Kamala Harris booked exclusive interview with Brett Baier on Fox

[Aloha Hoosier]

What did. Not what might could is possible if this that and those things possibly happen.

Fact
Speculation/opinion

They were in agreement before the spending. They were speculating and they were right. You and I thought they were right at the time. Why would we dismiss their speculation this time? The answer for some is that they don't like the possibility that their guy's policies might not be so good. The tariffs on everything idea is a bad idea, right?

Trump's economic plans would worsen inflation, experts say

Donald Trump has vowed that if voters return him to the White House, “inflation will vanish completely.”

apnews.com

As Trump touts tariffs, report claims they would cost the typical American $2,600 a year

If former President Trump is elected, he vows to raise tariffs on goods from China to help bolster manufacturing. One report, however, suggests those tariffs could cost the typical American $2,600.

www.ksby.com

Trump’s tariff plans would be disastrous for America and the world

You may think his worst ideas won’t get far. Sadly, on trade he has been singularly influential

www.economist.com

 

[mcmurtry66]

They were in agreement before the spending. They were speculating and they were right. You and I thought they were right at the time. Why would we dismiss their speculation this time? The answer for some is that they don't like the possibility that their guy's policies might not be so good. The tariffs on everything idea is a bad idea, right?

Trump's economic plans would worsen inflation, experts say

Donald Trump has vowed that if voters return him to the White House, “inflation will vanish completely.”

apnews.com

As Trump touts tariffs, report claims they would cost the typical American $2,600 a year

If former President Trump is elected, he vows to raise tariffs on goods from China to help bolster manufacturing. One report, however, suggests those tariffs could cost the typical American $2,600.

www.ksby.com

Trump’s tariff plans would be disastrous for America and the world

You may think his worst ideas won’t get far. Sadly, on trade he has been singularly influential

www.economist.com

MSN

because we already KNOW what far left progressive policies give rise to. the public knows. everyone knows. we have evidence of same. facts. data. we have no idea what trump will do, what will pass, etc. it's pure speculation. we also know that he already had four years in office. the inflation rate was in the twos and the day he left was 1.4. i'll stick with evidence not "opinions" and speculation.

 

[bailey777]

BREAKING: A record amount of Americans say their personal finances are WORSE than 4 years ago.That's worse than 1992 when the incumbent party lost in a 370 electoral vote landslide.

Worse: 52%

Better: 39%A horrible environment for Kamala Harris.

 

[hookyIU1990]

Economists aren't some monolithic block that is in lock step agreement. "They" may be in agreement, but "They" is a subset of the larger group.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

MSN

because we already KNOW what far left progressive policies give rise to. the public knows. everyone knows. we have evidence of same. facts. data. we have no idea what trump will do, what will pass, etc. it's pure speculation. we also know that he already had four years in office. the inflation rate was in the twos and the day he left was 1.4. i'll stick with evidence not "opinions" and speculation.

He can do tariffs without Congress. They'll be inflationary and Americans will pay the tax.

 

[mcmurtry66]

BREAKING: A record amount of Americans say their personal finances are WORSE than 4 years ago.That's worse than 1992 when the incumbent party lost in a 370 electoral vote landslide.

Worse: 52%

Better: 39%A horrible environment for Kamala Harris.

Welcome back big dog!!!!!!! I think this is the one. If memory serves me your predictions weren't far off on the last one. hone it in a bit and i think you might be spot on

 

[ChicagoFineForNow]

MSN

because we already KNOW what far left progressive policies give rise to. the public knows. everyone knows. we have evidence of same. facts. data. we have no idea what trump will do, what will pass, etc. it's pure speculation. we also know that he already had four years in office. the inflation rate was in the twos and the day he left was 1.4. i'll stick with evidence not "opinions" and speculation.

You were all doom and gloom a few weeks ago. Seems like you might be starting to believe. I am also letting myself believe, albeit it only slightly. The Democrat's ground game and get out the vote effort is still the apparatus that Obama built, and it's not to be underestimated.

See an example below:

 

[mcmurtry66]

He can do tariffs without Congress. They'll be inflationary and Americans will pay the tax.

and harris biden/harris did the border without congress. endless stays etc. as i said i'm going on FACTS. FACTS. do you want me to show you what trump's inflation rate was throughout his tenure? there's a record you know.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

and harris biden/harris did the border without congress. endless stays etc. as i said i'm going on FACTS. FACTS. do you want me to show you what trump's inflation rate was throughout his tenure?

