Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 67 (9078 total)
98 online now:
kjsimons, PaulK, Tangle, Tanypteryx (4 members, 94 visitors)
Newest Member: harveyspecter
Post Volume: Total: 895,057 Year: 6,169/6,534 Month: 362/650 Week: 132/278 Day: 30/24 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Phat Unplugged
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


Message 79 of 171 (888653)
09-26-2021 4:25 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by Phat
09-26-2021 2:51 AM


Re: jar manipulates and attempts to frame arguments
quote:
I'm talking about my predictions for global finance and how you ignorantly mock them.

Given that your understanding of economics doesn’t even include the basics of supply-and-demand your doomsaying doesn’t seem very credible without evidence. Which you don’t have.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Phat, posted 09-26-2021 2:51 AM Phat has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


(2)
Message 86 of 171 (888662)
09-26-2021 11:08 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Phat
09-26-2021 10:37 AM


Re: jar manipulates and attempts to frame arguments
quote:
You bring up a point I want to emphasize. The problem of the debt is not due to any one political party or ideology. An argument can easily be made that the debt was raised over the years under the administrations of both Democrats and republicans. Debt is debt...whether it be from a tax cut or a stimulus.

Failing to distinguish between correct management and mismanagement is a problem. When the economy is in trouble it is widely accepted that extra borrowing is necessary. When the economy is in good health the debt should be paid down. Debt taken on solely to maintain spending while reducing income is folly. That last point is one conservatives should agree with (Margaret Thatcher did!). It seems that many Republicans do not.

So, yes there are distinctions related to how the money raised is spent and they are important.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Phat, posted 09-26-2021 10:37 AM Phat has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


Message 101 of 171 (888704)
09-29-2021 9:32 AM
Reply to: Message 99 by Phat
09-29-2021 7:21 AM


Re: Production Backs The Dollar
quote:
Of course, it was sarcastic. Sometimes you guys insult me by imagining yourselves far smarter than I. I may correct you on that 300 billion servicing figure. It is now twice that, based on 9%. The latest figure was 2020 and it was over 500 billion.

I don’t know how you get “based on 9%”. The 2021 figure is over $520 billion dollars but that’s about 2% of the debt.

I don’t know where you got the 300 billion figure you’re objecting to either (I can’t see it in this thread).

quote:
And the problem with the dollar being backed by production is that the US is not an efficient producer anymore. We have a financial system driven upwards as of late only through artificially infused stimulus.

COVID has affected everyone, so I think you need to exclude stimulus to counter that.

quote:
…. I wonder if any of you know or care that the human productive backing of goods and services will not help us if the dollar becomes global

This doesn’t make sense. What does it mean for the dollar to “become global”? Why would it affect the backing from the US economy?

quote:
....nor will it help us if any other currency takes its place.

I don’t see why that would be true, either. The backing would remain. Demand for dollars might fall, and with it the international value, but there’s a negative feedback there. US production would become cheaper on an international scale.

quote:
I hope that I am not coming across as too delusional.

What you are saying doesn’t seem to make a lot of sense.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by Phat, posted 09-29-2021 7:21 AM Phat has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


Message 103 of 171 (888711)
09-29-2021 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by Percy
09-29-2021 12:45 PM


Re: Production Backs The Dollar
There seems to be some confusion over figures. The Treasury reports a figure of $524,706,646,051.90 in interest payments for FY 2021
Interest Expense on the Debt Outstanding (treasurydirect.gov)

That’s a little higher than the 2020 figure, but noticeably lower than 2019.

