO ONE knows what will happen in the next couple months.

One thing it has shown me is 70% of the people in the market should GTFO. The market dropped 16% or whatever and people immediately called recession, depression, leaving the country. The cash out leave the country crowd is clueless. Go live in another country for 5 years.....loop back and we will talk about your experience (another topic). In 10 days, the market had recovered. That blip will not even show up on your June statement. It had zero effect on 99% of the people in the market and they had kittens. Unless you cashed out during those 10 days of drop......in a long term strategy....essentially no effect. If you have this mentality over the market going down for a day or week----save yourself and get out. Peoples response to a drop is crazy. Revisit this when PSU plays OSU and see where the market is... Many people look like fools in their response- even the experts have done a massive backwalk showing they dont know much more than the average investor.

Give all this a chance to happen... all of it. Both sides... It is a PSU football game where PSU plays bad on a number of plays in the first half and I scream to fire Franklin..... then they settle down make a good drive at the end of the half and we are down by 10... We come back and score 28 in the second half and it is beers for everyone.

The media does not know what will happen either. They spin it to their political lean. They have NO clue just like everyone else. Getting fired up over anything they say is fools gold. There will be lots of plays in this tariff game over the next 6 months...

 

[junior1]

China changed absolutely nothing about their approach to us. Yet Americans end up paying higher taxes. Whooopeeee!! What an outcome…

I'm not sure anyone other than those who negotiated the arrangement really know the details of what was agreed.
Just last week the concern and complaint was that the 145% tariff was bad. So they must have heard you and lowered it. Good job roar!
Americans paying higher taxes??? Didn't all the Democrats just vote against the new tax bill? Not to point out the obvious, but unless the bill passed all of us are going to see higher taxes. NOT GOOD

 

[step.eng69]

no, no, no, now dolls for everybody! you get a doll, you get a doll etc

Aren't you a little old for playing with dolls?

just asking

NEVER TOO OLD FOR DOLLS.....

 

[Hotshoe]

I'm not sure anyone other than those who negotiated the arrangement really know the details of what was agreed.
Just last week the concern and complaint was that the 145% tariff was bad. So they must have heard you and lowered it. Good job roar!
Americans paying higher taxes??? Didn't all the Democrats just vote against the new tax bill? Not to point out the obvious, but unless the bill passed all of us are going to see higher taxes. NOT GOOD

They don't, he's just talking out his a$$.

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

LINK: US Loses Last Top Credit Rating With Downgrade From Moody’s

Dammmn. Not good. Though a ratings agency doesn’t determine the future, this kind of thing is what could send interest rates higher and cause LOTS of problems.

FYI, I’ll provide an update my approach to the market. Before, I was balancing TLT and BRK with one another to make sure I caught any bullishness in the market and an increase in bonds if Trump was able to successfully lower rates. I thought if Trump and Bessent could do anything right, that would be it because they were being so intentional about it, but everything they’re doing is having the opposite effect.

The China pause to 30% tariffs was a surprise and below the 50% level which was needed for trade to resume, albeit sluggishly. I’m able to trade outside market hours so the early morning of that announcement I flipped everything into QQQ, NVDA, AAPL, and AMZN for the week—basically tech and the three biggest companies hit hardest by tariffs. However, that was short term and I sold it all Friday and now I’m in a short-term bond etf, SCHO, which earns a 4.2% yield. That will be good if interest rates go up, because its yield will too, its price doesn’t go down much due to the short-term nature of it.

The stock market could go up from here because CTA’s, hedge funds, and institutions never caught this rally and may be required to jump in, but it also makes me nervous that only retail has been buying this rally, and it appears on an enormous amount of leverage—worse than before. I don’t trust this market, it’s swinging back and forth on Trump’s tweets and now he’s made it clear the tariffs we’re seeing are the bottom, they only go up from here. And it sounds like he’s not even waiting 90 days, he’s going to increase them a lot again in the coming weeks.

