How are we going to pay for all this shit?

WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-01-2022, 05:37 PM
The nonpartisan Tax Foundation is a little right of center, but respected by Congressmen on both sides of the aisle. Their take on the proposed Biden budget, which assumes the Build Back Better act will become law, is here:

https://taxfoundation.org/biden-budget-tax/
Originally Posted by Tiny
If you think Build Back Better is passing, you are the only one!
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-01-2022, 05:42 PM
Okay ... just getting caught up with stuff in this forum and didn't want to forget Tiny's offer to let WTF put in a good word for Jimmy!

To wit:





A few weeks went by and I had forgotten about this ... but WTF did take a stab at answering my question!



Actually, that's not what I was thinking of, but I don't think it's wrong!

Brief explanation:

Within the last few years, two friends of mine (both excellent students of the Cold War, I believe) said pretty much the same thing.

About 6 months before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Carter's national security advisor (Zbig) began working with the CIA to aid the Mujahideen, reportedly saying at the time that although this would not necessarily bait the Soviets into attacking, it certainly would materially increase the probability that they would do so.

I don't know enough about the foreign policy implications of all this to know whether WTF's answer is the best answer, but think it certainly may be a good one, and possibly even the best one. What I had in mind, though, was something of a purely economic nature.

Did Carter make a tough choice to reverse an utterly disastrous decision he had made in the previous year? (G. William Miller.)

Jimmy must have realized that such a tough choice would have been likely to tank his re-election prospects.

Why might this action have been construed as bad news for the Soviet Union?

. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
Lol...Reagan got waxed in the 82 midterms if memory serves me.

It took a lot longer than Carter, Volker or Reagan had hoped to get inflation under control. Luckily for them they did not use transitory as an economic adjective!
The_Waco_Kid's Avatar
Lol...Reagan got waxed in the 82 midterms if memory serves me.

It took a lot longer than Carter, Volker or Reagan had hoped to get inflation under control. Luckily for them they did not use transitory as an economic adjective! Originally Posted by WTF



how did the 1984 presidential election turn out for Ronnie?







bahahahahhaaaaaaaaaa
lustylad's Avatar
It took a lot longer than Carter, Volker or Reagan had hoped to get inflation under control. Originally Posted by WTF
Wtf are you babbling about now? Carter never got inflation under control. Reagan and Volcker did.

Your memory sucks. I already 'splained this to you earlier in this very thread:

The original question was - which President did a better job of controlling inflation? The first thing a curious, rational, objective person (economist or not) would do is LOOK UP THE FUCKING CPI DATA. Here's a quick snapshot for you:

Inflation rate 1976 = 5.7%
Inflation rate 1980 = 13.5%
Inflation rate 1984 = 4.3%
Inflation rate 1988 = 4.1%

So Jimmy Carter more than doubled the rate of Consumer Price Inflation during his 4 years in office. Ronnie Reagan came in and slashed it by 2/3 during his first term in office, then kept the rate at low single-digit levels throughout his second term as well. Originally Posted by lustylad
Joe Biden is Jimmy Carter on steroids. When it comes to inflation, he has accelerated it much, much faster than the Georgia peanut farmer did. Biden has stoked the 12-month CPI increase from 1.4% in January 2021 to 8.5% in March 2022.

That means it's only taken the current stooge in the White House 14 short months to accelerate the annual rate of price erosion in this country by SIX-FOLD!

By comparison, even the hapless, incompetent Jimmy Carter needed four years to double it.

Heckuva job, Joey!
  • Tiny
  • 05-02-2022, 02:39 PM
Okay ... just getting caught up with stuff in this forum and didn't want to forget Tiny's offer to let WTF put in a good word for Jimmy!

To wit:





A few weeks went by and I had forgotten about this ... but WTF did take a stab at answering my question!



Actually, that's not what I was thinking of, but I don't think it's wrong!

Brief explanation:

Within the last few years, two friends of mine (both excellent students of the Cold War, I believe) said pretty much the same thing.

