Thread: Today in Trump

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by Master

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Originally Posted by walrus

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Yyeeeahh.... on that.....

While it's tempting to blame high pharma prices strictly on Obama, the truth of the matter is pharma prices have been trending higher than most other developed countries since the early 2000's. There's plenty of blame to throw around. You also have to look at other factors as well. New, blockbuster pharma drugs don't come up on a regular basis. Sometimes it's a bit of "feast-famine." During Obama's tenure various blockbuster drugs hit the market, pretty much impacting the bottom line. That's not to exonerate Obama or any other POTUS during the past couple of decades. They should ALL be doing their damnest to keep these spiraling prices from going completely out of control. Pharma corporations operate at ridiculous margins... and much of that is in order to make up for extremely high R&D expenditures, and many times "less than optimal" operating efficiencies.

Tits I hear you but obama was supposed to make a deal with big pharma but it became to complicated and he wanted the bill passed so he dropped it

Lobbyists are who really run the country. The POTUS is but a puppet. That's the way it goes with big pharma.... that's the way it goes with oil.... and you could probably add the NRA in there as well.

Still..... all Presidents dance to the tune of the powerful lobbying interests.

If true that is sad and undemocratic. I would hope it is influence rather than actual direct impact from the lobbying groups.

I believe that what a RIGHT is has been very twisted and now everything known to man is something that should be a right.

The NRA is a RIGHTS advocacy group...they help protect the RIGHT to own firearms (and originally any kind of firearm available too). It's nothing about hunting it's nothing about anything other than self protection from someone going after your family or property or endangering your life OR overthrowing a tyrannical government (which has occurred a few times in American history).


Health insurance has become more expensive as government has become more involved in it. Big Pharma and how drugs are made and then made available to the citizens are also issues which must be addressed

You'll find there was nothing in my post labeling the NRA good or bad. I just stated a fact that the NRA, like other organizations with powerful lobbies, exerts a considerable amount of influence in politics, particularly Presidential politics.

Having said that Lyle, it's a bit telling that you immediately jumped to defend the NRA from a perceived attack.

While on the subject though, my own very personal opinion is that the NRA has dropped the ball on several instances where a show of leadership on issues like bump stocks would've made it sooo much easier to ban things that should be banned.

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by Spicoli

So, still no public report of the Mueller investigation. I think they're just going for the long delay before actual complete sentences in Mueller's own words are out. Trump went on his treasonous ranting again about 'them'. We need to see the complete report, period. Republicant's and Demodont's agreed 420-0 to do so. Now they're hedging juuust a bit. I'd actually like the healthcare debate to take off again but was surprised Trump dropped the proposal to again blitz affordable healthcare act without anything to replace it. Literally nothing on the table. One thing I do no is these bastards are still penalizing tax payers who cannot afford "affordable" healthcare. I think I'm going to make a stubborn effort to find weekly pluses and minuses for the Administration policy wise. Early contenders on the Democrat side are way too blurry to determine. The field is one giant clustefk of retread Bernie and some kid with no specifics jumping on top of tables and stools at every stop with the cameras.

He set the healthcare debate off again because he wants to destroy Obama's greatest achievement. There's nothing else to it. The GOP don't have anything to replace Obamacare with and don't want anything to do with replacing it. They don't want the subject to come up in the 2020 election at all. Trump has appointed a crack team of Republicans to come up with a healthcare plan the most prominent of whom is the guy who ran the company responsible for the biggest Medicare fraud in history. Of course he paid a $1.7 billion fine (which was nearly as much as he stole from the government!) and instead of going to jail is now the Governor of Florida.

