1. Same story, different day...........year ie more of the same fiat floods the world
    Dismiss Notice
  2. There are no markets
    Dismiss Notice
  3. Week of 6/24/2017 Closing prices & Chg Over Last Wk---- Gold $1256.40 Silver $16.64 Oil $43.01 USD $96.94
  4. "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding high finance, politics, constructionist Constitution, and mental masturbation of all types"
    Dismiss Notice

chips are on the table and tramp chimps out

Discussion in 'Politics Forum (Local/National/World)' started by Scorpio, Feb 7, 2018.



  1. Son of Gloin

    Son of Gloin Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,249
    Likes Received:
    5,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Delivery boy.
    Location:
    USA
    His reality is a little pissy.
     
    Joe King and newmisty like this.
  2. newmisty

    newmisty Duppy Conqueror Midas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    9,022
    Likes Received:
    8,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Build-a Burger
    Location:
    Omerica
     
    Son of Gloin likes this.
  3. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113

    That's about what I expected - - very similar to the response from the Obama Apologists whenever their leader was questioned.
     
  4. Son of Gloin

    Son of Gloin Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,249
    Likes Received:
    5,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Delivery boy.
    Location:
    USA
    Go back and read what you posted. I responded more to your attitude than your viewpoint.
     
    solarion likes this.
  5. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm aware of what I posted, my friend.

    Still waiting for any of the Trump Almighty pom-pom wavers to step up and try to justify the increasing military spending, the increasing debt and the continuation of the bloated bureaucrats.
     
  6. Son of Gloin

    Son of Gloin Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    3,249
    Likes Received:
    5,827
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    Delivery boy.
    Location:
    USA
    That's the problem.
     
    newmisty likes this.
  7. newmisty

    newmisty Duppy Conqueror Midas Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    9,022
    Likes Received:
    8,090
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Build-a Burger
    Location:
    Omerica
    Nobody needs to justify anything to you. What exactly are you contributing to your so called causes besides posting rubbish online?
     
    solarion, Joe King and Son of Gloin like this.
  8. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Actually he does. It's called his signature on an application for credit.

    Only because it contains a "promise to pay" in the future at agreed upon dates by the one who applied for credit. Without that sig it's valueless.

    Exactly. I would assume most people honor what they've agreed to by signing the note.

    There is an agreement, an agreement to pay by the person who applied for the credit. That's what is being sold, the Right to receive those promised payments.

    No, the value comes from the applicants legally binding promise to pay. Without that it is valueless.

    On this I agree. They should have done all of it correctly, but that's not really what Area 51 was referring to. He said to apply for credit in general Ie: credit cards and then to intentionally default on it without holding up his promise to pay.

    Again, the value is contained in the persons promise to pay. If one doesn't want to pay, don't promise to pay as a way to get free stuff.



    I understand it way better than you. I don't like how the banking system works either, but unlike you I simply refrain from using their credit.


    Then that means you've committed theft, or you should give back the 6 figures worth of stuff.


    His reality is wack. Wants people to go into massive debt with the intention of not paying, but then wants those same people when they work for gov to suddenly become bastions of virtue. lol

    bugs-bunny.jpg
     
    Last edited: Feb 12, 2018
    Son of Gloin likes this.
  9. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    My comments discuss how Trump Almighty is continuing with the same asinine status quo of Obama, Clinton and the Bushes.

    The devotees of Trump Almighty are just as blind to this as the followers of those other three assclowns were.
     
    Po'boy likes this.
  10. FunnyMoney

    FunnyMoney Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Since they own about 90 percent of all the agro and industrial JIT production and infrastructure, I don't really see how that happens. I mean I understand the theory and the end game result and there I do somewhat agree but I just don't see the steps that would take us there. There are so many things they can do to from starting a war to starting a new safety net program. They own all the opposition as well, most everything I see is controlled opposition. A case can be made that GIM1 was the last free thinking, hard analysis, liberty minded place that ever existed. I mean just look at this forum, you can't get more than 4 members to agree on the simplest of things at any one time. Not even the mercenary service wars get any traction, I think a lot of forum members actually see this as a road to MAGA and to white supremacy. The blind hope with Trump and the ability to ignore the GS and FED appointments, look the other way when it comes to the debt and the gold audit, and all the unfounded support of the status quo that is constantly dribbled out here at our forum borders on magical.

    If you could explain step by step how the TPTB are defeated in that way, maybe I would understand your thinking. But my thinking is the only way to turn this ship around is for the leader of the free world to come out and tell the world that the laws of physics were not suspended that day in 2001, the wars are for profit and to create suffering, that there is a 3000 year old reason why gold and silver were mentioned in the constitution and that if we don't want to hold another "French revolution" style purge were going to bring home all the troops and fix our own country using the original constitution. I don't see any other way without enlisting the armed forces AND the people of the nation (who are well armed and ready to know) using the Truth,
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2018 at 1:32 AM
    ErrosionOfAccord likes this.
  11. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113

    You've covered a wide range of topics with that post.