I was able to sell gold a day before its top a couple weeks ago and I was preparing for it to have a 20%-30% drop so I could scoop it up again. It’s down somewhere between 8%-9% now but with this Moody’s downgrade, it may or may not go down further. The amount of places to park wealth is very limited right now and I’m back to seeing gold as the only viable place. Maybe Bitcoin but it’s too hard to tell when it trades with or against the market. Regardless, I’m going to start slowly filtering SCHO into gold but I’m going to see how gold reacts to the Moody’s news on Monday.

 

[bdgan]

LINK: US Loses Last Top Credit Rating With Downgrade From Moody’s

Dammmn. Not good. Though a ratings agency doesn’t determine the future, this kind of thing is what could send interest rates higher and cause LOTS of problems.

FYI, I’ll provide an update my approach to the market. Before, I was balancing TLT and BRK with one another to make sure I caught any bullishness in the market and an increase in bonds if Trump was able to successfully lower rates. I thought if Trump and Bessent could do anything right, that would be it because they were being so intentional about it, but everything they’re doing is having the opposite effect.

The China pause to 30% tariffs was a surprise and below the 50% level which was needed for trade to resume, albeit sluggishly. I’m able to trade outside market hours so the early morning of that announcement I flipped everything into QQQ, NVDA, AAPL, and AMZN for the week—basically tech and the three biggest companies hit hardest by tariffs. However, that was short term and I sold it all Friday and now I’m in a short-term bond etf, SCHO, which earns a 4.2% yield. That will be good if interest rates go up, because its yield will too, its price doesn’t go down much due to the short-term nature of it.

The stock market could go up from here because CTA’s, hedge funds, and institutions never caught this rally and may be required to jump in, but it also makes me nervous that only retail has been buying this rally, and it appears on an enormous amount of leverage—worse than before. I don’t trust this market, it’s swinging back and forth on Trump’s tweets and now he’s made it clear the tariffs we’re seeing are the bottom, they only go up from here. And it sounds like he’s not even waiting 90 days, he’s going to increase them a lot again in the coming weeks.

I was able to sell gold a day before its top a couple weeks ago and I was preparing for it to have a 20%-30% drop so I could scoop it up again. It’s down somewhere between 8%-9% now but with this Moody’s downgrade, it may or may not go down further. The amount of places to park wealth is very limited right now and I’m back to seeing gold as the only viable place. Maybe Bitcoin but it’s too hard to tell when it trades with or against the market. Regardless, I’m going to start slowly filtering SCHO into gold but I’m going to see how gold reacts to the Moody’s news on Monday.

Two takeaways:

1. Everything Trump does is horrible
2. Your investment expertise is unparalleled

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

By the way, I wish KnightWhoSaysNit hadn’t left the conversation. Though we differ politically we landed closely on the same outcomes to come, with the only difference being that I was leaning more toward a recession/depression scenario and he landed on a worse stagflationary future. With this news and congress’s unwillingness to deal with the deficit, I’m now leaning more toward his scenario.

I was about 60/40 on the depression/stagflation scenario before but I’ve moved to 50/50. If we’re lucky, what’s happening now will only cause a recession, people around the world will reflexively reach for the dollar and US treasuries and though GDP might drop and unemployment rise, we would get a normal deflationary trimming that is a good buying opportunity for the future. If Knight is right, which this downgrade is providing evidence for, we’re totally screwed. We could see the same drop in GDP and rise in unemployment as the recession scenario, but also uncontrollable interest rate increases, money printing, and inflation.

Another way to put this is:

• Recession/Depression - this would be similar to 1929, 2000, and 2008. It’s the better scenario of the two. I had put this at 60% likely, but with the downgrade it’s looking like 50%
• Uncontrollable stagflation - this is the worst-case scenario. The only time in American history we had something like this was when the confederacy collapsed in the south and their currency spiraled until it died. It was an economic depression combined with hyperinflation. More recent examples would be Germany 1923 when the papiermark spiraled out of control and 2018 when Venezuela’s currency did the same. I previously had this at 40% chance of happening and now I have it at 50%. It doesn’t necessarily have to play out this severely, but it could play out like the British pound after WWII.