Here's how the GOP are reacting to Trump's healthcare push:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...h-care-1241142


The Democratic field is awful. Unelectable Bernie and a bunch of finger in the wind politicians. Literally any one of them would be an improvement on Trump though. It's not like they're going to have sixty votes in the Senate to get anything done and Trump won't be able to get anything through the House so all in all the country would be much better off with a Democrat winning in 2020.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...reform-1247632

So now the great GOP healthcare plan is going to be released after the 2020 election. Being on the verge of releasing a great healthcare plan is now basically one of the great Republican party traditions. Certainly anything relating to policy isn't any kind of tradition. If you remember candidate trump promised much cheaper, much better healthcare that would cover everybody and that the government would pay for (socialism!) but then when he got elected he changed this to who knew healthcare could be so complicated? and left the whole thing to the Senate. The Senate came up with a brilliant plan that removed healthcare from 30+ million people and gave the resulting savings away as a massive corporate tax cut.

In two years controlling all branches of government the only actual concrete policy achievement Trump has had is to pass a massive corporate tax cut. Candidate Trump quite rightly told Americans that the economy was rigged in favour of the elite and his only achievement has been to rig it even further in their favour.

Of course slashing corporate taxes was supposed to trigger a huge wave of investment that would supercharge economic growth and make everybody much richer. The reality?




Oh. And economic growth for the fourth quarter of last year has been revised downward. Trump missed out on three percent growth last year. Obama had a year with slightly higher growth than last year. And current estimates for growth for the first quarter of this year are 1-1.5%. So even with a gigantic increase in government spending and almost 17% of a massive tax cut going to the bottom 99% Trump failed to hit three percent growth.

Being completely honest punting healthcare after literally years of admonishing and lambasting Obamas "plan" is incomprehensible. Frankly weak. Look...I have many problems with the affordable care act and how it was implemented. It has cost me a good couple of thousand dollars but thats another story. BUT..to have complete control for 2 of 4 years and to spend endless hrs weeks months shredding the plan of another while offering..no not even offering..having zero zippo zilch plan of your own is a total embarrassment. Then to use it as a recycled campaign promise that you obviously could not fulfill the first time around.... He has played a lot of otherwise decent people for fools. I just don't get it.

Originally Posted by TitoFan

You'll find there was nothing in my post labeling the NRA good or bad. I just stated a fact that the NRA, like other organizations with powerful lobbies, exerts a considerable amount of influence in politics, particularly Presidential politics.

Having said that Lyle, it's a bit telling that you immediately jumped to defend the NRA from a perceived attack.

While on the subject though, my own very personal opinion is that the NRA has dropped the ball on several instances where a show of leadership on issues like bump stocks would've made it sooo much easier to ban things that should be banned.

I didn't mention whether you said the NRA was good or bad I mentioned that you labeled it a LOBBYIST group. It's not unless you think being in favor of Constitutional rights is a lobby. I personally don't think it is.

Even if you believe the NRA dropped the ball there's no way they did worse than the Broward County Sheriff's Department before the MSD shooting.

By the by did we ever get a motive for the Las Vegas shooting? Odd no?

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by TitoFan

You'll find there was nothing in my post labeling the NRA good or bad. I just stated a fact that the NRA, like other organizations with powerful lobbies, exerts a considerable amount of influence in politics, particularly Presidential politics.

Having said that Lyle, it's a bit telling that you immediately jumped to defend the NRA from a perceived attack.

While on the subject though, my own very personal opinion is that the NRA has dropped the ball on several instances where a show of leadership on issues like bump stocks would've made it sooo much easier to ban things that should be banned.

I didn't mention whether you said the NRA was good or bad I mentioned that you labeled it a LOBBYIST group. It's not unless you think being in favor of Constitutional rights is a lobby. I personally don't think it is.

Even if you believe the NRA dropped the ball there's no way they did worse than the Broward County Sheriff's Department before the MSD shooting.

By the by did we ever get a motive for the Las Vegas shooting? Odd no?

Ok, I get the misunderstanding. No, the NRA is not a lobbyist group per se. But they DO exert a lot of influence in American politics, and any candidate that comes out with the slightest inclination toward ANY form of gun control is automatically blackballed. Maybe that's a more accurate way to put it.

And yes, I agree with you about the Broward Sheriff's Dept. Their actions or lack thereof were deplorable. Which is why I usually maintain there's plenty of blame to throw around on all sides. Mind you, I'm not blaming the NRA for this particular disaster. It's just that after the fact, I'd like to see a little more empathy and willingness to reach certain compromises without sacrificing any of their key beliefs or principles.... that's all.