Stop. I know what the inflation rate was. It was 2.45 right before COVID. It's 2.4 now - about the same. Presidents don't get credit or blame for these things - Congress and the Fed do. COVID killed demand so of course inflation decreased in 2020. That's an uncommon event.

Are we not going to take Trump seriously when he says he's going to put in place huge tariffs and tariff increases?

 

[mcmurtry66]

You were all doom and gloom a few weeks ago. Seems like you might be starting to believe. I am also letting myself believe, albeit it only slightly. The Democrat's ground game and get out the vote effort is still the apparatus that Obama built, and it's not to be underestimated.

See an example below:

View embedded media

she's just soooooooooooooooo fing stupid that i feel like the more she''s out there the more the shine fades.

what are you going to do about the economy to get prices down.
i grew up in the middle class. and remember trump

you understand that you let 10 million cross the border.
trump tried to get republicans to not sign a bill
right but it was your actions that reversed existing policies that gave rise to the explosion
but trump

she's got absolutely nothing but canned lines and yabbuts

 

[mcmurtry66]

Stop. I know what the inflation rate was. It was 2.45 right before COVID. It's 2.4 now - about the same. Presidents don't get credit or blame for these things - Congress and the Fed do. COVID killed demand so of course inflation decreased in 2020. That's an uncommon event.

Are we not going to take Trump seriously when he says he's going to put in place huge tariffs and tariff increases?

no go month by month. after all of the free cheese it spiked to the highest levels in 41 years. prices over 20 percent during her tenure. i'm going by facts. 4 years under trump. 4 years under biden/harris. they both have a record. not speculation. this isn't hard

as for your bs about presidents it spiked bc the dems had congress and the white house and that's how they got the bullshit through that today we are still paying for. don't make the same mistake again. remove your emotions and vote for DONALD JOHN TRUMP

 

[mcmurtry66]

You were all doom and gloom a few weeks ago. Seems like you might be starting to believe. I am also letting myself believe, albeit it only slightly. The Democrat's ground game and get out the vote effort is still the apparatus that Obama built, and it's not to be underestimated.

See an example below:

View embedded media

MSN

"Democrats have no one to blame but themselves for their predicament. Throughout this interminable campaign season, they have studiously avoided substantive discussion of the four issues that Americans consistently tell pollsters are most important to them this cycle: the economy, inflation, immigration and crime. Instead, they have repeatedly attempted to shift the electoral terrain back to the few issues that poll in their favor: namely, abortion and the Jan. 6 jamboree at the Capitol. In this, they have completely failed. The American people still care above all about the same four basic quality-of-life issues that they have cared the most about for years now. It is Democrats' own fault that they are so woefully out of touch with the voters' sentiments on those issues and that the Biden-Harris administration's track record polls as poorly as it does."

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

no go month by month. after all of the free cheese it spiked to the highest levels in 41 years. prices over 20 percent during her tenure. i'm going by facts. 4 years under trump. 4 years under biden/harris. they both have a record. not speculation. this isn't hard

as for your bs about presidents it spiked bc the dems had congress and the white house and that's how they got the bullshit through that today we are still paying for. don't make the same mistake again. remove your emotions and vote for DONALD JOHN TRUMP

**** your emotions. The only way I'd vote for Trump is if I lost all objectivity and let my emotions go haywire and went all in on that mess. Not going to happen.

I'm objectively determined Trump is unfit for President. I don't like Harris, it's only about her in so much as she's running against Trump, but she's at least fit. The bar was set so low by Trump, it's practically non-existent.

 

[mcmurtry66]

**** your emotions. The only way I'd vote for Trump is if I lost all objectivity and let my emotions go haywire and went all in on that mess. Not going to happen.

I'm objectively determined Trump is unfit for President. I don't like Harris, it's only about her in so much as she's running against Trump, but she's at least fit. The bar was set so low by Trump, it's practically non-existent.

i go by data and outcomes. not personalities and feelings and emotions. the data demonstrates on the border and inflation trump was far superior.

throw in her nonsense on bail projects and defund and rush to judgement on cops and it's a no brainer on the big issues that americans care about

you should create a pros and cons list. i think that would help to temper your emotions and allow you to make a more objective decision

 

[mrhighlife]

He can do tariffs without Congress. They'll be inflationary and Americans will pay the tax.

