Trump Tariffs = Tax Hike on all

[kalm]

Huh?

You think employment is driven by rich people’s spending?

The purchasing power of a large middle class employs a large amount of people. The rich can’t own enough yachts vacation homes.

Unemployment was real low during slavery and feudalism too..

Double Sweet Jesus!

Digest this a bit
https://www.statista.com/statistics/240 ... in-the-us/

And this
http://www.idexonline.com/FullArticle?Id=32472

Seriously?

[CAA Flagship]

Digest this a bit
https://www.statista.com/statistics/240 ... in-the-us/

And this
http://www.idexonline.com/FullArticle?Id=32472

Seriously?

So you don't understand. I won't hold it against you.

[∞∞∞]

Seriously?

So you don't understand. I won't hold it against you.

The graphs seem to make Kalm's point. Annually combined, lower/middle households spend more or similar to the upper class. One can also infer that there are significantly more lower/middle class households.

From the jewelry one (rounded numbers):

Upper class households spends $4000.
Middle class households spends $2900.
Lower class households spends $300.

For clarity, let's say 100 individuals exist.

Being very generous, upper class comprises of 20% of the population. $4000 x 20 = $80000.
Lower + Middle Class comprise of 80% of the population. $3200 x 80 = $256000.

The boat one holds up too.

[Ivytalk]

So you don't understand. I won't hold it against you.

The graphs seem to make Kalm's point. Annually combined, lower/middle households spend more or similar to the upper class. One can also infer that there are significantly more lower/middle class households.

From the jewelry one (rounded numbers):

Upper class households spends $4000.
Middle class households spends $2900.
Lower class households spends $300.

For clarity, let's say 100 individuals exist.

Being very generous, upper class comprises of 20% of the population. $4000 x 20 = $80000.
Lower + Middle Class comprise of 80% of the population. $3200 x 80 = $256000.

The boat one holds up too.

You’re morphing into a Levantine JSO.

[UNI88]

So you don't understand. I won't hold it against you.

The graphs seem to make Kalm's point. Annually combined, lower/middle households spend more or similar to the upper class. One can also infer that there are significantly more lower/middle class households.

From the jewelry one (rounded numbers):

Upper class households spends $4000.
Middle class households spends $2900.
Lower class households spends $300.

For clarity, let's say 100 individuals exist.

Being very generous, upper class comprises of 20% of the population. $4000 x 20 = $80000.
Lower + Middle Class comprise of 80% of the population. $3200 x 80 = $256000.

The boat one holds up too.

I get your point but your math is wrong and inflates the difference. You don't add 2900+300 and multiply by 80. It doesn't add up even if the lower middle class is only 1%.

Sent from my XT1650 using Tapatalk

[∞∞∞]

I get your point but your math is wrong and inflates the difference. You don't add 2900+300 and multiply by 80. It doesn't add up even if the lower middle class is only 1%.

The links are for how much the average American household spends on jewelry and boats.

In a one-to-one comparison, an upper-class person creates more jobs, but we can't just ignore the ratio of lower/middle-class to upper-class people. That's what I'm getting at.

[kalm]

I get your point but your math is wrong and inflates the difference. You don't add 2900+300 and multiply by 80. It doesn't add up even if the lower middle class is only 1%.

The links are for how much the average American household spends on jewelry and boats.

In a one-to-one comparison, an upper-class person creates more jobs, but we can't just ignore the ratio of lower/middle-class to upper-class people. That's what I'm getting at.

Not to mention, spending on luxury items is such a small percentage of overall consumer spending that Flaggy's point is inconsequential.

[∞∞∞]

The links are for how much the average American household spends on jewelry and boats.

In a one-to-one comparison, an upper-class person creates more jobs, but we can't just ignore the ratio of lower/middle-class to upper-class people. That's what I'm getting at.

Not to mention, spending on luxury items is such a small percentage of overall consumer spending that Flaggy's point is inconsequential.

Yup.

US luxury spending (projected) in 2019: 197 billion dollars.
US consumer spending (projected) in 2019: 14 trillion dollars.

1.4% of consumer spending will be on the luxury market.

[AZGrizFan]

Is it still Stockholm Syndrome if I AM the 0.1%?

No...
You're fucking upper middle and pipe dreaming

Ok, buttercup.

Whatever you say.

[UNI88]

Not to mention, spending on luxury items is such a small percentage of overall consumer spending that Flaggy's point is inconsequential.

Yup.