About 6 months before the Soviets invaded Afghanistan, Carter's national security advisor (Zbig) began working with the CIA to aid the Mujahideen, reportedly saying at the time that although this would not necessarily bait the Soviets into attacking, it certainly would materially increase the probability that they would do so.

I don't know enough about the foreign policy implications of all this to know whether WTF's answer is the best answer, but think it certainly may be a good one, and possibly even the best one. What I had in mind, though, was something of a purely economic nature.

Did Carter make a tough choice to reverse an utterly disastrous decision he had made in the previous year? (G. William Miller.)

Jimmy must have realized that such a tough choice would have been likely to tank his re-election prospects.

Why might this action have been construed as bad news for the Soviet Union?

. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
I see G. William Miller served as both Fed Chairman and Secretary of the Treasury during the Carter Administration. My guess is that by appointing someone who wasn't able to get inflation under control, Carter paved the way for the election of the Greatest President of our Lifetimes, Ronald Reagan. And that caused the Soviet Empire to crumble. So Carter's aggressive action against the Soviets was getting Reagan elected.

OK, actually I'm totally stumped, but then I wasn't old enough to vote in the 1976 election. I don't remember what was happening back then. Kudos to WTF for coming up with a good answer.
Why_Yes_I_Do's Avatar
Lol...Reagan got waxed in the 82 midterms if memory serves me.
.. Originally Posted by WTF
Ya think F Joe Biden gonna be able to get his wreck buffed out in time for a serious mid-term waxing? Imma say nope.


WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-02-2022, 03:30 PM
how did the 1984 presidential election turn out for Ronnie?







bahahahahhaaaaaaaaaa Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid
Once again you've missed the point...in 82 things were still moving in the wrong direction. Not so in 84.

The Dems will get rolled this year imho.

Just like the Republicans did in 2018 when the Fed was raising rates.

This ain't rocket science
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-02-2022, 04:24 PM
Wtf are you babbling about now? Carter never got inflation under control. Reagan and Volcker did.

Your memory sucks. I already 'splained this to you earlier in this very thread:



Joe Biden is Jimmy Carter on steroids. When it comes to inflation, he has accelerated it much, much faster than the Georgia peanut farmer did. Biden has stoked the 12-month CPI increase from 1.4% in January 2021 to 8.5% in March 2022.

That means it's only taken the current stooge in the White House 14 short months to accelerate the annual rate of price erosion in this country by SIX-FOLD!

By comparison, even the hapless, incompetent Jimmy Carter needed four years to double it.

Heckuva job, Joey! Originally Posted by lustylad
You almost as bad at trying to distort history as you are economics!

https://www.businessinsider.com/rona...rom%20%251%24s

HOMEPAGE

HOME POLITICS
Trump's attacks on the Fed may be intense, but they're nothing compared to a wild new story about Ronald Reagan from former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker
Bob Bryan Oct 24, 2018, 9:58 AM
Download the app
reagan volcker
President Ronald Reagan and Federal Reserve Chairman Ronald Reagan in 1981 AP
President Donald Trump's public attacks on the Federal Reserve have been eye-catching.
But a new story from former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker about President Ronald Reagan. is perhaps even more shocking.
In a new memoir, Volcker recounts being privately ordered by Reagan's chief of staff to not raise interest rates prior to the 1984 election while Reagan was in the room.
Volcker was not planning to raise interest rates at the time, but said he was "stunned" by the direct violation of the Fed's independence.
Sign up for our weekday newsletter, packed with original analysis, news, and trends — delivered right to your inbox.

Email address

By clicking ‘Sign up’, you agree to receive marketing emails from Insider as well as other partner offers and accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

President Donald Trump has come under fire recently for breaking with presidential traditions and attacking the Federal Reserve over their recent interest rate hikes.

Trump renewed the attacks on Tuesday during an interview with the Wall Street Journal, bashing Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and attacking the Fed as the "biggest risk" for the economy.