It's so bizarro world to see you arguing about tariffs with other "Republicans". You're supposed to be yelling a Democrats about them. Odd times indeed.

 

[ChicagoFineForNow]

**** your emotions. The only way I'd vote for Trump is if I lost all objectivity and let my emotions go haywire and went all in on that mess. Not going to happen.

I'm objectively determined Trump is unfit for President. I don't like Harris, it's only about her in so much as she's running against Trump, but she's at least fit. The bar was set so low by Trump, it's practically non-existent.

This sounds like you’re trending toward a Harris vote. A vote you denied you denied you will make

 

[mcmurtry66]

It's so bizarro world to see you arguing about tariffs with other "Republicans". You're supposed to be yelling a Democrats about them. Odd times indeed.

Trump is an old school Dem on many issues. Harris a radical progressive. That’s why the Cheney crowd is dead. Everyone went left

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

i go by data and outcomes. not personalities and feelings and emotions. the data demonstrates on the border and inflation crime trump was far superior.

Not really. You're all emotions all the time on this election. You're just fooling yourself.

I'm not trying to change your mind, stop trying to change mine. It won't happen either way. Actually, if either would change his mind, it would probably be you because something could trigger your emotions and turn you the other way. That'll never happen in my case. Anyway, we're wasting time here. I'm moving on to something else. WSJ is saying that the history of the stock market's performance indicates a 72 percent chance that Harris wins:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-presidential-candidate-is-still-the-stock-markets-bet-to-win-the-election-4e0a1b76

 

[mcmurtry66]

Not really. You're all emotions all the time on this election. You're just fooling yourself.

I'm not trying to change your mind, stop trying to change mine. It won't happen either way. Actually, if either would change his mind, it would probably be you because something could trigger your emotions and turn you the other way. That'll never happen in my case. Anyway, we're wasting time here. I'm moving on to something else. WSJ is saying that the history of the stock market's performance indicates a 72 percent chance that Harris wins:

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/this-presidential-candidate-is-still-the-stock-markets-bet-to-win-the-election-4e0a1b76

you devote your entire day every day to attacking trump. that's all emotions. you're like an open sore driven by emotions adopting absurdly untenable speculative positions in an effort to ignore facts put before you.

inflation
border crossings

we have hard data. evidence. facts.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

This sounds like you’re trending toward a Harris vote. A vote you denied you denied you will make

I'm still voting for a write-in. My mail in ballot is on the counter and will be in the mail soon.

 

[ChicagoFineForNow]

Trump is an old school Dem on many issues. Harris a radical progressive. That’s why the Cheney crowd is dead. Everyone went left

Liz Cheney was interviewed the other day. The interviewer asked her why do you support Harris when you’ve said such scathing things about her in the past, is there any issue you two actually agree on?

“UKRAINE!!”

Responded the blood soaked monster.

Trading the Cheneys for RFK Jr. and Tulsi will go down as the most lopsided trade in history.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Liz Cheney was interviewed the other day. The interviewer asked her why do you support Harris when you’ve said such scathing things about her in the past, is there any issue you two actually agree on?

“UKRAINE!!”

Responded the blood soaked monster.

Trading the Cheneys for RFK Jr. and Tulsi will go down as the most lopsided trade in history.

Amen. Pure evil people

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

you devote your entire day every day to attacking trump. that's all emotions. you're like an open sore driven by emotions adopting absurdly untenable speculative positions in an effort to ignore facts put before you.

inflation
border crossings

we have hard data. evidence. facts.

If I was driven by emotions, your emotional rants might bother me. I'm not, so you're just wasting your emotional focus.

There is one fact that matters the most - fitness for President. Trump doesn't have it and he's worse now than during his first term because he's more mentally unstable, demonstrates even less character (as hard as that is), and his mental acuity is slipping. He hasn't caught Biden yet, but he's on his way and he'll never recover. That doesn't happen. He's the old, declining geezer in the race.

 

[snarlcakes]

Trading the Cheneys for RFK Jr. and Tulsi will go down as the most lopsided trade in history.

Similar to when the Yankees picked up Babe Ruth.

 

[snarlcakes]

Stop. I know what the inflation rate was. It was 2.45 right before COVID. It's 2.4 now - about the same. Presidents don't get credit or blame for these things - Congress and the Fed do. COVID killed demand so of course inflation decreased in 2020. That's an uncommon event.

Are we not going to take Trump seriously when he says he's going to put in place huge tariffs and tariff increases?

