[Winstonm]

 Winstonm, on 2022-August-10, 16:35, said:

Today, Trump invoked the 5th amendment over 400 times.

It wasn’t so much he did it but what he said to his lawyer, “isn’t that the one about Thou shalt not commit adultery?”

[y66]

BLS reported today that the producer price index for final demand of goods and services fell 0.5% in July mainly as the result of a 9% decrease in energy prices.

[y66]

Bill Kristol said:

What is not open to doubt is that the Republican party, which seemed to be flirting with post-Trumpism just a few weeks ago, has now come roaring back as an authoritarian cult. Trump has not changed. But he has changed Republicans.

[y66]

Paul Krugman said:

The GOP's main campaign plank is getting sawed off.

Wonking Out: The Meaning of Falling Inflation

[kenberg]

Everyone has noticed that gas prices have fallen and I have seen some of the welcome data about inflation but it is too early to pop open the champagne, especially regarding the effect on the election. I watch news, I read news, I am not exactly stupid but if someone were to ask me to explain the various indices I would suggest that they ask someone else. People have to eat, and prices at the grocery store are up. That's what a lot of voters will see. Maybe they will fall. Maybe substantially. We can hope so for all sorts of reasons.


This is not disagreeing with Krugman's economic comments, I sometimes (often?) do, but my point here is different. There are actually good reasons for voting D this fall and not just that the Republicans have lost their collective minds. Although that is a pretty good reason. I am saying it is way too early to think that gas prices going down is going to, in itself, change votes. Dems have some serious thinking to do.

I am actually fine with hearing what Krug thinks. Just don't open the champagne yet.

[Winstonm]

One of the main reasons to reject Republicans is that they are willing to eliminate free and fair elections. At this point a vote for a Republican is a vote for autocracy.

[y66]

 kenberg, on 2022-August-11, 14:12, said:

I am saying it is way too early to think that gas prices going down is going to, in itself, change votes. Dems have some serious thinking to do.

I'm pretty sure the majority WC opinion is that presidents can only do so much to affect the economy and that there are more important reasons than recent price movements to vote for candidate X, Y or Z. But good news is better than bad news and I am very happy to see this trending in the right direction for Biden and the country. Let's hope it continues.

[kenberg]

 y66, on 2022-August-11, 17:48, said:

I'm pretty sure the majority WC opinion is that presidents can only do so much to affect the economy and that there are more important reasons than recent price movements to vote for candidate X, Y or Z. But good news is better than bad news and I am very happy to see this trending in the right direction for Biden and the country. Let's hope it continues.

I have heard it often but I am not sure what is meant. I heard only a small part of what Biden said the other day about inflation, he talked about the good news, but I am pretty sure he did not say "Of course this good news has nothing to do with anything I or the Dems have done". The Inflation Reduction Act has tings in it that have little to do with inflation, and of course the naming of bills is an exercise in publicity, but is it a total misnomer?

Consider climate change. Joe Biden cannot command it to rain tomorrow, but presumably policy decisions will affect climate, for better or worse, over the next decade. Is the economy not similar? Does it not matter whether we follow the advice of Krugman or of Summers?


I suppose I grew up with the idea that the attack on Pearl Harbor, rather than Roosevelt's policies, brought an end to the depression. Perhaps so. No doubt the attack on Ukraine has had bad effects on the world economy.


The president, by himself, cannot alter the course of the economy all that much. He needs congress to enact some or all of his suggestions. I like to think that if the suggestions are good and if congress enacts good suggestions, this will have a good effect on the economy. The argument that I put in red, is it saying that "No, well, maybe the effect will be a tad around the edges but really the economy just goes its own way regardless"? My guess is that this is not what is meant, but I am far from sure what is meant. I like to think that good choices will produce good results. Naive?

[y66]

 kenberg, on 2022-August-12, 06:17, said:

I have heard it often but I am not sure what is meant. I heard only a small part of what Biden said the other day about inflation, he talked about the good news, but I am pretty sure he did not say "Of course this good news has nothing to do with anything I or the Dems have done". The Inflation Reduction Act has tings in it that have little to do with inflation, and of course the naming of bills is an exercise in publicity, but is it a total misnomer?