But Trump's public tantrums are nothing compared to a new recounting from former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, who recalled intense pressure from President Ronald Reagan in the run up to the 1984 election.

In a new memoir, according to The New York Times, Volcker said he was called to the White House to meet with Reagan and Chief of Staff James Baker in the presidential library.


Volcker is best known for the "Volcker Shock," a rapid increase in interest rates in 1980 that helped tame the long-running inflation problem from the 1970s while also contributing to the
recession
that began in 1981.

It appeared that Reagan did not want a similar tightening cycle, which would have choked off economic growth, prior to his reelection campaign. According to Volcker, Reagan did not say a word, but Baker delivered a strong message.

"The president is ordering you not to raise interest rates before the election," Baker told Volcker.

Volcker did not plan on raising rates at the time, but the then-Fed chair was "stunned" since the order was an affront to the Fed's political independence. Volcker also said he later realized that the meeting was conducted in the library since there was likely no recording equipment in the room like in the Oval Office.

HOMEPAGE

HOME POLITICS
Trump's attacks on the Fed may be intense, but they're nothing compared to a wild new story about Ronald Reagan from former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker
Bob Bryan Oct 24, 2018, 9:58 AM
Download the app
reagan volcker
President Ronald Reagan and Federal Reserve Chairman Ronald Reagan in 1981 AP
President Donald Trump's public attacks on the Federal Reserve have been eye-catching.
But a new story from former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker about President Ronald Reagan. is perhaps even more shocking.
In a new memoir, Volcker recounts being privately ordered by Reagan's chief of staff to not raise interest rates prior to the 1984 election while Reagan was in the room.
Volcker was not planning to raise interest rates at the time, but said he was "stunned" by the direct violation of the Fed's independence.
Sign up for our weekday newsletter, packed with original analysis, news, and trends — delivered right to your inbox.

Email address

By clicking ‘Sign up’, you agree to receive marketing emails from Insider as well as other partner offers and accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

President Donald Trump has come under fire recently for breaking with presidential traditions and attacking the Federal Reserve over their recent interest rate hikes.

Trump renewed the attacks on Tuesday during an interview with the Wall Street Journal, bashing Fed Chairman Jerome Powell and attacking the Fed as the "biggest risk" for the economy.

But Trump's public tantrums are nothing compared to a new recounting from former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, who recalled intense pressure from President Ronald Reagan in the run up to the 1984 election.

In a new memoir, according to The New York Times, Volcker said he was called to the White House to meet with Reagan and Chief of Staff James Baker in the presidential library.


Volcker is best known for the "Volcker Shock," a rapid increase in interest rates in 1980 that helped tame the long-running inflation problem from the 1970s while also contributing to the
recession
that began in 1981.

It appeared that Reagan did not want a similar tightening cycle, which would have choked off economic growth, prior to his reelection campaign. According to Volcker, Reagan did not say a word, but Baker delivered a strong message.

"The president is ordering you not to raise interest rates before the election," Baker told Volcker.

Volcker did not plan on raising rates at the time, but the then-Fed chair was "stunned" since the order was an affront to the Fed's political independence. Volcker also said he later realized that the meeting was conducted in the library since there was likely no recording equipment in the room like in the Oval Office.


Reagan's apparent intimidation also echoed former President Richard Nixon's disastrous pressure on former Fed Chair Arthur Burns to keep rates low, which is seen as one of the reasons for the inflation of the 1970s.

The story also jumps out given Reagan's public reluctance to comment on Fed actions during his tenure.

For instance, when asked about Volcker's shifts during a press conference in 1982, Reagan replied: "'I can't respond to that because the
Federal Reserve
System is autonomous." In the same press conference, Reagan said there was "no way I can comment" on calls for Volcker's resignation.