The Vegas shooting.... wow. Sometimes these things get pushed to the back of the mind by the latest incident. Sad. That one was particularly horrific. I mean, you can protect schools in any number of ways, knowing that it's become vogue to shoot up schools. But a guy mowing down people at a concert from a hotel room? Damn, that just boggles the mind. And no... I don't know of any motive that has been established for that one. That makes it even more scary. It could happen anywhere to anybody.

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

The only reply you could possibly make would feature a bunch of claims I disproved a couple of days ago. Facts and evidence just bounce off you, don't they? They work for a couple of days but then fall off your little shelf and you're back to making them again.

There was no coup. The FBI started investigating the Trump campaign after one of its senior members drunkenly told a barful of foreign diplomats that the Democratic party had been hacked by the Russians and that the results of the hacking would eventually be made public. When the various emails and documents started to be released these diplomats got in touch with the FBI. There were also at least two foreign intelligence agencies that contacted the FBI with evidence of contacts between the Russians and the Trump campaign.

If somebody working for Hillary's campaign had told a bunch of foreign diplomats that a hostile foreign power had stolen documents and information damaging to the Trump campaign and these documents were later released publicly and the diplomats and foreign intelligence agencies then contacted the FBI and told them what they knew what would you expect the FBI to do? They'd have to investigate right? I mean there's no question about it. The FBI is legally obligated to investigate anything like this. They can't not do it. So no coup Lyle.

If that's the case Kirkland then why bother asking the question to begin with? That's what I mean when I say "You're only going to be smug and dismissive" and here you fucking are being smug and dismissive.

Not only that you're full of confidence despite not using any of the names of the people involved.... you mean George Papadopolous? You mean Alexander Downer? I mean I have to guess because you are just spouting generalities. Know of any specifics? Know of Papadopolous meeting with 2 Americans from the Defense Intelligence Agency before meeting with Downer? Know of an Israeli diplomat Christian Cantor & his girlfriend Australian diplomat Erika Thompson setting up the meeting with Downer? Know of Downer securing $25 million for the Clinton Foundation? What of Mifsud? what of Halper? Do you know who those guys are or even care about their involvement in this charade?

"Imagine if Hillary"....hold up, I don't have to imagine Hillary being shady, she is she has been her entire public life and she'll continue to be until the day she dies.

Imagine if Anthony Weiner somehow had classified files on his laptop (that also had child porn on it) in a file marked "Life Insurance" ....yes IMAGINE Kirkland. But hey continue being dismissive.

Time will be the judge

I'm asking you why you think there was a coup so I can pull the answer to bits. You're scared to even post one. And you still haven't named a date for the bet.


I know all the specifics Lyle and crucially I know what they mean in context and I can see that you don't have a clue about the whole thing.

If it's a "charade" Lyle explain why and how.

Come on Lyle. Stop running away and answer the question. Exactly how is the Trump-Russia investigation a "charade"? Have the courage of your convictions man.

Three more replies to make later. Work intrudes.

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Three more replies to make later. Work intrudes.

Aka he needs to stand in Line at the dole and then see his counselor and take his medication

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Ok, I get the misunderstanding. No, the NRA is not a lobbyist group per se. But they DO exert a lot of influence in American politics, and any candidate that comes out with the slightest inclination toward ANY form of gun control is automatically blackballed. Maybe that's a more accurate way to put it.

And yes, I agree with you about the Broward Sheriff's Dept. Their actions or lack thereof were deplorable. Which is why I usually maintain there's plenty of blame to throw around on all sides. Mind you, I'm not blaming the NRA for this particular disaster. It's just that after the fact, I'd like to see a little more empathy and willingness to reach certain compromises without sacrificing any of their key beliefs or principles.... that's all.

