red viking

Theatrics. They have nothing better to do? Pathetic and again demonstrates their dysfunction.

You don't think it matters that congress is dominated by wingers?

O'toole got beat out at 165 and 174. He has to bump up to184 or settle for 2nd string.

As a result of Fat Donnys money printing press.

I think Barnett was AWA but not Buchanen. Buchanen was up in the north woods.

His dad was actually Askrens HS coach. Will probably lose to Carr, but a great season either way.

As I said earlier, look at the month-to-month data from the end of Fat Donny's tenure. Inflation was extremely high on Jan 6 transfer to Biden and ramped up to around 9% by March 2021, before Biden had a chance to really do anything. Inflation doesn't happen right away when you print a bunch of money. It takes several months before you really start to notice the effects. Money supply rose most rapidly during Fat Donny's reign: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/M2SL

Markets blasting through to new territory. Soaring like an eagle, the symbol of our great nation.

He'll find a way to raise the cash. There are plenty of idiots in this country that will give him $.

A LOT more. the exact amounts? There are millions of possibilities that I'd be OK with.

Yes; the middle class needs to step up some too, but the rich need to step up more. It's pretty simple. The poor people just don't have the money to pay since most of them are barely scraping by anyway. The rich have gotten rich off of them so it's only fair to cut them a break. Also, the poor people get hurt the most when you cut spending so need to hit them on both ends.

The rich are richer than ever and their taxes are lower than ever. Yes; let's work on this deficit and part of that should be making the ultra-wealthy pay their fair share. Even Warren Buffett (and many other uber-wealthy) admitted that it's ridiculous and that he has a lower tax rate than a lot of middle class folks.

It would reduce it from what it would otherwise be, because the feds wouldn't be borrowing as much money. Deficit during COVID (that has partially continued) resulted in significant increase in money supply.

There's a balancing act between economic health & environmental health, since that also impacts our long-term economic health. But again, that's a different question and the end-result really depends upon priorities. A thousand people can have a thousand different opinions on how much we should really do, if anything. I prefer to stay focused on the science though, which should inform the policy. There is no doubt whatsoever that human burning of fossil fuels is the primary driver of recent climate change.

No significant amount of money, if any, was "sucked out." COVID and COVID-related policies caused a slowdown in the exchange of money (but not the overall money supply) and that's why the stimulus was injected. It was an over-reaction though.

It's very basic economics Jimmy. Inflation results when you increase the money supply that is in the hands of consumers significantly more than the production of goods (if that increases at all). Deficit spending results in more money to consumers without having to pay for it. If we cut spending and increased taxes, that would take money out of consumers hands and slow down the economy. https://www.crfb.org/papers/risks-and-threats-deficits-and-debt

You need to learn to read more carefully. i said that fixing inflation could be done without raising rates. Yes, the inflation has everything to do with the money supply. The money supply increased dramatically during the COVID era due to our massive deficit. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYFSD In fact, most economists will tell you that if we truly balanced the budget 100%, we'd go into a depression and probably have DEFLATION. there's a sweet spot in the middle where we'd definitely slow down inflation significantly but people ignore that.

The month over month inflation rate was already increasing significantly by end of Jan 2021 (when Biden was sworn in). Monthly rate for Jan '21 was 0.5%, which comes out to 6% annually. By March '21 (also before any of Biden's policies could impact inflation) it was up to 0.9% for the month, which comes out to >10% annual rate. Biden continued the policy, but if you also look at money supply graphs, you'll see that the recent mass printing of money started under Fat Donny. The inflation was inevitable at that point. . https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_monthly_inflation_rate

Funny that you make that claim when pretty much all economists agree that the insane deficit spending (see graph in my link above) that occurred during the COVID era (starting w/ Fat Donny) was the primary driver of the inflation that started ramping up near the end of 2020.

Coral reefs are thriving? Huh? Where did you get that? Fox News? Every reputable source that I've seen indicates that they have diminished significantly. A lot of the CO2 that we spew out ends up in the ocean and lowers the pH of the water. That, in addition to the increased temps, have killed much of the coral.

I don't know what to do about it mspart. What we do about it is a 100% different subject than whether it is occurring or not. Let's at least just be honest about what's happening and then go from there.

Spending is generally steady as a % of GDP since 1980. The increase that we've had can mostly, if not completely be attributed to the interest payments on the debt. More bogus claims by the 'wingers. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S

As reported by New Scientist back in 2007…

I said repeatedly that we also probably need to cut spending; particularly on our fat & bloated military. Some cuts in other areas may also be reasonable but not nearly as much waste in those areas. Your argument "Any increases in taxes will be met with increased deficit spending" can easily be flipped on its head to "any decrease in spending will be met with decreased taxes." Yes, our leaders need to make difficult decisions that are going to result in a lot of negative press. No matter how they do it.

https://www.newswise.com/factcheck/rising-temperatures-may-cause-a-rise-in-carbon-dioxide-but-this-does-not-refute-human-caused-climate-change