    With regard to GIM1, yes it was much different that this version. It's unfortunate that so much of the discussion is focused on racist overtones or the uncanny obsession with democrats. I certainly agree the bigoted rhetoric of Trump Almighty is what makes him so worshiped by those dreaming of a "pure" white America.

    It's a mathematical certainty that America will default - - the only question is when. Especially with the current jackass running up the debt just as the previous ones did. And once America defaults the rest of the world will follow. No doubt the hubris of the elites has them convinced they can orchestrate the BK in a calm and orderly manner, but look at what happened in 2009. The financial system is so vulnerable that a relatively minor uptick in mortgage defaults had the entire system on the brink of collapse.

    But I expect the catalyst for collapse will come via nature rather than from the financial system. The elites in control could barely hold it together in 2009 - - WTF would they do in the event of a natural disaster hundreds of times larger in scope than Katrina was? That's not exactly something you can prep for.

    Not sure where you're located but do you remember the 2003 black out of the north east? That really highlighted just how vulnerable the electrical grid is. It only lasted for a few days and it was in the middle of summer. Imagine a prolonged period of a few months without electricity in the dead of winter. Maybe years? Across the entire continent. That's what a solar flare could do. Many wouldn't survive it and there'd be complete anarchy as they desperately tried to stay alive. Could the elites maintain control over an environment like that? Not a chance. Police and the military wouldn't be able to maintain anything either. If electricity and technology was ever restored to the current levels, things would be way too far gone by that point for the elites to regain control.

    As for agriculture, that's even more precarious. All thanks to our corrupt friends at Monsanto. You can't have such homogeneity and lack of diversity among planting rotations. We're already seeing weeds developing resistance to roundup. Sooner or later it's not going to have any effect. Weeds can be somewhat controlled mechanically though without herbicides - - the real danger is a fungus. Something similar to the red rust. There's nothing that can be done in that situation. The only hope is that some varieties are immune, but with so much homogeneity that's not going to be the case.

    I don't anticipate it'll ever be a revolt or a revolution that leads to the collapse. It'll be more of a sudden shattering.
     
    Po'boy likes this.
  12. FunnyMoney

    FunnyMoney Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I didn't really see the 1-2-3 step process but more of a sudden catastrophic event from space is going to shake up the apple cart. I don't want to say it's not possible, but , well, in the mean time, while we're waiting for that, maybe we could pull our troops back and try to focus on this MAGA thing, because it's clear Trump's not doing it.

    I think it's much simpler than that, while we wait for the asteroid to arrive , we could simply get a POTUS to tell us the truth. Or maybe if we could just get a few people willing to admit that the laws of physics don't get suspended. On second thought, that's probably not going to happen, so I guess you're right, we have a better chance with the asteroid.
     
  13. edsl48

    edsl48 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,308
    Likes Received:
    1,731
    Trophy Points:
    113

    In agreement with you on this one. We still have troops in Germany and Japan...and here I thought WW2 was over back in the 1940s. To make it even more worse Germany and Japan can devote their GDPs to their own country's citizens because they have no requirements to fund a military. As much as I seriously dislike many of our "entitlement programs" I would prefer they be funded instead of the USA providing "entitlement military" programs for others.
    Now thats Germany and Japan...then we have Korea etc etc etc
     
    searcher likes this.
  14. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,338
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So the bank loses a bet on repayment of fiat, writes it off, stiffs the investor and sells the worthless debt to a junk debt buyer.

    What did they create?

    What did they lose?

    Who really has the power of money creation.

    Can you whip up a financial agreement and sell it to the banks for cash?
     
  15. solarion

    solarion Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2013
    Messages:
    4,885
    Likes Received:
    7,285
    Trophy Points:
    113
    One generally has to work hard at being a dink to get SoG hurling insults. lol Dude is about as tolerant as they come.

    Fortunately I have the offending clown on mute so I'm not being exposed to so much nonsense.
     
    Son of Gloin and newmisty like this.
  16. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,338
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Maybe low grade.
    Does it take a higher grade to recognize being played for a fool?

    Maybe rose colored glasses overlook flip flopping?
     
  17. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    There's the problem.


    The issue is, if one applies for (asks) for help buying something they cannot currently afford and that help is provided, they should fulfill their end of the agreement.
    Ie: they used their hand to sign their name to an agreement that bound them to making certain payments at certain times in order to get the thing they want but cannot afford. If that agreement stipulates that those payments be denominated in frn's, well, that's what they should pay. If they didn't want to keep their end of the deal, they shouldn't have signed their name to the Note.
    Anyone who signs a lenders Promissory Note, knows quite well what they are agreeing to. Going into the deal with the express intention of defaulting is no different than theft. Because it's acquiring something under false pretenses.