How inflationary were they his first term when he implemented them? The answer is not much. Inflation dropped to below 2% in 2019. So, I’m not concerned at all.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Economists aren't some monolithic block that is in lock step agreement. "They" may be in agreement, but "They" is a subset of the larger group.

That's obviously true. And it's also true that the disciples of Solow and Samuelson (Stiglitz, etal) tend to think of themselves as the Alpha and Omega of economic thought -- given that Keynesians and Neo-Keynesians dominate academia. So, if you ask them, it's hard to escape the impression that they see themselves not merely as having better ideas, but as having the only valid ideas.

That said, one area where New Classical, Austrian, Monetarist, Keynesians/Neo-Keynesians of both the Demand-Side and Supply-Side schools, etc. do broadly agree....is that tariffs and other barriers to trade are a terrible idea.

 

[mcmurtry66]

That's obviously true. And it's also true that the disciples of Solow and Samuelson (Stiglitz, etal) tend to think of themselves as the Alpha and Omega of economic thought -- given that Keynesians and Neo-Keynesians dominate academia. So, if you ask them, it's hard to escape the impression that they see themselves not merely as having better ideas, but as having the only valid ideas.

That said, one area where New Classical, Austrian, Monetarist, Keynesians/Neo-Keynesians of both the Demand-Side and Supply-Side schools, etc. do broadly agree....is that tariffs and other barriers to trade are a terrible idea.

And I agree on tariffs. The question is how do you bring back manufacturing without same? The main product my co manufactures is about $12. Right now to do it at a factory I know in kc is $82

 

[mrhighlife]

Trump is an old school Dem on many issues. Harris a radical progressive. That’s why the Cheney crowd is dead. Everyone went left

Trump is more radical left when it comes to Tariffs. Even Woodrow Wilson would be like "dude slow down". Certainly not the party of Reagan anymore that's for sure.

 

[hookyIU1990]

That's obviously true. And it's also true that the disciples of Solow and Samuelson (Stiglitz, etal) tend to think of themselves as the Alpha and Omega of economic thought -- given that Keynesians and Neo-Keynesians dominate academia. So, if you ask them, it's hard to escape the impression that they see themselves not merely as having better ideas, but as having the only valid ideas.

That said, one area where New Classical, Austrian, Monetarist, Keynesians/Neo-Keynesians of both the Demand-Side and Supply-Side schools, etc. do broadly agree....is that tariffs and other barriers to trade are a terrible idea.

I'm in complete agreement with the point on tariffs.

It's the first part of your reply that makes me chuckle every time the trope "Economists agree" is trotted out as a way to treat whatever they're pushing as settled. I mean, there's a growing group trumpeting Modern Monetary Theory. You could poll them and claim that economists agree that debt doesn't matter since we can just print more money to pay the debt and raise taxes to control the inflation it produces.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

And I agree on tariffs. The question is how do you bring back manufacturing without same? The main product my co manufactures is about $12. Right now to do it at a factory I know in kc is $82

This assumes that we want to, of course. I don't really see that as a simple question or a simple answer. In some instances, it would make sense. In others, it wouldn't.

But, generally, I think anybody longing for a return to an economy where lots of Americans once again work in manufacturing are going to die waiting for that to happen.

Given the impact that continued and accelerating advancement in automation and AI are going to have on labor demand from manufacturing, it's probably best that we have a lot less exposure to it than we did in the past. Because there's no doubt that the unit labor inputs necessary for manufacturing will continue to decline.

So, if you're looking for an answer to how we get manufacturing back here, I don't have one -- other than continued automation to get to a competitive cost. But tariffs won't deliver the outcome proponents are wanting to see, but they will deliver pain to American consumers.

 

[mcmurtry66]

This assumes that we want to, of course. I don't really see that as a simple question or a simple answer. In some instances, it would make sense. In others, it wouldn't.

But, generally, I think anybody longing for a return to an economy where lots of Americans once again work in manufacturing are going to die waiting for that to happen.

Given the impact that continued and accelerating advancement in automation and AI are going to have on labor demand from manufacturing, it's probably best that we have a lot less exposure to it than we did in the past. Because there's no doubt that the unit labor inputs necessary for manufacturing will continue to decline.

So, if you're looking for an answer to how we get manufacturing back here, I don't have one -- other than continued automation to get to a competitive cost. But tariffs won't deliver the outcome proponents are wanting to see, but they will deliver pain to American consumers.