Knight and I were invested similarly but due to our slight difference, he was in short-term bonds (I’ll use SCHO as an example) and I was in long-term bonds (I’ll use TLT as an example) hoping the long bond rates reached a top. I could still be right about that, it’s at an attractive level, but now the risk is too high. If Knight’s scenario plays out, TLT is in big trouble. And so is America.

 

[bdgan]

By the way, I wish KnightWhoSaysNit hadn’t left the conversation. Though we differ politically we landed closely on the same outcomes to come, with the only difference being that I was leaning more toward a recession/depression scenario and he landed on a worse stagflationary future. With this news and congress’s unwillingness to deal with the deficit, I’m now leaning more toward his scenario.

I was about 60/40 on the depression/stagflation scenario before but I’ve moved to 50/50. If we’re lucky, what’s happening now will only cause a recession, people around the world will reflexively reach for the dollar and US treasuries and though GDP might drop and unemployment rise, we would get a normal deflationary trimming that is a good buying opportunity for the future. If Knight is right, which this downgrade is providing evidence for, we’re totally screwed. We could see the same drop in GDP and rise in unemployment as the recession scenario, but also uncontrollable interest rate increases, money printing, and inflation.

Another way to put this is:

• Recession/Depression - this would be similar to 1929, 2000, and 2008. It’s the better scenario of the two. I had put this at 60% likely, but with the downgrade it’s looking like 50%
• Uncontrollable stagflation - this is the worst-case scenario. The only time in American history we had something like this was when the confederacy collapsed in the south and their currency spiraled until it died. It was an economic depression combined with hyperinflation. More recent examples would be Germany 1923 when the papiermark spiraled out of control and 2018 when Venezuela’s currency did the same. I previously had this at 40% chance of happening and now I have it at 50%. It doesn’t necessarily have to play out this severely, but it could play out like the British pound after WWII.

Knight and I were invested similarly but due to our slight difference, he was in short-term bonds (I’ll use SCHO as an example) and I was in long-term bonds (I’ll use TLT as an example) hoping the long bond rates reached a top. I could still be right about that, it’s at an attractive level, but now the risk is too high. If Knight’s scenario plays out, TLT is in big trouble. And so is America.

The first credit downgrade was by S&P 14 years ago. The reason for the downgrades are rising debt and interest cost. You blame mostly Trump but this is not a new problem. Debt to GDP was 30% in 1980. Today it's over 100%. I blame the nature of government in general. IMO you can spend more if you produce more. Spending without producing is a big problem. The old quote:

“A democracy can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy"​

Look at what's happening currently. Government giveaways have grown and grown as work ethic has declined. Any attempt to cut things back to what they were just a decade ago is met with lawsuits and accusations that fiscally responsible legislators don't care about people.


I don't think we're anywhere close to 1929 but debt is certainly a big concern. 2000 was a correction of extreme optimism but the unemployment rate only climbed to 6%. Unemployment climbed to near 10% after the financial crisis but banks are better capitalized today. Unemployment rose past 25% in the years following 1929. I don't expect anything like that.

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

The first credit downgrade was by S&P 14 years ago. The reason for the downgrades are rising debt and interest cost. You blame mostly Trump but this is not a new problem. Debt to GDP was 30% in 1980. Today it's over 100%. I blame the nature of government in general. IMO you can spend more if you produce more. Spending without producing is a big problem. The old quote:

“A democracy can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy"​

Look at what's happening currently. Government giveaways have grown and grown as work ethic has declined. Any attempt to cut things back to what they were just a decade ago is met with lawsuits and accusations that fiscally responsible legislators don't care about people.


I don't think we're anywhere close to 1929 but debt is certainly a big concern. 2000 was a correction of extreme optimism but the unemployment rate only climbed to 6%. Unemployment climbed to near 10% after the financial crisis but banks are better capitalized today. Unemployment rose past 25% in the years following 1929. I don't expect anything like that.