    If we agree that I will acquire a car and put it in your name in exchange for you transferring to me a certain amount of feathers, you'd better hold up your end of the bargain and give me every feather you agreed to, or I'm rightfully coming for the car.
     
  18. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,338
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Investment is risk.
    Fudging the risk is where the money is made, stiffing the taxpayers pays really well.

    Who wrote the underlying paper, who rated it?
    Who is in jail?

    Who lost?
    The bailed out banks?
     
  19. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    True, but when the default is planned in advance, it wasn't just a risk, but a given and had the lender been fully informed they'd have never agreed in the first place and the person signing wouldn't get the thing they want but cannot afford.

    All I'm saying is, if you don't intend to fulfill your end of the agreement, don't enter in to it to begin with. Find some other way to get what you want.
     
  20. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,338
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Bankers pocket the profits and socialized the risks.
    They only lost what never was and still got payed.
    Lobbying pays well.
    https://www.google.com/amp/www.ibti...onvicted-banks-including-deutsche-which?amp=1
     
  21. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    I don't agree with that, either. Both sides should do what they agreed to do and neither should get bailed out.
     
  22. Po'boy

    Po'boy Midas Member Midas Member Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Messages:
    4,338
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Half of wall Street played along.
    The Don plays along.
    The peasants are to be virtuous while the leadership sells them out.
     
  23. FunnyMoney

    FunnyMoney Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Of course they did, they are in this for the money.


    I think he enjoys playing king. He seemed to enjoy it during his reality TV shows. He has a history of playing along to get what he wants regardless of how many people he needs to step on to do it.


    Reminds me of many members here at our forum.



    I know they're selling us out but I'm not sure if calling them "traitors" at every opportunity would be considered "virtuous."
     
  24. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113

    I'd say it was closer to 95% of wall street that played along, but totally agree with your sentiments.

    No matter how corrupt the bankers and corporate elites are some peasants will always close their eyes and be good little sheep, like our friend above.
     
  25. solarion

    solarion Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2013
    Messages:
    4,885
    Likes Received:
    7,285
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's tough to understand the pessimism. The choices were a murderous traitor and a billionaire business man. We easily made out better in this election than nearly any I can recall. The shrubs? Clinton? Barry? Gore, Kerry, McCain? LOL I'll take Don over any of them.

    Dude hasn't invaded a half dozen more countries, plus he's managed to piss off everyone in the lamestream media, Hollyweird, and in the district of corruption.

    Sure, I'd like to see the defense offense budget slashed by at least 50%, but that's like pulling teeth in DC. There are so many corporate welfare interests at this point that it's nearly impossible to get these parasitic piglettes away from the trough.
     
  26. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113


    The pessimism is because it's just more of the same. Still pissing money away on comical "wars", still adding to the colossal debt, still letting the bankers run the fed, still carrying an over bloated bureaucracy.

    Those are the actual problems facing the country, my friend. Who in fuck cares about the media shills or the fakes in Hollywood. You're celebrating how Trump Almighty has "pissed them off" - - FFS, how about having the president focus on issues that actually impact the country instead of that horseshit minutiae.

    If you want to acknowledge that Trump Almighty has no real power to do anything other than do as he's told and keep the status quo with the military/national debt/fed/bureaucracy, then let's call it like it is - - Trump Almighty is nothing more than a eunuch. He's a puppet for the elites who control the show.

    In which case it makes ZERO difference who's elected/appointed president because they're powerless to do anything.
     
  27. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Exactly. The pessimists are just perpetual whiners and would bitch and moan no matter who got elected.

    If not for Trump, we'd have single payer, a gun ban, TPP, no tax decrease with the same increase in spending, and Al Gore on the SC with two more new appointees making for a lib Court for the next quarter Century.
    ...and we're supposed to believe that Trump is e x a c t l y the same as the bitch would've been? lol lol lol Get real and try to smell the coffee for once in your life. @Area51 I'm lookin' at you, pal.
     
    Glasgow and Son of Gloin like this.
  28. gnome

    gnome Platinum Bling Platinum Bling

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2010
    Messages:
    4,262
    Likes Received:
    2,622
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Trump is just following in the footsteps of Reagan.
    The GOP is not a fiscally conservative organization by any stretch of the imagination.


    How the GOP Used a Two Santa Clauses Tactic to Con America for Nearly 40 Years
    This scam has been killing wages and enriching billionaires for decades.
    By Thom Hartmann / AlterNet
    February 11, 2018, 8:35 AM GMT
    Print
    458 COMMENTS

    [​IMG]
    Ronald Reagan
    Photo Credit: Whitehouse.gov

    The only thing wrong with the U.S. economy is the failure of the Republican Party to play Santa Claus.
    -Jude Wanniski, March 6, 1976


    The Republican Party has been running a long con on America since Reagan’s inauguration, and somehow our nation’s media has missed it – even though it was announced in The Wall Street Journal in the 1970s and the GOP has clung tenaciously to it ever since.