Trump has complained that the Fed's current rates hikes are "loco." But while Trump's public outbursts are a break with presidential norms, the attacks have been easily dismissed by current Fed Chairman Jerome Powell. The administration had publicly maintained the respect of the Fed's independence
lustylad's Avatar
You (sic) almost as bad at trying to distort history as you are (sic) economics!

https://www.businessinsider.com/rona...rom%20%251%24s Originally Posted by WTF
You are a complete dumbshit. A worthless troll who wastes everyone's time and uses up bandwidth by repeating posts that I already thoroughly addressed.

Not only do you keep regurgitating your discredited garbage, you cut and re-paste it here without even cleaning it up first and making it readable. You're too stupid and lazy to perform that minimal courtesy for others in this forum.

You take every discussion backwards, not forward.

Here’s a reprint of the thrashing I gave you back in post #1252 of this thread. Since you have nothing to say about it, you need to stfu instead of sounding like a broken record and begging me to thrash your faggoty ass all over again.


For an old fuck who lived through the Carter-Reagan years, you sure seem handicapped by a faulty memory of events.

Yes, Carter appointed Paul Volcker in August 1979 (barely 3 weeks after his famously dismal "malaise" speech flopped) out of desperation after his first Fed Chairman, G. William Miller, proved to be as feckless and incompetent as Carter was.

No, Reagan never considered firing Volcker. To the contrary, he re-appointed him to a second 4-year term as Fed Chairman in 1983. And Volcker was entirely independent. In 1984, he actually raised the Fed Funds rate to a peak of 11.5% in August. That was barely 2 months before the 1984 election, which Reagan won in a landslide.

But I'll throw you a bone... here's an example of Jimmy Carter's team trying to trample all over the Fed's independence... take a look at what the WaPo was reporting back in July 1978:

"President Carter's chief economic adviser (Charles Schultze) warned yesterday that pursuit of a tighter money policy by the Federal Reserve Board could threaten the nation's economic growth...

Schultze's warning followed sharp criticism Wednesday of recent Federal Reserve actions raising interest rates by Robert Strauss, who heads the White House anti-inflation program."


Ain't that groovy? Jimmy the Peanut Farmer put a political hack in charge of his White House anti-inflation program, and the guy lashes out publicly at the Fed for taking actions... to slow inflation!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archi...-172fb65caf3b/ Originally Posted by lustylad
But here's what I was thinking of:

I see G. William Miller served as both Fed Chairman and Secretary of the Treasury during the Carter Administration. My guess is that by appointing someone who wasn't able to get inflation under control, Carter paved the way for the election of the Greatest President of our Lifetimes, Ronald Reagan. And that caused the Soviet Empire to crumble. So Carter's aggressive action against the Soviets was getting Reagan elected.

OK, actually I'm totally stumped, but then I wasn't old enough to vote in the 1976 election. I don't remember what was happening back then. Kudos to WTF for coming up with a good answer. Originally Posted by Tiny
Carter's first two years in office were pretty much an unmitigated disaster. As inflation raged out of control, he complained about how many Americans and other Westerners had what he referred to as "an inordinate fear of communism." (No, Jimmy, people recognized the USSR as the disaster and evil superpower wannabe that it most certainly was.)

In 1978, he appointed G. William Miller, an even worse Fed Chair than Burns. At the same time, even though he verbally acknowledged the seriousness of inflation, his own CEA chair was pushing back against any possible (and as yet nonexistent) efforts to combat inflation.

These people were IFINOs ("Inflation fighters in name only").

But then, in August of 1979 (2 1/2 years into his term), Jimmy appointed Paul Volcker to replace the hapless Miller.

And apparently just in time, too, because the previous year the dollar collapsed 30+% against the yen and the West German D-mark, and oil prices were skyrocketing.

When Volcker met in the Oval Office with Carter and Miller, he motioned toward the latter and told the prez that he would be conducting monetary policy quite differently from "that fellow sitting over there."

And he sure did, too!

As a result, inflation came down, the dollar strengthened dramatically, and oil prices began a steady decline.