Consider climate change. Joe Biden cannot command it to rain tomorrow, but presumably policy decisions will affect climate, for better or worse, over the next decade. Is the economy not similar? Does it not matter whether we follow the advice of Krugman or of Summers?


I suppose I grew up with the idea that the attack on Pearl Harbor, rather than Roosevelt's policies, brought an end to the depression. Perhaps so. No doubt the attack on Ukraine has had bad effects on the world economy.


The president, by himself, cannot alter the course of the economy all that much. He needs congress to enact some or all of his suggestions. I like to think that if the suggestions are good and if congress enacts good suggestions, this will have a good effect on the economy. The argument that I put in red, is it saying that "No, well, maybe the effect will be a tad around the edges but really the economy just goes its own way regardless"? My guess is that this is not what is meant, but I am far from sure what is meant. I like to think that good choices will produce good results. Naive?

I think the effect of individual presidents is greater than a tad around the edges but still quite limited relative to the effect that Federal Reserve Board policy has. Obama had a rare opportunity to accelerate the economic recovery by pushing for more stimulus in 2009 which he was not likely to get from Congress. Still, I think it was a big mistake for him and Summers not to have tried harder. Carter had a rare opportunity to tackle inflation which he handled by appointing Paul Volcker as Fed Chair in 1979. Supporting the Fed and letting it do its job while also guarding against excessive optimism in the self-correcting power of free markets is probably the most we should expect from presidents.

[Winstonm]

How much damage did a Trump presidency do and is it still doing it?

Quote

On the Sunday after the election, when Biden was declared the president-elect and foreign leaders began to offer their congratulations, the New York Times discussed the deeper reactions of European leaders to Biden's election:

Quote

David O'Sullivan, former European Union ambassador to the United States, said he looked forward to a renewal of American leadership — if not the hegemony of the past, then at least "America's role as the convening nation" for multilateral initiatives and institutions.

But the world has changed, and so has the United States, where the Biden victory was relatively narrow and not an obvious repudiation of Mr. Trump's policies. A fundamental trust has been broken, and many European diplomats and experts believe that U.S. foreign policy is no longer bipartisan, so is no longer reliable.

[Winstonm]

Donald Trump is like the hotshot who has lorded it over the local duplicate for years, but now he's finally playing the Spingold Knockout Teams and his first opponents are Hamman and Wolff who look at him and say, "We play hardball here."

[Chas_P]

 kenberg, on 2022-August-07, 19:28, said:

Often when a piece is cited I look it up as I did with the M. B.Matthews article. It's at
You posted something by M. B. Matthews that denies the legitimacy of the election but you have an out, M. B. Matthews said it, you didn't say it, you just quoted it.

That's not my point at all. Here's my point:

Quote

A large part of Trump’s appeal was that he was a bona fide outsider. He distrusted the experts who believe they knew better than the average American how to run the country. This distrust was appealing to Trump’s base who believed, and with good reason, that it is the experts who created the despotic mess in which we find ourselves.

I, like you, know very little (if anything) about M. B. Matthews other than what I read on the internet. I like his opinion. You don't. That's OK. I think none the less of you. We just don't all see things the same way.

[y66]

Laurence Tribe at Harvard Law said:

You don’t claim, without a shred of evidence, that law enforcement planted documents during a search and seizure unless you believe that they found something incriminating.

[johnu]

y66 said:

Laurence Tribe at Harvard Law said:

You don’t claim, without a shred of evidence, that law enforcement planted documents during a search and seizure unless you believe that they found something incriminating.

And you certainly don't claim without a shred of evidence except your own word (a serial and compulsive liar) that you magically declassified those "planted" documents that you know nothing about before you took them from the White House. Those 2 claims are pretty much mutually exclusive.

[hrothgar]

 Chas_P, on 2022-August-12, 18:26, said:

That's not my point at all. Here's my point:
I, like you, know very little (if anything) about M. B. Matthews other than what I read on the internet. I like his opinion. You don't. That's OK. I think none the less of you.