    In fact, Republican strategist Jude Wanniski’s 1974 “Two Santa Clauses Theory” has been the main reason why the GOP has succeeded in producing our last two Republican presidents, Bush and Trump (despite losing the popular vote both times). It’s also why Reagan’s economy seemed to be “good.”

    Here’s how it works, laid it out in simple summary:

    First, when Republicans control the federal government, and particularly the White House, spend money like a drunken sailor and run up the US debt as far and as fast as possible. This produces three results – it stimulates the economy thus making people think that the GOP can produce a good economy, it raises the debt dramatically, and it makes people think that Republicans are the “tax-cut Santa Claus.”

    Second, when a Democrat is in the White House, scream about the national debt as loudly and frantically as possible, freaking out about how “our children will have to pay for it!” and “we have to cut spending to solve the crisis!” This will force the Democrats in power to cut their own social safety net programs, thus shooting their welfare-of-the-American-people Santa Claus.

    Think back to Ronald Reagan, who more than tripled the US debt from a mere $800 billion to $2.6 trillion in his 8 years. That spending produced a massive stimulus to the economy, and the biggest non-wartime increase in the debt in history. Nary a peep from Republicans about that 218% increase in our debt; they were just fine with it.

    And then along came Bill Clinton. The screams and squeals from the GOP about the “unsustainable debt” of nearly $3 trillion were loud, constant, and echoed incessantly by media from CBS to NPR. Newt Gingrich rode the wave of “unsustainable debt” hysteria into power, as the GOP took control of the House for the first time lasting more than a term since 1930, even though the increase in our national debt under Clinton was only about 37%.

    The GOP “debt freakout” was so widely and effectively amplified by the media that Clinton himself bought into it and began to cut spending, taking the axe to numerous welfare programs (“It’s the end of welfare as we know it” he famously said, and “The era of big government is over”). Clinton also did something no Republican has done in our lifetimes: he supported several balanced budgets and handed a budget surplus to George W. Bush.

    When George W. Bush was given the White House by the Supreme Court (Gore won the popular vote by over a half-million votes) he reverted to Reagan’s strategy and again nearly doubled the national debt, adding a trillion in borrowed money to pay for his tax cut for GOP-funding billionaires, and tossing in two unfunded wars for good measure, which also added at least (long term) another $5 to $7 trillion.

    There was not a peep about the debt from any high-profile in-the-know Republicans then; in fact, Dick Cheney famously said, essentially ratifying Wanniski’s strategy, “Reagan proved deficits don't matter. We won the midterms [because of those tax cuts]. This is our due.” Bush and Cheney raised the debt by 86% to over $10 trillion (although the war debt wasn’t put on the books until Obama entered office).

    Then comes Democratic President Barack Obama, and suddenly the GOP is hysterical about the debt again. So much so that they convinced a sitting Democratic president to propose a cut to Social Security (the “chained CPI”). Obama nearly shot the Democrats biggest Santa Claus program. And, Republican squeals notwithstanding, Obama only raised the debt by 34%.

    Now we’re back to a Republican president, and once again deficits be damned. Between their tax cut and the nearly-trillion dollar spending increase passed on February 8th, in the first year-and-a-month of Trump’s administration they’ve spent more stimulating the economy (and driving up debt by more than $2 trillion, when you include interest) than the entire Obama presidency.

    Consider the amazing story of where this strategy came from, and how the GOP has successfully kept their strategy from getting into the news; even generally well-informed writers for media like the Times and the Post – and producers, pundits and reporters for TV news – don’t know the history of what’s been happening right in front of us all for 37 years.

    Republican strategist Jude Wanniski first proposed his Two Santa Clauses strategy in 1974, when Richard Nixon resigned in disgrace and the future of the Republican Party was so dim that books and articles were widely suggesting the GOP was about to go the way of the Whigs. There was genuine despair across the Party, particularly when Jerry Ford began stumbling as he climbed the steps to Air Force One and couldn’t even beat an unknown peanut farmer from rural Georgia for the presidency.

    Wanniski was tired of the GOP failing to win elections. And, he reasoned, it was happening because the Democrats had been viewed since the New Deal as the Santa Claus party (taking care of people’s needs and the General Welfare), while the GOP, opposing everything from Social Security to Medicare to unemployment insurance, was widely seen as the party of Scrooge.

    The Democrats, he noted, got to play Santa Claus when they passed out Social Security and Unemployment checks – both programs of the New Deal – as well as when their "big government" projects like roads, bridges, and highways were built, giving a healthy union paycheck to construction workers and making our country shine.