Edited by Admin, : Fix link.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by Percy, posted 09-29-2021 12:45 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Percy, posted 09-29-2021 1:21 PM PaulK has replied
 Message 105 by Percy, posted 09-29-2021 1:46 PM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


Message 106 of 171 (888714)
09-29-2021 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Percy
09-29-2021 1:21 PM


Re: Production Backs The Dollar
That’s still $378B for 2021 which is rather more than $300B

I can’t find any explanation either, but obviously there must be some factor which reduces the gross amount reported by the Treasury.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Percy, posted 09-29-2021 1:21 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 107 by Percy, posted 09-29-2021 2:33 PM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


(1)
Message 111 of 171 (888762)
10-03-2021 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by Phat
10-03-2021 10:36 AM


Re: Production Backs The Dollar
quote:
It is easy to criticize my sources, but I would wager that no one in this forum understands the markets and the global money system any better than I do

I doubt that anyone here is as ignorant of basic economics as you. I might be wrong, but supply and demand is a simple concept, but you haven’t grasped it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Phat, posted 10-03-2021 10:36 AM Phat has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


(5)
Message 146 of 171 (889140)
11-07-2021 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by LamarkNewAge
11-07-2021 12:24 PM


Re: Research, smesearch. Who needs it!
quote:
So it does not matter what anybody eats?

He didn’t say anything like that.

quote:
Or how often they eat?

Aside from the fact that A1C levels aren’t affected by recent meals he’d didn’t say anything like that either.

quote:
Just take insulin?

He absolutely didn’t say anything like that.

quote:
What about pre-diabetics? Doctors will not prescribe insulin, nor will the prescribe needles & a testing kit. These are not over the counter items, right?

You don’t know anything about treating diabetes, do you? Insulin is for the worst cases. Pre-diabetics would typically get advice on diet and exercise. If they develop diabetes that still aren’t likely to be prescribed insulin unless it’s bad.

quote:
You keep conflating my discussion with you (and your canards have swallowed nearly every) with my questions/comments to Phat. You take individual sentences and (mis)use them for your straw man responses.

Massive projection there. Your old habit of long rambling posts with no discernible point wasn’t effective debate - but this nastiness is even worse.

quote:
Sorry if I missed any points if substance. Do you have any?

Actual debate requires reading and responding to your opponent’s points. Not inventing straw men and making false accusations.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-07-2021 12:24 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 148 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-07-2021 2:17 PM PaulK has replied
 Message 164 by Percy, posted 11-08-2021 9:19 AM PaulK has not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


Message 149 of 171 (889145)
11-07-2021 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 148 by LamarkNewAge
11-07-2021 2:17 PM


Re: Research, smesearch. Who needs it!
quote:
I never said anything about "recent meals"

I didn’t claim that you did. But you did.

The only time my sugar would go above 70 was when I ate. And it would be back down to 70 almost right away. 2 hours or slightly longer, and the level would typically hit exactly 70, and stay that way.

quote:
We were talking about the A1C.

And you were confusing it with blood sugar measurements.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 148 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-07-2021 2:17 PM LamarkNewAge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-07-2021 2:27 PM PaulK has replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17179
Joined: 01-10-2003


Message 152 of 171 (889153)
11-07-2021 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by LamarkNewAge
11-07-2021 2:27 PM


Re: Research, smesearch. Who needs it!
quote:
I was showing that my body had no trouble breaking down sugar.

Which has nothing to do with what I said.

quote:
My A1C level of 5.7 indicated otherwise, according to AzPauls commentary on pre diabetes.

Which raises the question of why your A1C is so high. Nevertheless it would be odd for a single, simple diagnostic indicator to be an infallible guide.

quote:
It is obvious, to those with integrity, that I was not saying my morning meal influenced my hour-later A1C.

It seems that you are the one lacking integrity, since you claimed that constant sugar spikes could give a misleading A1C reading.

Earlier, I said the A1C was misleading, with respect to its sugar level number indicating diabetes,because you could have a person eat constantly (eat all day, my words) and thus have a constant "sugar spike" effect on your levels.

Message 140

quote:
This is so obvious that I wonder if I should spend any more time responding to straw man crap.

Presumably you mean “responding with straw man crap” Message 144 being an obvious case in point. And no, you should give it up along with your unpleasant habit of making hypocritical and false accusations. But you won’t.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by LamarkNewAge, posted 11-07-2021 2:27 PM LamarkNewAge has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022