Oh No, The New Awesome Primary Thread

"Putin is a one-horse country. Oil and energy." --- Ben Carson.This man is licensed to open your skull and try to improve your brain. Would you let him?

Yup those are the ones.

Perhaps he was performing self-surgery and his fell out

Maybe, but her personality isn't likeable. That's what politics and tv stars and everything else (especially in the US) is about nowadays.No matter how good she dances or tells jokes or argues in courts or how seriously or non-seriously she tells Putin to get a life or whatever. She just doesn't have that non-academic X-factor.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

Nope. Never. Ever.

I agree, and when she tries it seems very forced and unnatural for her

What afraid that there will be no belt buckle stoping him from stabbing you.

To me it seems as if he's mentally been heavily disturbed from a very young age.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

I agree (though I disagree with the analyses of her politics as presented here, I think her policies actually are fine). She should have given it up in 2008 because she's not a likeable person.Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

quote:

---

To be frank, I think the QE mechanism and the ZIRP (zero interest rate policy) of the Fed have essentially just created inflation in assets, but not yielded any tangible benefits from a fundamental standpoint.
....
The solution to the most recent Great Recession was to once again throw easy money at the problem. Now, we dropped interest rates to zero and started the QE mechanism. The result? Same as before. We now have another disconnect between fundamentals and asset prices.

​

What does this mean for the future? Hard to say and no one knows the end result. But my suspicion is that interest rates will stay low because we will likely be on the verge of another downturn and subsequent recession.

---

The only reason the rates are low is because the government has created about $3-4 trillion to purchase mortgage-backed securities and federal treasury debt.When the government needs to borrow money, it puts federal treasury IOUs on the market, and depending on the level of market interest (as in desire to purchase), then the government offers a certain interest rate. When the government makes purchases of its own debt, then there is no need to raise interest rates to snatch up additional bidders. The government was able to attract a certain amount of purchasers for bonds with super-low rates, but rates would have been higher if not for the quantitative easing.When it comes to the housing market, interest rates are very important. The government was buying mortgage-backed securities at low-interest rates and that enabled mortgages to be lower. The market would have demanded somewhat higher interest rates for the mortgage-backed bonds.But now we have to transition from the government purchasing $85 billion per month of debt, (first) incrementally down to no purchases.Then the big transition after that will be for the government to start selling the $3 trillion or so in bonds back to the market (that should have been purchasing it all along) WHICH WILL COMPETE FOR PURCHASERS against the newer mortgage-backed security and treasury bonds finding buyers. The rates will be driven up.Future housing mortgages and government deficits will come at a higher interest rate. Everybody knows this.Japan and Europe have QE programs of their own.They will collapse first. (If that happens then it might keep interest rates lower for Americans as the dollar will be seen as the least dangerous currency to invest in - Japan has a debt that is about 250% of GDP and with near 0% interest rates, so there is a real possibility of investors dumping the yen when QE is depressing rates artificially low for a country that might inflate its currency someday to pay the debt)

quote:

---

Notice that the "news" out of the last town hall meeting (where each candidate was on the stage independently and asked different questions, different attitude loaded questions) is that Bernie said "Will we raise taxes, yes we will ... " while ignoring that he said that you in effect get a tax rebate by not having to pay your private insurance premium for a net benefit for people earning under $250,000/yr.

---

ObamaCare charges a 2.5% individual income-tax (as the Supreme Court interpreted it) if a person doesn't pay at least 6% of their income on (very high deductible)insurance (or 12% of their income on lower-deductible insurance).Sanders charges a 2.2% tax for no-deductible insurance that a person can use anywhere (I am assuming that the "network" issues, typical of American healthcare, will be obsolete with single payer).Businesses have to pay a 6.7% tax per employee, which IMO isn't a good idea (I'd rather increase the marginal rates than to tax hiring), but I doubt it is more of a burden to businesses than their present health care spending.6.7% +2.2% = 8.9%.Medicare is 1.45% + 1.45% =2.9%(but seniors are a smaller population group than workers, and Medicare taxes only fund payments to doctors or Part A. Part B, payment to hospitals, is not taxed at all - the government simply pays it's share without a revenue source. Medicare part C might not even exist, does anybody know of it? Medicare Part D costs the government over $75 billion per year, at least, and has no revenue source. It is the Bush prescription drug plan of 2003)Medicare would be something like 6% (I think) if the program was fully funded by the revenues to match the government expenditures.(The $600 billion+ annual military budget - in 2016 - is not and has never had to be funded by a revenue stream. Imagine how many people would want to pay the payroll tax for that? It is $100 billion per year higher than the Cold War yearly average when adjusted for inflation. Only 1 single year -during the Reagan administration - saw a military budget higher, when adjusted for inflation, than our present budget. USA Today, in 2010, reported that federal income tax revenue brought in 1126 billion in 2009. It also showed that $846 billion was spent on "military and security" for that year. That's over 76% of the much-obsessed over - think "Joe the Plumber" - Federal Income Tax spent on military and security related programs)At least recent health care proposals have been alongside a funding source (2003 Medicare Part D BushCare aside). ObamaCare policy changes (with revenue adjustments!) have run a net-surplus so far.Why isn't Hillary bitching about the 2.5% tax penalty for not purchasing (ObamaCare) insurance? And much higher $$ percentages for purchasing the plans?2 reasons.1)Because she fought hard in 2008 for such a tax (Obama actually opposed it then).2) Because she would have to admit that Sanders would lower the CURRENT tax bill for most people (all middle class people).Hillary is a genuine liar and I hope we can move beyond her brand of politics.It is 2016.Enough of the crap.

Jeb! isn't bright enough to realize that "mission accomplished" is a phrase he should avoid.Jeb’s ‘Mission Accomplished’ Moment Is The Jeb-iest Thing Ever - TPM – Talking Points Memo

Hillary - 49.9
Bernie - 49.5Ted - 27.7
Donald - 24.3
Marco - 23.1The only unexpected was Marco Rubio finishing such a strong 3rd nearly overtaking Trump. The Republican establishment may have found their viable candidate.Neck-to-neck horse race for Hillary and Bernie will make a good show for the Democrats.On to New Hampshire next Tuesday Feb 9.

Goodness gracious me. A self-described Socialist got very close to winning the Democratic domination in Iowa. The times they are a-changing.

Hillary declares victory with less than 0.5% margin after under-performing (losing) in what should (according to the pundits, media and democrat elite) should have been an overwhelming "anointment" ... and there are some questions on the counting.Bernie thanks Iowa and his supporters for a virtual tie and eagerly awaits the New Hampshire results. Correction: a self-described social democrat:

quote:

---

Social democracy is a political ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy, and a policy regime involving welfare state provisions, collective bargaining arrangements, regulation of the economy in the general interest, measures for income redistribution, and a commitment to representative democracy.[1][2][3] Social democracy thus aims to create the conditions for capitalism to lead to greater egalitarian, democratic and solidaristic outcomes; and is often associated with the set of socioeconomic policies that became prominent in Western and Northern Europeparticularly the Nordic model in the Nordic countriesduring the latter half of the 20th century.[4][5][6]

---

In other words a democratic government (of the people by the people for the people) that imposes some controls on capitalism to provide basic needs for all people: single payer health care, equal pay, social security, minimum wages, free education from state institutions, and control over the banks and investment conglomerates.He wants to level the playing field and hold businesses that cheat and steal accountable.In this he follows the lead of FDR and he build on the message of hope campaign that Obama used.Enjoy