The Vegas shooting.... wow. Sometimes these things get pushed to the back of the mind by the latest incident. Sad. That one was particularly horrific. I mean, you can protect schools in any number of ways, knowing that it's become vogue to shoot up schools. But a guy mowing down people at a concert from a hotel room? Damn, that just boggles the mind. And no... I don't know of any motive that has been established for that one. That makes it even more scary. It could happen anywhere to anybody.

The bold and underlined part is quite the conundrum for the NRA. I know I personally feel sorry for victims of gun violence, but nevertheless I would NEVER give up any firearms rights that is unshakable in me regardless what happens to me or my loved ones the right to self defense is something greater than myself.

I would say the NRA does exert power in Washington in that the regular Joe is still able to buy firearms for whatever legal purpose. That rubs a lot of folks the wrong way and I get that, I do. Guns aren't toys, they can do a lot of damage obviously that hasn't changed in the 655 years in which guns have been around. There will be crimes and atrocities committed with them same with knives same with bombs same with any weapon. America was founded on the citizens owning firearms from early settlers to the colonies to the Revolution, to the War Between the States to the Indian Wars to this very day....the gun is a part of our society and should remain so.

The fault consistently lies with government blunders....the Sutherland Spring shooting in Texas shouldn't have had access to guns after he was charged before a general court-martial for: assault on his wife, aggravated assault on his stepson, two charges of pointing a loaded gun at his wife, and two counts of threatening his wife with an unloaded gun. And he served a stretch in a mental health facility as well. Also not every state uses NICS The National Instant Criminal Background Check System. The guns laws vary state to state as well which is fine but the inept nature of how some local law enforcement handle things is very dangerous.

Yeah the lack of motive in Las Vegas deeply concerns me and it makes me question if the authorities aren't releasing key findings on purpose.

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

I'm asking you why you think there was a coup so I can pull the answer to bits. You're scared to even post one. And you still haven't named a date for the bet.


I know all the specifics Lyle and crucially I know what they mean in context and I can see that you don't have a clue about the whole thing.

If it's a "charade" Lyle explain why and how.

Of course, I'd expect nothing less from you. I asked you "When do you think is fair?" I received no answer from you.


Oh sure you know the specifics do you? Maybe that is why you thought Natalia Veselnitskaya was the wife of the Russian Attorney General? Even though she's not married currently and even when she was it wasn't to "The Russian AG" it was to a former deputy transportation minister of Moscow. So I know we don't see eye to eye and I don't think we're ever going to on this so pardon me if I'm not going to waste my time with your bullshit questions which you've got your own set in stone answers for and all you're going to do is whine about what I post then pat yourself on the back for not believing what I'm telling you so yeah you might want to partake in the masterbation of your ego, but I will decline that offer thank you very much.


I'm done dealing with your bullshit Kirkland, I'm more than happy to let time be the judge. You want to debate, there is no debate, not for us, it will be decided by other folks.

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Yyeeeahh.... on that.....

While it's tempting to blame high pharma prices strictly on Obama, the truth of the matter is pharma prices have been trending higher than most other developed countries since the early 2000's. There's plenty of blame to throw around. You also have to look at other factors as well. New, blockbuster pharma drugs don't come up on a regular basis. Sometimes it's a bit of "feast-famine." During Obama's tenure various blockbuster drugs hit the market, pretty much impacting the bottom line. That's not to exonerate Obama or any other POTUS during the past couple of decades. They should ALL be doing their damnest to keep these spiraling prices from going completely out of control. Pharma corporations operate at ridiculous margins... and much of that is in order to make up for extremely high R&D expenditures, and many times "less than optimal" operating efficiencies.

Half of all pharma r and d is funded directly by the government. And that's half the claimed r and d expenditure. In reality the pill companies spend much less than the government does and get the government research for free and patent it. It would cost the government less than a hundred billion a year to fund all the claimed r and d expenditures and they could then licence generic manufacturers to sell the drugs for pennies. They could also stop the price gouging that goes on. Look at the insulin thing right now where firms tweak the formula of the product so they never have to put out a generic for a fraction of the price. It allows them to gouge their customers. An example:

Just got a text from my mom about my dad's insulin prescriptions. The prescription company called to inform them that the 90-day supply of Levemir, one of two insulins he takes, went from $95 to $946. Un-fucking-believable.

https://twitter.com/CahnEmily/status...35730219769861

The government could allow a generic manufacturer to make insulin for pennies. Five dollars a month retail. But the healthcare lobby is too strong for anything like this to happen.