I'd say that we judge you by the company you keep, however, in your case there's really no need.

We have plenty of firsthand evidence that you're a racist f*ckwit...

[Chas_P]

Richard obviously has the panel moderators in his hip pocket.

[Gilithin]

 Chas_P, on 2022-August-13, 17:57, said:

Richard obviously has the panel moderators in his hip pocket.

There seems to be considerably more evidence to suport Richard's opinion than that of M.B.Matthews. If moderators want to get involved, I would question on which side they should throw their weight.

[hrothgar]

 Chas_P, on 2022-August-13, 17:57, said:

Richard obviously has the panel moderators in his hip pocket.

Perhaps the moderators take context into account.

I have a long history of providing valuable content to the forums.
You're a self admitted troll and a racist.

I wonder why folks don't have that much sympathy for you...

[pilowsky]

Noam Chomsky discusses power, justice and the state with Michel Foucault in 1971.
Plus ca change.
There's a part 1 - here's part 2.

[kenberg]

 Chas_P, on 2022-August-12, 18:26, said:

That's not my point at all. Here's my point:
I, like you, know very little (if anything) about M. B. Matthews other than what I read on the internet. I like his opinion. You don't. That's OK. I think none the less of you. We just don't all see things the same way.

I will take a stab at this. You quote " He distrusted the experts who believe they knew better than the average American how to run the country. This distrust was appealing to Trump's base who believed, and with good reason, that it is the experts who created the despotic mess in which we find ourselves.". So I will look at levels of mistrust.

A: Rain was predicted for this morning but did not happen. This is hardly unusual.
I'll move on.

B: A while back I got bitten by a bug (or so I assume) while mowing the grass. Not unusual, and usually I ignore it. But this one produced a large swelling the next day, and around 3 the next morning I woke up with even larger swelling and significant pain. So I got up and sent a message to my doctor. He arranged for me to meet with his Physician's Assistant. When I saw the PA I mentioned a new, and powerful, drug that I was taking for a different issue and expressed concern over interactions. The PA prescribed an anti-biotic and assured me that it has no adverse interactions with anything. I have had bad results with that PA before and even if I hadn't, checking online is often wise. Yes, that anti-biotic has adverse interactions with many drugs including the one I was taking and anyway it was recommended that it be taken only as a last resort. I have, from that experience and others, good reason to be cautious about that PA. When I am ill, I hope for medical treatment, but I do not accept everything I am told without question. Trust but verify, someone said. A Republican, as I recall.

C; Ok, now we get to Trump. And yes, I will speak of his claims of election fraud. It's a big issue. And the reasons for distrust, and the consequences, are enormous. Even before the election there were repeated claims that DT could not possibly lose a fair election and so, inverting that statement if trump lost then the election was unfair. That is still the fundamental argument. If the counted vote did not show Trump to be the winner, then there must have been fraud. QED. Of course many Republicans have rejected this argument. So they are RINOS. We have political ads with armed politicians on a RINO hunt. If you even dare to say Biden won, you are a RINO.
The distrust here is not like the distrust of a weatherman, or even like my distrust of a particular PA or my general reluctance to give full trust to anything a doctor tells me. This distrust is closer in kind to what a woman out on a date might feel if she spots the guy slipping something into her drink. You leave, you call a friend to come and get you. Maybe you can get the guy put in jail, maybe you can't, but there are no other issues to discuss.
Distrusting experts is natural, experts are sometimes wrong. Often Krugman says one thing, Summers says another, they cannot both be right, and I recommend accepting that without a great deal of study we cannot see who is right and who is wrong. Maybe both are wrong. But that is very very different from what Trump is doing. He is lying, he is promoting violence. He is the fraud of the last election.

Distrust experts? Fine, don't we all? Trust Trump? You gotta be kidding. And it's not funny.

Side issue on Trolls: Chas and I are probably not the only ones who read what Chas and I say. So if one or the other of us is a Troll then non]trollish readers can still decide what they think of what we say. Or not. My (older) daughter's favorite childhood story was The Three Billy Goats Gruff. I never asked whether she liked the goats or the troll best.