If you’ve been following me, you know I haven’t been blaming only Trump. In fact, that’s why Knight and I landed on a similar outcome. Every single leader (except Bill Clinton ironically) since 1980 has contributed to deficit spending that has chased and surpassed GDP. Trump is certainly not the first nor only problem—but he’s making it worse with his toxic combo of tariffs and increased deficit spending. He spent twice as much as Biden, even when you take COVID spending out (which I don’t think you should do because he put his big fat signature on all that stimulus).

It’s the debt servicing under the hood that’s the major problem, not the tariffs. But tariffs can absolutely make things worse. I’ve said before, we are all going to be tricked into thinking the removal of the tariffs will make us think things will be better, and they won’t be—not unless the real problem is solved. Not only is Trump and this congress not solving the problem, they’re on track to massively increase deficit spending and make the problem worse. Now Trump is saying he’s going to layer higher tariffs back on top again which will only exasperate issues as GDP will likely fall keeping us even further from servicing the deficit spending of his big beautiful bill.

 

[bdgan]

If you’ve been following me, you know I haven’t been blaming only Trump. In fact, that’s why Knight and I landed on a similar outcome to come. Every single leader (except Bill Clinton ironically) since 1980 has contributed to deficit spending that has chased and surpassed GDP. Trump is certainly not the first nor only problem—but he’s making it worse with his toxic combo of tariffs and increased deficit spending. He spent twice as much as Biden, even when you take COVID spending out (which I don’t think you should do because he put his big fat signature on all that stimulus).

It’s the debt servicing under the hood that’s the major problem, not the tariffs. But tariffs can absolutely make things worse. I’ve said before, we are all going to be tricked into thinking the removal of the tariffs will make us think things will be better, and they won’t be—not unless the real problem is solved. Not only is Trump and this congress not solving the problem, they’re on track to massively increase deficit spending and make the problem worse. Now Trump is saying he’s going to layer higher tariffs back on top again which will only exasperate issues as GDP will likely fall keeping us even further from servicing the deficit spending of his big beautiful bill.

You've been blaming Trump non stop. You even do it while claiming not to do it. Just look at your first paragraph. You said Trump isn't the only problem but he spent twice as much as Biden. If you were honest you would admit that the spending occurred under Covid when democrats controlled congress.

My local school district is a perfect example of the problem. They got a huge federal payment "to reopen schools safely" even though Covid had passed and schools were already reopened. They used that money for capital items like HVAC that they were planning to do anyway. The budget showed $0 for capital that year but we still had our annual 3% tax increase because they used that money to add new programs. Now that one time government funding is gone and they're blaming this year's 6% increase on a reduction in federal money. They aren't eliminating the programs they added by indirectly using federal money.

I actually liked Clinton as president but to be fair I think he benefitted from momentum coming out of the Regan years. He spent less on defense and some people say that contributed to the lack of preparedness for 9/11. Some also blame him for the financial mess because he repealed Glass-Steagall. I think those accusations are politically motivated but they show how difficult the job is.

But here's where I liked Clinton. He said we're a nation of immigrants but we're also a nation of laws. Today's democrats would never say such a thing. He talked about ending welfare as we know it. He proposed that able-bodied people can only have 5 years of welfare over the course of a lifetime and no more than 2 years at one time. Can you even remotely imagine a democrat saying such a thing today?

Now to taxes. Clinton had the top rate at 39.6% which is 2.6% higher than today. But the little know secret is that a family earning the median income in 1993 was in the 28% tax bracket. Today they're in the 12% tax bracket with higher deductions and credits. And now that we've done it we can't undo it.

 

[junior1]

You've been blaming Trump non stop. You even do it while claiming not to do it. Just look at your first paragraph. You said Trump isn't the only problem but he spent twice as much as Biden. If you were honest you would admit that the spending occurred under Covid when democrats controlled congress.