US luxury spending (projected) in 2019: 197 billion dollars.
US consumer spending (projected) in 2019: 14 trillion dollars.

1.4% of consumer spending will be on the luxury market.

I don't disagree with you but I don't want the naysayers to use your calculation error to shift the focus away from what you're saying.

If the Lower class only makes up 1% and the Middle Class makes up 79% then you have (79x2900)+(1x300) = $229,400 not $256,000. If the Lower class makes up 20% and the Middle Class makes up 60% then you have (60x2900)+(20x300) = $180,000.

When Young Flaggy and his friends were working at Busch Gardens they probably spent part of their paychecks on food, movies and entertainment near the park and near their houses.

[Skjellyfetti]

Reminds me of CAA Flagship

[JohnStOnge]

Here is Larry Kudlow saying everything was swell shortly before the last big crash:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/12/ ... ry-kudlow/

This sort of fiscal and monetary coordination will continue the Bush boom for years to come. Though mainstream media outlets will never admit it, President Bush has kept America safe and prosperous. But history will eventually judge him in a more kindly light.

Guess what, Larry: The History is that you were really, really wrong.

The guy SHOULD have zero credibility. But such is the world we live in .

[CAA Flagship]

Reminds me of CAA Flagship

No. I believe that jobs are very important for the vast majority of the people (and the country). The government makes money each time money changes hands. The government should be more interested in increasing the velocity of money than simply taking it out of circulation.

[dbackjon]

Reminds me of CAA Flagship

No. I believe that jobs are very important for the vast majority of the people (and the country). The government makes money each time money changes hands. The government should be more interested in increasing the velocity of money than simply taking it out of circulation.

Which occurs faster if the bottom has more money to spend, instead of hording it off-shore, or tying it up in illiquid investments.

[CAA Flagship]

Here is Larry Kudlow saying everything was swell shortly before the last big crash:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/12/ ... ry-kudlow/

This sort of fiscal and monetary coordination will continue the Bush boom for years to come. Though mainstream media outlets will never admit it, President Bush has kept America safe and prosperous. But history will eventually judge him in a more kindly light.

Guess what, Larry: The History is that you were really, really wrong.

The guy SHOULD have zero credibility. But such is the world we live in .

Show me the people who saw the extent of the fraud that banks and lenders were committing and when they pointed it out.

[JohnStOnge]

Here is Larry Kudlow saying everything was swell shortly before the last big crash:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/12/ ... ry-kudlow/



Guess what, Larry: The History is that you were really, really wrong.

The guy SHOULD have zero credibility. But such is the world we live in .

Show me the people who saw the extent of the fraud that banks and lenders were committing and when they pointed it out.

Show ME the people that weren't realizing there were storm clouds on the horizon when Kudlow wrote that piece.

Kudlow is not credible. He's a hack.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/kudlo ... 2018-03-15

[Skjellyfetti]

No. I believe that jobs are very important for the vast majority of the people (and the country). The government makes money each time money changes hands. The government should be more interested in increasing the velocity of money than simply taking it out of circulation.

Which occurs faster if the bottom has more money to spend, instead of hording it off-shore, or tying it up in illiquid investments.

Stop being obtuse. It's luxury jewelry and boat sales that drive a healthy economy.

[JohnStOnge]

In case you haven't noticed, China is winning.

[kalm]

Here is Larry Kudlow saying everything was swell shortly before the last big crash:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/12/ ... ry-kudlow/



Guess what, Larry: The History is that you were really, really wrong.

The guy SHOULD have zero credibility. But such is the world we live in .

Show me the people who saw the extent of the fraud that banks and lenders were committing and when they pointed it out.

You really don’t want to go there. My sister who was a mortgage underwriter at Wa Mutual saw it coming years prior. You could see it in neighborhoods across America with lower middle class wage earners buying McMansions with $40,000 SUV’s in the driveway. Kudlow was proven to be as big an idiot as Jim Cramer...or Alan Greenspan.

[CAA Flagship]

Show me the people who saw the extent of the fraud that banks and lenders were committing and when they pointed it out.

You really don’t want to go there. My sister who was a mortgage underwriter at Wa Mutual saw it coming years prior. You could see it in neighborhoods across America with lower middle class wage earners buying McMansions with $40,000 SUV’s in the driveway. Kudlow was proven to be as big an idiot as Jim Cramer...or Alan Greenspan.