The truth is the Obamacare bill is the furthest left it was possible to go with healthcare. You need to control all three branches of the legislature and have sixty votes in the Senate. The healthcare industry bought off a few DINO centrist Senators so that allowed them to literally write the Obamacare bill. I mean literally too.

Something worth reading on the world's best healthcare system:

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/04/americans-borrowed-usd88-billion-for-health-expenses-in-2018.html



EDIT: actually not much less, a little bit more. But the government could charge five dollars a prescription on top of the few dollars they would cost and it would cover the extra. Pill companies would be out of business and a tiny fraction of the country who own their stock would get a bit of a haircut but so fucking what.

I think the pharma portion is higher than that, although the government certainly foots the bill for a substantial amount. Still... the point to be made is that with the patent protection afforded the pharma companies on their drugs, they're free to put their own price on the pills. I've read about some ridiculous markups, sometimes in the thousands of percentage. Pharma companies, mindful of the patent period, will try to make a killing on the drug, way over and above any costs they may have incurred in development and manufacture. Having worked at pharmaceuticals, as well as other industries, I can say firsthand that operational efficiencies in many pharma facilities leave a lot to be desired. The lack of competition plus patent protection will do that to an industry. Pharmaceuticals should be allowed high margins. After all, salaries, research, and equipment costs are extremely high in comparison with other industries. But this should be regulated. You can't leave the kid next to the cookie jar and expect there to be anything left when you get back.

Roughly speaking the government spends fifty billion a year in socialist subsidies for the pill industry and the pill companies spend seventy billion a year on r and d but by the time you take off the boondoggles and (tax avoidance and payouts to executives disguised as r and d) off the seventy then it might not be much more than the government spends. And it may well be that it's so expensive to do r and d compared to other industries although some of the tech r and d dwarfs it.

But even so why doesn't the government just spend the seventy billion. Nationalise the whole system. Just give the NIH a hundred and twenty billion instead of seventy, tell the pill firms they never get another FDA approval and it's done overnight.

This year America government and people will spend $450 billion on drugs. Legal drugs that is. Somebody help me out with the maths here. There's the potential to save eventually hundreds of billions of dollars a year here. That could pay for another corporate tax cut! Or you know, pay for healthcare for everybody who doesn't have it. And you could even do something similar to the healthcare industry. That would save some real money.

Originally Posted by El Kabong

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

I'm asking you why you think there was a coup so I can pull the answer to bits. You're scared to even post one. And you still haven't named a date for the bet.


I know all the specifics Lyle and crucially I know what they mean in context and I can see that you don't have a clue about the whole thing.

If it's a "charade" Lyle explain why and how.

Of course, I'd expect nothing less from you. I asked you "When do you think is fair?" I received no answer from you.


Oh sure you know the specifics do you? Maybe that is why you thought Natalia Veselnitskaya was the wife of the Russian Attorney General? Even though she's not married currently and even when she was it wasn't to "The Russian AG" it was to a former deputy transportation minister of Moscow. So I know we don't see eye to eye and I don't think we're ever going to on this so pardon me if I'm not going to waste my time with your bullshit questions which you've got your own set in stone answers for and all you're going to do is whine about what I post then pat yourself on the back for not believing what I'm telling you so yeah you might want to partake in the masterbation of your ego, but I will decline that offer thank you very much.


I'm done dealing with your bullshit Kirkland, I'm more than happy to let time be the judge. You want to debate, there is no debate, not for us, it will be decided by other folks.