My local school district is a perfect example of the problem. They got a huge federal payment "to reopen schools safely" even though Covid had passed and schools were already reopened. They used that money for capital items like HVAC that they were planning to do anyway. The budget showed $0 for capital that year but we still had our annual 3% tax increase because they used that money to add new programs. Now that one time government funding is gone and they're blaming this year's 6% increase on a reduction in federal money. They aren't eliminating the programs they added by indirectly using federal money.

I actually liked Clinton as president but to be fair I think he benefitted from momentum coming out of the Regan years. He spent less on defense and some people say that contributed to the lack of preparedness for 9/11. Some also blame him for the financial mess because he repealed Glass-Steagall. I think those accusations are politically motivated but they show how difficult the job is.

But here's where I liked Clinton. He said we're a nation of immigrants but we're also a nation of laws. Today's democrats would never say such a thing. He talked about ending welfare as we know it. He proposed that able-bodied people can only have 5 years of welfare over the course of a lifetime and no more than 2 years at one time. Can you even remotely imagine a democrat saying such a thing today?

Now to taxes. Clinton had the top rate at 39.6% which is 2.6% higher than today. But the little know secret is that a family earning the median income in 1993 was in the 28% tax bracket. Today they're in the 12% tax bracket with higher deductions and credits. And now that we've done it we can't undo it.

Too many facts….and they go against the agenda. Roar will never accept

 

[PurposePitch]

Now to taxes. Clinton had the top rate at 39.6% which is 2.6% higher than today. But the little know secret is that a family earning the median income in 1993 was in the 28% tax bracket. Today they're in the 12% tax bracket with higher deductions and credits. And now that we've done it we can't undo it.

Holy crap. You were already proven wrong about this earlier in this thread. You're embarrassing.


We used 1994, instead of 1993.

But, the median household income in 1993 was $31, 241 (or thereabouts, depending on your source). That's in the 15% marginal tax bracket (assuming, for simplicity's sake that household income = TI). 28% didn't kick in until $36,900.

The median household income in 2024 was $82,586. The marginal tax bracket for that income level was 12%.

It's 15 v 12, not 28 v 12. Knock it off.

 

[NittanyLionRoar]

You've been blaming Trump non stop. You even do it while claiming not to do it. Just look at your first paragraph. You said Trump isn't the only problem but he spent twice as much as Biden. If you were honest you would admit that the spending occurred under Covid when democrats controlled congress.

My local school district is a perfect example of the problem. They got a huge federal payment "to reopen schools safely" even though Covid had passed and schools were already reopened. They used that money for capital items like HVAC that they were planning to do anyway. The budget showed $0 for capital that year but we still had our annual 3% tax increase because they used that money to add new programs. Now that one time government funding is gone and they're blaming this year's 6% increase on a reduction in federal money. They aren't eliminating the programs they added by indirectly using federal money.

I actually liked Clinton as president but to be fair I think he benefitted from momentum coming out of the Regan years. He spent less on defense and some people say that contributed to the lack of preparedness for 9/11. Some also blame him for the financial mess because he repealed Glass-Steagall. I think those accusations are politically motivated but they show how difficult the job is.

But here's where I liked Clinton. He said we're a nation of immigrants but we're also a nation of laws. Today's democrats would never say such a thing. He talked about ending welfare as we know it. He proposed that able-bodied people can only have 5 years of welfare over the course of a lifetime and no more than 2 years at one time. Can you even remotely imagine a democrat saying such a thing today?

Now to taxes. Clinton had the top rate at 39.6% which is 2.6% higher than today. But the little know secret is that a family earning the median income in 1993 was in the 28% tax bracket. Today they're in the 12% tax bracket with higher deductions and credits. And now that we've done it we can't undo it.

I blame the democrats in congress as much as I blame Trump. Whose big fat permanent marker signature was on the bill and the subsequent checks? He could have used the marker to veto it, right?

I can blame democrats and Trump at the same time. They tangoed together in 2020. Has there been anyone since Clinton who actually did anything positive about the debt and deficit? And I mean actually doing something. Not just talking about it with their big mouths. Because Trump is once again on track to spend more than Biden with his big beautiful bill.