    Democrats kept raising taxes on businesses and rich people to pay for things, which didn't seem to have much effect at all on working people (wages were steadily going up, in fact), and that added to the perception that the Democrats were a party of Robin Hoods, taking from the rich to fund programs for the poor and the working class.

    Americans loved the Democrats back then. And every time Republicans railed against these programs, they lost elections.

    Wanniski decided that the GOP had to become a Santa Claus party, too. But because the Republicans hated the idea of helping working people, they had to figure out a way to convince people that they, too, could have the Santa spirit. But what?

    “Tax cuts!” said Wanniski.

    To make this work, the Republicans would first have to turn the classical world of economics – which had operated on a simple demand-driven equation for seven thousand years – on its head. (Everybody understood that demand – aka “wages” – drove economies because working people spent most of their money in the marketplace, producing demand for factory output and services.)

    In 1974 Wanniski invented a new phrase – "supply side economics" – and suggested that the reason economies grew wasn't because people had money and wanted to buy things with it but, instead, because things were available for sale, thus tantalizing people to part with their money.

    The more things there were, he said, the faster the economy would grow. And the more money we gave rich people and their corporations (via tax cuts) the more stuff they’d generously produce for us to think about buying.

    At a glance, this move by the Republicans seems irrational, cynical and counterproductive. It certainly defies classic understandings of economics. But if you consider Jude Wanniski’s playbook, it makes complete sense.

    To help, Arthur Laffer took that equation a step further with his famous napkin scribble. Not only was supply-side a rational concept, Laffer suggested, but as taxes went down, revenue to the government would go up! Neither concept made any sense – and time has proven both to be colossal idiocies – but together they offered the Republican Party a way out of the wilderness.

    Ronald Reagan was the first national Republican politician to fully embrace the Two Santa Clauses strategy. He said straight out that if he could cut taxes on rich people and businesses, those tax cuts would cause them to take their surplus money and build factories, and that the more stuff there was supplying the economy the faster it would grow.

    George Herbert Walker Bush – like most Republicans in 1980 who hadn’t read Wanniski’s piece in The Wall Street Journal – was horrified. Ronald Reagan was suggesting "Voodoo Economics," said Bush in the primary campaign, and Wanniski's supply-side and Laffer's tax-cut theories would throw the nation into such deep debt that, he believed, we'd ultimately crash into another Republican Great Depression.

    But Wanniski had been doing his homework on how to sell “voodoo” supply-side economics.

    In 1976, he rolled out to the hard-right insiders in the Republican Party his "Two Santa Clauses" theory, which would enable the Republicans to take power in America for the next forty years.

    Democrats, he said, had been able to be "Santa Clauses" by giving people things from the largesse of the federal government. From food stamps to new schools to sending a man to the moon, the people loved the “toys” the Democrats brought every year.

    Republicans could do that, too, the theory went – spending could actually increase without negative repurcussions. Plus, Republicans could be double Santa Clauses by cutting people's taxes!

    For working people it would only be a small token – a few hundred dollars a year on average – but would be heavily marketed. And for the rich, which wasn’t to be discussed in public, it would amount to hundreds of billions of dollars in tax cuts.

    The rich, Reagan, Bush, and Trump told us, would then use that money to import or build more stuff to market, thus stimulating the economy and making average working people richer. (And, of course, they’d pass some of that money back to the GOP, like the Kochs giving Paul Ryan $500,000.00 right after he passed the last tax cut that gave them billions.)

    There was no way, Wanniski said, that the Democrats could ever win again. They'd be forced into the role of Santa-killers by raising taxes, or anti-Santas by cutting spending. Either one would lose them elections.

    When Reagan rolled out Supply Side Economics in the early 80s, dramatically cutting taxes while exploding spending, there was a moment when it seemed to Wanniski and Laffer that all was lost. The budget deficit exploded and the country fell into a deep recession – the worst since the Great Depression – and Republicans nationwide held their collective breath.

    But David Stockman came up with a great new theory about what was going on – they were "starving the beast" of government by running up such huge deficits that Democrats would never, ever in the future be able to talk again about national health care or improving Social Security.

    And this so pleased Alan Greenspan, the Fed Chairman, that he opened the spigots of the Fed, dropping interest rates and buying government bonds, producing a nice, healthy goose to the economy.

    Greenspan further counseled Reagan to dramatically increase taxes on people earning under $37,800 a year by doubling the Social Security (FICA/payroll) tax, and then let the government borrow those newfound hundreds of billions of dollars off-the-books to make the deficit look better than it was.

    Reagan, Greenspan, Winniski, and Laffer took the federal budget deficit from under a trillion dollars in 1980 to almost three trillion by 1988, and back then a dollar could buy far more than it buys today. They and George HW Bush ran up more debt in eight years than every president in history, from George Washington to Jimmy Carter, combined.