Agreed

 

[mcmurtry66]

This assumes that we want to, of course. I don't really see that as a simple question or a simple answer. In some instances, it would make sense. In others, it wouldn't.

But, generally, I think anybody longing for a return to an economy where lots of Americans once again work in manufacturing are going to die waiting for that to happen.

Given the impact that continued and accelerating advancement in automation and AI are going to have on labor demand from manufacturing, it's probably best that we have a lot less exposure to it than we did in the past. Because there's no doubt that the unit labor inputs necessary for manufacturing will continue to decline.

So, if you're looking for an answer to how we get manufacturing back here, I don't have one -- other than continued automation to get to a competitive cost. But tariffs won't deliver the outcome proponents are wanting to see, but they will deliver pain to American consumers.

And I will add many don’t realize the expenditures already invested overseas. The infrastructure. Start up costs. Build outs. Blah blah blah. Companies aren’t doing all that again

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

I'm in complete agreement with the point on tariffs.

It's the first part of your reply that makes me chuckle every time the trope "Economists agree" is trotted out as a way to treat whatever they're pushing as settled. I mean, there's a growing group trumpeting Modern Monetary Theory. You could poll them and claim that economists agree that debt doesn't matter since we can just print more money to pay the debt and raise taxes to control the inflation it produces.

I totally agree with you.

Usually when somebody says that, what they really mean is that "economists (who have the same worldview I do, and that each other do) agree that....."

That's what I mean that this group rarely engages in any sort of debate with people who subscribe to other schools of economic thought. And about the only time they even acknowledge these other guys exist is when one of the other guys says something that actually is in harmony with the Ks and Neo-Ks view.

"Even New Classical Greg Mankiw agrees with us that......"

 

[ChicagoFineForNow]

Similar to when the Yankees picked up Babe Ruth.

A good one. But recently surpassed when the Bears traded away the rights to draft Bryce Young for what now comprises half the Bears roster to include Caleb Williams and DJ Moore.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

I totally agree with you.

Usually when somebody says that, what they really mean is that "economists (who have the same worldview I do, and that each other do) agree that....."

That's what I mean that this group rarely engages in any sort of debate with people who subscribe to other schools of economic thought. And about the only time they even acknowledge these other guys exist is when one of the other guys says something that actually is in harmony with the Ks and Neo-Ks view.

"Even New Classical Greg Mankiw agrees with us that......"

This was exactly my point to DANC.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

A good one. But recently surpassed when the Bears traded away the rights to draft Bryce Young for what now comprises half the Bears roster to include Caleb Williams and DJ Moore.

Yeah, that's certainly become an absolute disaster for the Panthers and possibly a boon to the Bears. There's a reason we have an old saying that "patience is a virtue."

However, I think the jury is still out as to whether or not that turns into as lopsided and consequential trade as the one that sent Herschel Walker from the Cowboys to the Vikings.

 

[BradStevens]

Chicago Fine, appreciate your honest and frank response.

Remember going to the bank on 9/11. A trembling teller told me Indianapolis would soon be under attack.

Asked her why, She firmly replied, "Because we have Eli Lilly and Naval Avionics here".

My point being, the entire country was in a panic subject to wanting our leaders to do something.

Early on our leaders had high ratings for the military response in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The same leaders who are now in retrospect (Monday Morning Quarterbacking) held in low regard for wasting money and men.

Iraq wasn't a "response." It was a preemptive invasion.

 

[BradStevens]

Iraq was wrong. Unless Saddam unleashes a smart bomb of gas in the US and kills thousands. Then what does the media say about Bush? What does history say?

It's always easy to Monday morning quarterback when we don't know what unfolds in the alternative timeline.

I don't understand this reasoning. Based on it, we would be justified in launching an invasion of Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, etc. all right now.

 

[BradStevens]

Ok. You're arguing the reasons not to go to war. But you don't know what today would be like if we hadn't. You have absolutely zero idea. None. Zilch. Nada. I gave one example of infinite possibilities if we hadn't gone.

My point isn't to debate the war, but to state you don't know that it was "clearly wrong" as you don't know the results of the other infinite possibilities.

Weird reasoning.

So the Germans can't say Hitler was wrong to invade Russia because they don't know the results of the other infinite possibilities? We can't say Napoleon shouldn't have done it either?

 

[BradStevens]

If he's the best, why doesn't he have a regular show?

Because he's a journalist, not an entertainer?