You're terrified to actually put down in detail what you think happened. You're happy to rant away about a whole bunch of Democrats from Obama on down who are going to be arrested and that the investigation is a sham and that you and a bunch of like minded nutcases might decide to take a second amendment solution into your own hands if the crazy conspiracy theory you believe in doesn't become public and expose the deep staters. But you won't actually spell out what you think did happen. You've just spat your dummy out and are now running away again.

Let's name the date then seeing as you won't do it yourself. How about the date that the Mueller report comes out and confirms that Mueller was not secretly working with Trump to expose the biggest scandal in history and indict endless Democrats and deep staters but was in fact investigating Russian interference in the 2016 election and their theft of various DNC/Clinton campaign electronic documents which they then released via Wikileaks and other sources. When that happens you have to pay your $20 to the NAACP and Black Lives Matter. $10 each with verifiable receipts posted here.

Originally Posted by Master

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Originally Posted by walrus

Originally Posted by TitoFan

Yyeeeahh.... on that.....

While it's tempting to blame high pharma prices strictly on Obama, the truth of the matter is pharma prices have been trending higher than most other developed countries since the early 2000's. There's plenty of blame to throw around. You also have to look at other factors as well. New, blockbuster pharma drugs don't come up on a regular basis. Sometimes it's a bit of "feast-famine." During Obama's tenure various blockbuster drugs hit the market, pretty much impacting the bottom line. That's not to exonerate Obama or any other POTUS during the past couple of decades. They should ALL be doing their damnest to keep these spiraling prices from going completely out of control. Pharma corporations operate at ridiculous margins... and much of that is in order to make up for extremely high R&D expenditures, and many times "less than optimal" operating efficiencies.

Tits I hear you but obama was supposed to make a deal with big pharma but it became to complicated and he wanted the bill passed so he dropped it

Lobbyists are who really run the country. The POTUS is but a puppet. That's the way it goes with big pharma.... that's the way it goes with oil.... and you could probably add the NRA in there as well.

Still..... all Presidents dance to the tune of the powerful lobbying interests.

If true that is sad and undemocratic. I would hope it is influence rather than actual direct impact from the lobbying groups.

It's not influence. In America lobbyists literally write the bills that get passed. I'm not kidding. Whoever has the most money controls government policy. So Middle East policy is controlled by the Israel lobby, agricultural policy by the agricultural policy, financial regulation is controlled by the financial industry and so on.

Originally Posted by Spicoli

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by Kirkland Laing

Originally Posted by Spicoli

So, still no public report of the Mueller investigation. I think they're just going for the long delay before actual complete sentences in Mueller's own words are out. Trump went on his treasonous ranting again about 'them'. We need to see the complete report, period. Republicant's and Demodont's agreed 420-0 to do so. Now they're hedging juuust a bit. I'd actually like the healthcare debate to take off again but was surprised Trump dropped the proposal to again blitz affordable healthcare act without anything to replace it. Literally nothing on the table. One thing I do no is these bastards are still penalizing tax payers who cannot afford "affordable" healthcare. I think I'm going to make a stubborn effort to find weekly pluses and minuses for the Administration policy wise. Early contenders on the Democrat side are way too blurry to determine. The field is one giant clustefk of retread Bernie and some kid with no specifics jumping on top of tables and stools at every stop with the cameras.

He set the healthcare debate off again because he wants to destroy Obama's greatest achievement. There's nothing else to it. The GOP don't have anything to replace Obamacare with and don't want anything to do with replacing it. They don't want the subject to come up in the 2020 election at all. Trump has appointed a crack team of Republicans to come up with a healthcare plan the most prominent of whom is the guy who ran the company responsible for the biggest Medicare fraud in history. Of course he paid a $1.7 billion fine (which was nearly as much as he stole from the government!) and instead of going to jail is now the Governor of Florida.

Here's how the GOP are reacting to Trump's healthcare push:

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...h-care-1241142


The Democratic field is awful. Unelectable Bernie and a bunch of finger in the wind politicians. Literally any one of them would be an improvement on Trump though. It's not like they're going to have sixty votes in the Senate to get anything done and Trump won't be able to get anything through the House so all in all the country would be much better off with a Democrat winning in 2020.