    Surely this would both starve the beast and force the Democrats to make the politically suicidal move of becoming deficit hawks. And that's just how it turned out.

    Bill Clinton, who had run on an FDR-like platform of a "New Covenant" with the American people that would strengthen the institutions of the New Deal, strengthen labor, and institute a national health care system, found himself in a box.

    A few weeks before his inauguration, Alan Greenspan and Robert Rubin sat him down and told him the facts of life: he was going to have to raise taxes and cut the size of government. Clinton took their advice to heart, raised taxes, balanced the budget, and cut numerous programs, declaring an "end to welfare as we know it" and, in his second inaugural address, an "end to the era of big government."

    Clinton was the anti-Santa Claus, and the result was an explosion of Republican wins across the country as Republican politicians campaigned on a platform of supply-side tax cuts and pork-rich spending increases. State after state turned red, and the Republican Party rose to take over, ultimately, every single lever of power in the federal government, from the Supreme Court to the White House.

    Looking at the wreckage of the Democratic Party all around Clinton by 1999, Winniski wrote a gloating memo that said, in part: "We of course should be indebted to Art Laffer for all time for his Curve... But as the primary political theoretician of the supply-side camp, I began arguing for the 'Two Santa Claus Theory' in 1974. If the Democrats are going to play Santa Claus by promoting more spending, the Republicans can never beat them by promoting less spending. They have to promise tax cuts..."

    Ed Crane, then-president of the Koch-funded Libertarian CATO Institute, noted in a memo that year: "When Jack Kemp, Newt Gingrich, Vin Weber, Connie Mack and the rest discovered Jude Wanniski and Art Laffer, they thought they'd died and gone to heaven. In supply-side economics they found a philosophy that gave them a free pass out of the debate over the proper role of government. Just cut taxes and grow the economy: government will shrink as a percentage of GDP, even if you don't cut spending. That's why you rarely, if ever, heard Kemp or Gingrich call for spending cuts, much less the elimination of programs and departments."

    Two Santa Clauses had gone mainstream. Never again would Republicans worry about the debt or deficit when they were in office; and they knew well how to scream hysterically about it as soon as Democrats took power.

    George W. Bush embraced the Two Santa Claus Theory with gusto, ramming through huge tax cuts – particularly a cut to the capital gains tax rate on people like himself who made their principle income from sitting around the mailbox waiting for their dividend or capital gains checks to arrive – and blew out federal spending.

    Bush, with his wars, even out-spent Reagan, which nobody had ever thought would again be possible. And it all seemed to be going so well, just as it did in the early 1920s when a series of three consecutive Republican presidents cut income taxes on the uber-rich from over 70 percent to under 30 percent.

    In 1929, pretty much everybody realized that instead of building factories with all that extra money, the rich had been pouring it into the stock market, inflating a bubble that – like an inexorable law of nature – would have to burst.

    But the people who remembered that lesson were mostly all dead by 2005, when Jude Wanniski died and George Gilder celebrated the Reagan/Bush supply-side-created bubble economies in a Wall Street Journal eulogy:

    "...Jude's charismatic focus on the tax on capital gains redeemed the fiscal policies of four administrations. ... Unbound by zero-sum economics, Jude forged the golden gift of a profound and passionate argument that the establishments of the mold must finally give way to the powers of the mind. ... He audaciously defied all the Buffetteers of the trade gap, the moldy figs of the Phillips Curve, the chic traders in money and principle, even the stultifying pillows of the Nobel Prize."

    In reality, his tax cuts did what they have always done over the past 100 years – they initiated a bubble economy that would let the very rich skim the cream off the top just before the ceiling crashed in on working people. Just like today.

    The Republicans got what they wanted from Wanniski's work. They held power for thirty years, made themselves trillions of dollars, and cut organized labor's representation in the workplace from around 25 percent when Reagan came into office to around 6 of the non-governmental workforce today.

    Over time, and without raising the cap, Social Security will face an easily-solved crisis, and the GOP’s plan is for force Democrats to become the anti-Santa, yet again. If the GOP-controlled Congress continues to refuse to require rich people to pay into Social Security (any income over $128,000 is SS-tax-free), either benefits will be cut or the retirement age will have to be raised to over 70.

    The GOP plan is to use this unnecessary, manufactured crisis as an opening to “reform” Social Security - translated: cut and privatize. Thus, forcing Democrats to become the Social Security anti-Santa a different way.

    When this happens, Democrats must remember Jude Wanniski, and accept neither the cut to disability payments nor the entree to Social Security “reform.” They must demand the “cap” be raised, as Bernie Sanders proposed and the Democratic Party adopted in its 2016 platform.