If the Soviet Union was already a pretty serious basket case in 1979 (and it was!), imagine how much trouble the gerontocracy running the Kremlin thought it was in by 1982-83.

Conclusion: In one key respect, Jimmy teed it up nicely for Ronnie to have a good shot at hitting it right out of the ballpark!

.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-06-2022, 01:53 PM
If lustylad and Tiny read the above at the exact same time my money is lustylad fainting first...
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-06-2022, 02:08 PM
https://www.wsj.com/articles/jimmy-c...ss-11579734698


SUBSCRIBE
SIGN IN
Opinion
Read the Latest
DISNEY GOES FOR WOKE
APOLOGIES FOR HUNTER BIDEN'S LAPTOP
YALE LAW STUDENTS FOR CENSORSHIP
DOES THE ‘DON’T SAY GAY’ BILL SAY THAT?
GARRY KASPAROV ON PUTIN
TAKE A SURVEY We want to hear from you. Take part in this short survey to help shape The Wall Street Journal. Take Survey
OPINION COMMENTARY
Jimmy Carter’s Persian Gulf Success
His doctrine, outlined 40 years ago, doesn’t get enough credit.
Opinion: What is the Iran Nuclear Deal 'Dispute Mechanism'?
YOU MAY ALSO LIKE

Opinion: What is the Iran Nuclear Deal 'Dispute Mechanism'?
Opinion: What is the Iran Nuclear Deal 'Dispute Mechanism'?
Play video: Opinion: What is the Iran Nuclear Deal 'Dispute Mechanism'?
On Jan. 14, 2019, the U.K., Germany and France formally triggered a dispute mechanism written into the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. High Representative of the European Union, Josep Borrell Fontelles, explains its aim. Image: Behrouz Mehri/AFP via Getty Images
By Taylor Dinerman
Jan. 22, 2020 6:11 pm ET
SHARE
TEXT
109
Jimmy Carter deserves a bit of the credit for the killing of Iranian Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani. In his Jan. 23, 1980, State of the Union address, the 39th president laid down the Carter Doctrine: “An attempt by any outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region will be regarded as an assault on the vital interests of the United States of America, and such an assault will be repelled by any means necessary, including military force.”

Long after Mr. Carter left office, the doctrine has proved one of Carter’s greatest successes. It took a few years and the Reagan buildup before America had a credible military option in the region, but eventually the U.S. achieved predominance in the Gulf.
dilbert firestorm's Avatar
If lustylad and Tiny read the above at the exact same time my money is lustylad fainting first... Originally Posted by WTF
lusty never faints but you fart too much.


wsj has a paywall.. please post entire article.
If lustylad and Tiny read the above at the exact same time my money is lustylad fainting first... Originally Posted by WTF
LOL ... although I generally hate to second guess what others may think, nothing I've ever seen posted by lustylad or Tiny suggests to me that they'd consider Volcker's appointment to the Fed a bad idea.

On the contrary, I suspect they would consider that an excellent turning point in history.

Although Jimmy had been badly failing for two-and-a-half years, he was -- in my opinion -- a profile in courage at least on the day that he made that pivotal choice.

.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 05-09-2022, 12:50 PM

Conclusion: In one key respect, Jimmy teed it up nicely for Ronnie to have a good shot at hitting it right out of the ballpark!

. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
If lustylad and Tiny read the above at the exact same time my money is lustylad fainting first... Originally Posted by WTF
LOL ... although I generally hate to second guess what others may think, nothing I've ever seen posted by lustylad or Tiny suggests to me that they'd consider Volcker's appointment to the Fed a bad idea.

On the contrary, I suspect they would consider that an excellent turning point in history.

Although Jimmy had been badly failing for two-and-a-half years, he was -- in my opinion -- a profile in courage at least on the day that he made that pivotal choice.

. Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight
The part about giving Carter any credit for the Volker appointment was where I see one if not both fainting!