Sure you could see it. You can always see it. You can see it today. "Extent" is harder to see.
It wasn't until the weekend of the Lehman Brothers failure that some bank CEO's learned that the derivatives could not be valued. These derivatives had become so complicated that auditors could not wrap their heads around the whole picture. If they couldn't do it at ground level, how can anyone at 30,000 feet do it?

https://www.investopedia.com/financial- ... ssion.aspx

[SDHornet]

Here is Larry Kudlow saying everything was swell shortly before the last big crash:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2007/12/ ... ry-kudlow/

This sort of fiscal and monetary coordination will continue the Bush boom for years to come. Though mainstream media outlets will never admit it, President Bush has kept America safe and prosperous. But history will eventually judge him in a more kindly light.

Guess what, Larry: The History is that you were really, really wrong.

The guy SHOULD have zero credibility. But such is the world we live in .

You're the last person that should be calling out anybody's credibility.

[kalm]

You really don’t want to go there. My sister who was a mortgage underwriter at Wa Mutual saw it coming years prior. You could see it in neighborhoods across America with lower middle class wage earners buying McMansions with $40,000 SUV’s in the driveway. Kudlow was proven to be as big an idiot as Jim Cramer...or Alan Greenspan.

Sure you could see it. You can always see it. You can see it today. "Extent" is harder to see.
It wasn't until the weekend of the Lehman Brothers failure that some bank CEO's learned that the derivatives could not be valued. These derivatives had become so complicated that auditors could not wrap their heads around the whole picture. If they couldn't do it at ground level, how can anyone at 30,000 feet do it?

https://www.investopedia.com/financial- ... ssion.aspx

Historian Neil Ferguson, economists Nouriel Roubini and Ravi Batra, and number of others saw the danger with in CDO's and the derivatives market before the fall. Not to mention there were those who were betting on it happening. They knew. Quit making excuses for shitty legislation, shitty punditry, and shitty leadership.

[Ivytalk]

You're the last person that should be calling out anybody's credibility.

Larry Kudlow is ALWAYS wrong. Took my money out of the market this week so I can just watch this shitshow play out over the next few months.

I’m sure you’ll put that fifty bucks to good use.

[CAA Flagship]

Sure you could see it. You can always see it. You can see it today. "Extent" is harder to see.
It wasn't until the weekend of the Lehman Brothers failure that some bank CEO's learned that the derivatives could not be valued. These derivatives had become so complicated that auditors could not wrap their heads around the whole picture. If they couldn't do it at ground level, how can anyone at 30,000 feet do it?

https://www.investopedia.com/financial- ... ssion.aspx

Historian Neil Ferguson, economists Nouriel Roubini and Ravi Batra, and number of others saw the danger with in CDO's and the derivatives market before the fall. Not to mention there were those who were betting on it happening. They knew. Quit making excuses for shitty legislation, shitty punditry, and shitty leadership.

Excuses? I blame the banks. And I blame the lack of oversight.
I'm just saying that very few knew how bad things were. It all had to be unwound to determine the real damage.
At any given time, there are people predicting things going in all directions possible. Some of them will be right. They will have to be around a long time to be right multiple times (i.e. the broken clock).

Nouriel Roubini
Dec 20, 2014

Economist Nouriel Roubini is back on the circuit with his Doomsday predictions. In an interview to WSJ.com, 'Dr Doom' prophesies that there is now a greater than 50 percent risk of a global recession, and that this is not the time to be invested in risky assets.

https://www.firstpost.com/world/how-ser ... 59685.html


Ravi Batra

"2016 is going to be a year of the climax," says Batra, an economics professor at Southern Methodist University in Dallas. "It will be a year in which a revolution begins against the rule of money, leading to economic reforms by 2018. After that a golden age starts and is in place around the end the decade."

https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/book- ... 00751.html

Economist Ravi Batra reached the number one on The New York Time Best Seller List in 1987 thanks to his book The Great Depression of 1990. From the title, one can easily infer what was the main thesis of the book, namely: An economic crisis is imminent, and it will be a tough one. Fortunately, his prediction failed to come true. In fact, the 1990s was a period of relative stability and strong economic growth, with the US stock market growing at an 18 percent annualized rate. Not so bad for an economic depression, right?

https://www.speakfreely.today/2018/08/14/64729/

[Ivytalk]

I’m sure you’ll put that fifty bucks to god use.

I’m not an entitled government subsidized Deplorable.

Not drawing any guvmint bennies except Medicare, which is mandatory, Melvin.