    And, hopefully, some of our media will begin to call the GOP out on the Two Santa Clauses program. It’s about time that Americans realized the details of the scam that’s been killing wages and enriching billionaires for nearly four decades.

    https://www.alternet.org/right-wing/two-santa-clauses-or-how-gop-conned-america-nearly-40-years
     
    searcher likes this.
  29. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If your apartment was engulfed in flames, would you GTFO and call the fire department or would you finish doing the dishes and make sure the laundry was folded?

    You're focused on minutiae and completely ignoring the biggest issues - - the wars/debt/fed/bureaucracy.

    Unless Trump Almighty does something to address those issues, he's just shuffling deck chairs in the Titanic like the rest of the Republocrat assclowns have done.
     
    gnome likes this.
  30. tigerwillow1

    tigerwillow1 Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    417
    Likes Received:
    464
    Trophy Points:
    63
    How the GOP Used a Two Santa Clauses Tactic to Con America for Nearly 40 Years

    Maybe there's some truth in this article, but whenever somebody starts pushing the Clinton era balance budget and/or surplus, you know he's either lying, spinning, or stupid.
     
  31. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    Ok, I'm goin' in. lol

    Your mistake (among others) was in thinking Trump was going to address those things. Anyone with an ounce of sense should have known he wasn't going to end the fed or do any of your other fairy tail wish list stuff.
    ...and bottom line is that no one on the Nov ballot would have either. Especially not the bitch. So complaining about that which was never going to change anyways is just an excuse to bitch and moan, moan and bitch.


    Like I said, just be glad he didn't come for your gunz after LV and be glad Al Gore isn't on the SC.
     
    newmisty and Son of Gloin like this.
  32. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Excellent article that reiterates what I've been explaining - - there's ZERO difference between the Republocrats and the Demopublicans. Both have run the country straight into a shithole.

    Unfortunately many of the peasants are too dumb to realize it yet.
     
    gnome likes this.
  33. Area51

    Area51 Silver Miner Seeker

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2012
    Messages:
    1,046
    Likes Received:
    692
    Trophy Points:
    113

    In other words, Trump Almighty is just another bullshitter spouting hollow rhetoric.

    Remember his promises about cracking down on Wall Street? Not only does he go limp and let the banks carry on with their fraud he puts a piece of shit banker in control of the fed.

    I did have a chuckle at the last line in your comment. Nobody's coming for any guns, my friend. Let's be realistic about that little confiscation spook story.

    As for Al Gore, I couldn't give a fuck if he waddled his fat ass into a SC chair any more than I did about his laughable fairy talk on global warming and the "melting" Arctic.

    Irrelevant who gets appointed - - the SC isn't going to do anything to help the peasants, and it sure as fuck isn't going to do anything to hurt the wealthy elites. Put whatever puppets they want into the SC because it's not going to change the grand scheme.
     
    gnome and FunnyMoney like this.
  34. Joe King

    Joe King Gold Member Gold Chaser

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    5,131
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Instant Gratification Land
    With the recent high profile shootings, had the skank been your POTUS, there's no doubt she'd be at least calling for more gun control, including potential bans on certain weapons if dems also happened to have a majority in Congress. Ie: had the election gone the other way.


    I was using "Al Gore" as a euphemism for an ultra lib that would be helping to decide the Constitutionality of laws long after Trump is no longer in office. Also, had the skank won, do really not think that Ginsberg and Kennedy would not soon be retiring? They're hanging on for dear life just hoping Trump doesn't get re-elected so as to not be replaced by conservative leaning Justices. That's one thing that will help going forward, a non-liberal Court. That way even if the dems get control and start trying to enact a bunch of crap Legislation, they'll at least have a harder time doin' it.

    I'm not like you and looking for a Saviour to become POTUS to save us all from tyranny. Because in the grand scheme of things, I'm smart enough to know that the odds of it happening during my short years here are next to nil. If it does, hey! what'aya know, bonus! woo! hoo! Until then, it's reality. Not some pie in the sky hope for some thing that I already know will just set me up for disappointment. Ie: I don't want to go through life being constantly pissed because someone else ain't doin' something I think they ought to be doing.


    Really? So you'd be ok with 7-9 lib Court for the next 20-30 years that would approve every wacky idea Bernies followers want enacted? Because that's what would happen had she won the election. She'd have 3 picks, at least. SC Justices nominations are critical. Especially so if you want to have any chance at all of steering things back towards anything even resembling a conservative interpretation of the Constitution. I assume you do in fact prefer that over having a Court packed with her people?