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/...reform-1247632

So now the great GOP healthcare plan is going to be released after the 2020 election. Being on the verge of releasing a great healthcare plan is now basically one of the great Republican party traditions. Certainly anything relating to policy isn't any kind of tradition. If you remember candidate trump promised much cheaper, much better healthcare that would cover everybody and that the government would pay for (socialism!) but then when he got elected he changed this to who knew healthcare could be so complicated? and left the whole thing to the Senate. The Senate came up with a brilliant plan that removed healthcare from 30+ million people and gave the resulting savings away as a massive corporate tax cut.

In two years controlling all branches of government the only actual concrete policy achievement Trump has had is to pass a massive corporate tax cut. Candidate Trump quite rightly told Americans that the economy was rigged in favour of the elite and his only achievement has been to rig it even further in their favour.

Of course slashing corporate taxes was supposed to trigger a huge wave of investment that would supercharge economic growth and make everybody much richer. The reality?




Oh. And economic growth for the fourth quarter of last year has been revised downward. Trump missed out on three percent growth last year. Obama had a year with slightly higher growth than last year. And current estimates for growth for the first quarter of this year are 1-1.5%. So even with a gigantic increase in government spending and almost 17% of a massive tax cut going to the bottom 99% Trump failed to hit three percent growth.

Being completely honest punting healthcare after literally years of admonishing and lambasting Obamas "plan" is incomprehensible. Frankly weak. Look...I have many problems with the affordable care act and how it was implemented. It has cost me a good couple of thousand dollars but thats another story. BUT..to have complete control for 2 of 4 years and to spend endless hrs weeks months shredding the plan of another while offering..no not even offering..having zero zippo zilch plan of your own is a total embarrassment. Then to use it as a recycled campaign promise that you obviously could not fulfill the first time around.... He has played a lot of otherwise decent people for fools. I just don't get it.

They've been coming up with a great healthcare plan any day now for the last ten years. This started in 2009. Obamacare was going to be a disaster and the GOP replacement would be great but we have yet to see it. The only plan that they had was the one that failed to pass by a couple of votes in 2017. That would have scrapped all the government spending on Obamacare, paid the savings out as a corporate tax cut and left the states and the magic of the marketplace to provide healthcare to thirty plus million people which of course means thirty plus million would have lost their healthcare. That was the actual plan, I'm not making it up. Trump has had endless luck since he took office but the luckiest thing so far is that the GOP failed to repeal Obamacare by a couple of votes. If they had he'd be seriously fucked now. For somebody who makes his money putting his name on things Trumpcare would have destroyed his brand entirely.

The GOP don't actually have any policies other than cutting taxes and cutting regulations that prevent businesses maximising profits. They won't cut regulations (regulations lobbied for by big business to preserve their market share) that prevent small businesses becoming big businesses but they will scrap regulations on fossil fuel companies that say prevent them dumping mining waste in streams or on chemical companies that prevent them selling a pesticide that damages childrens' brains. The GOP is a party that believes that government doesn't work and when they get elected they set about proving it.

The worst deregulatory stuff is going on in the financial industry. Bush replaced the heads of the various regulatory agencies with bank lobbyists, people who had spent their careers lobbying to remove regulations on the industry. It was like putting a fox in charge of a henhouse and it directly led to the 2008 economic meltdown and trillions of dollars in debt and lost growth/income etc.

So guess what Trump is doing. I mean, after 2008 you'd think they would maybe think twice about doing the same thing again. You would, wouldn't you.

The Obama era re regulation featured the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau which as the name suggests is supposed to prevent banks robbing their customers. Trump sacked the guy who ran it and appointed a payday loans lobbyist who had previously called the CFPB a "sad, sick joke" to run it. Here's how that is going:

https://theconversation.com/mick-mul...ment-cog-98842

https://www.housingwire.com/articles...vices-industry


Note the end of oversight on "financial innovation" in the last article. That worked out so well in 2008.

Republican healthcare:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/01/o...nion&smtyp=cur