    Had she won, the Court would have been set to go in the exact opposite direction, but you somehow insist there's no difference at all? Are you blind and deaf? Or just wanting to always look at things negatively and throw rocks no matter what, because no one on the ballot was going to address the things you drone on about. Yes, we get it already. Trump is not RP. Trump is not going to end the fed. Get over it already. Anyone who thought he was going to do those things has to have been high or drunk on something. At no time during his campaign did I ever once think that anything he said or inferred meant ending the fed, closing bases, and restoring a 1791 interpretation of the Constitution complete with Au and Ag in our money. I mean, c'mon man. How could you even begin to think any of that was going to happen?

    Yea, I get it, that's like a Libertarian's wet dream and I would love to see those things happen too, but I have to be Mr. Reality here and try to keep my expectations somewhat reasonable so as to not have to go through life pissy and bitchy all the time due to not having gotten my way in every f'ing thing out there.
     
    Son of Gloin likes this.
  35. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    24,134
    Likes Received:
    26,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    has there been a libya yet?

    how about a bengazi?

    who has he put in the supremes?

    who has gashed the mainstream media to now show them for what they are to all, rather than just to the informed junkies like most of us?

    who has asked to change the welfare programs, previously considered untouchable?

    when was the last time companies were announcing coming back to the US in multiples rather than 1 every 5 yrs or so?

    when was the last time companies were giving bonuses to employees in size and quantity?

    who has exposed the repubs for what they are?

    would amazon and buffet be getting together to form a new company to fight medical costs if a dem were in the WH?

    To me anyway, there are a number of positives that must be accounted for against the negatives,

    not a fan of the guy, but certainly can appreciate the difference of having him vs the emailer or the socialist in there.
     
  36. FunnyMoney

    FunnyMoney Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I think Area51 might be overjoyed to see just one thing happen. Bringing back the troops is the start he was looking for but any one of the big things, if they were to happen (any of the 3 RP ran on) would be a nice start for me.

    I don't see any of the things that you mention to hold a candle to our young soldiers in harm's way so 5 time deferred status leaders can play king. But hey, those things you mentioned in that post are important to you and you have them. While I see them as your consolation prize, I guess you find them more important than I do.

    But I also don't see any honest reflection on what America has become in your posts. Maybe you believe where America is today, following Bush and Obama (and with a current leader pretty much doing a lot of the same) is all just ok. But in the eyes of hundreds of millions of people around the globe we've gone from a beacon of hope to murderers for hire. I must say, the case they make is quite convincing.

    Certainly our middle class families are not totally to blame but we've been warned on several occasions that this would be coming. Generals and political leaders have told us in no uncertain terms. But as long as ultimate fighting is on the tube, some beers are in the fridge and those damn liberal commies stay out of power everything will be just good enough is the story I hear. Don't worry, be happy. If that works for you, then congrats on your ability to coexist with them. Inside their matrix life is good.

    But for me and for mine, that's not our take on things. What you call "pissy and bitchy" isn't really at all. What you see as upsetting, negative or complaining is in reality only an urgency, a need for true freedom which you don't recognize or don't see as important or as never to be attained.

    For me, the definition of freedom is not a volunteer army. For me, there is no true freedom inside the matrix. Freedom is not a choice between a gov't job or a much lower standard of living. Where this nation is headed, you may recognize that when the choice gets presented to you.
     
  37. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    24,134
    Likes Received:
    26,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    we have spoken to it frequently, but the importance of the supremes cannot be understated.

    JK correctly refers to it again above.

    whether the fed reserve act, the welfare state, or socialist policies, they have all traveled through that house.
     
  38. FunnyMoney

    FunnyMoney Silver Member Silver Miner

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2010
    Messages:
    2,764
    Likes Received:
    1,489
    Trophy Points:
    113
    $700 Billion MIC
    soldiers for hire
    commander 'n chief
     
  39. Scorpio

    Scorpio Скорпион Founding Member Board Elder Site Mgr Site Supporter ++

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2010
    Messages:
    24,134
    Likes Received:
    26,227
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FM,

    If you believe people here are content with things as they are, then your bias will not allow you to appreciate where they are at.

    A RP solution is not forthcoming. Talking people to death with no action isn't changing anything.
     
    mayhem, itsamess, newmisty and 3 others like this.
  40. solarion

    solarion Gold Member Gold Chaser Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2013
    Messages:
    4,885
    Likes Received:
    7,285
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I see headlines like this and think Trump may just be alright...

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/second-federal-judge-blocks-trump-plan-to-end-daca-1518567376

    Then there's the Paris climate accords, where he gave gloabalists the finger...and TPP which died a quick death on his watch.

    So far, dude doesn't seem to be a super warmonger like the neocon in liberal garb he defeated. He's not all about open borders, he's actually doing damage to some entitlement programs(SNAP), and my greatest concern with him was that he'd go nuts with the police state crap, but he's been relatively tame there too...at least so far. I daresay I'm pretty happy with this guy in the oval office. Other than a Paul, I can't really come up with anyone I'd rather see as POTUS.
     

Share This Page