5th line wingnutt

These are pejoratives, not arguments.

This is about science. If you want to make it about politics there is a place for that.

@Weave and @PASabreFan I posted a link to an article I found interesting. I did not endorse it. I take pretty much everything I read with a healthy dash of skepticism. When something new, like the Wuhan strain of coronavirus shows up there is bound to be confusion and misinformation flying around. Most of the misinformation is unintentional. There will even be disagreement among experts. There will even be, gasp!, broken hyperlinks. I think the post I linked to was informative and sincere. Is it 100% correct? I doubt it. I have found WUWT to be more reliable than the people it critiques. Remember that science is not done by consensus or arguments that appeal to authority.

I read @Weave's post and it took me about 5 minutes to find the broken links. Links that were working when I read the story.

Pick a post and critique it. Until then your reaction is just hot air.

Interesting post on coronavirus: https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/02/14/wuhan-coronavirus-wuwt-update/

I went to a bunch of websites this morning looking for actual info. What I found was 97% spin and 3% numbers that were cherry picked to illustrate the websites point of view. Nowhere did I find the basic numbers. It is no wonder so many dislike and distrust the media.

Budget/spending primer: (numbers from fiscal 2019) There are three main areas of spending/budgeting: Servicing the national debt, 363B. Mandatory spending, 2.73T. Includes social security, medicare, medicaid, and welfare. IOW wealth redistribution programs. Discretionary spending, 1.02T. Somewhat over half of this goes to military and veterans. The rest is "everything else" not included above.

Cannot be right. Got a link?

Jobs? We don't need no stinkin' jobs. It was a holiday, you know.

Iowa caucus follies continue https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/iowa-mess-gets-worse-analysis-finds-inconsistencies-in-over-100-official-caucus-site-reports Bernie claims victory https://freebeacon.com/politics/sanders-declares-victory-in-iowa-claims-media-are-distorting-results/

Maybe not... https://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/news/elections/presidential/caucus/2020/02/05/iowa-democratic-party-reports-iowa-caucus-results-with-errors/4672474002/ What a clown show.

What a fiasco. All you have to do is count the votes and report the results. This appears to be beyond the competence of the Democrats. These are the same folks who want to control the economy and micromanage your life.

Russian interference!

B r e x I t tonight.

I knew ARRA=Stimulus=Obama. I was only pretty sure about TARP=Bailout=Bush, I was too lazy to look it up. Are farm subsidies directly tied to tariffs? This is news to me. I thought the Secretary of Agriculture had some discretion. I am against farm subsidies, period. This has been fun but it is almost enough for now. I am working on a response to @Ogre's questions and then I am done for a while. Been wanting to take a break from the web.

Were the bailouts were done under TARP or the ARRA? Without regard to what legislation covered the bailouts...I am against bailouts, subsidies, or any form of executive or legislative interference in corporate bankruptcies.

John Maynard Keynes would agree, I do not. Neither do Murray Rothbard, F A Hayek, and Milton Friedman. I have read both Keynes and his critics, for my money the critics have the better of it. If you do not like it we are in agreement. Trump has continued it, so did Obama. @Weave just rained on your parade. I do not have a link just lying around, it is something I read a couple of months ago. Will you accept Weave's link (I have not read it) or do you want me to dig one up?

You misunderstood. The report could conclude that Trump was unaware. So what? The report did not conclude that Trump did not collude. So what? The report did not conclude much of anything other than Russia interfered. (I notice you edited your post). Collusion was a hoax cooked up by HRC & the DNC. The Steele dossier was a hoax cooked up by HRC & the DNC. Crash & Burn stands. Do you believe there was collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia? If so, what do you think happened? You're a little out there if you thought that "the DNC was behind getting Donal Trump elected" was what I meant.

I choose neither. Corporate taxes being too high was making our corporation noncompetitive. When the Trump tax rate cut went into effect lots of people in high tax were complaining about double taxation, some in this very thread. Corporate profits are quadruple taxed. The before tax profits are taxed by the feds and the states (not all states but many) at an average rate somewhere between 5% to 10%. After tax profits that are paid out to shareholders are also taxed by the feds and most states. That is a lot. Additionally, if a US company makes a profit abroad they pay corporate taxes abroad and if they bring profits home they pay a repatriation tax. If we went back to following the constitution we could cut the federal government by 90%.

So what? They also did not conclude that Obama was unaware or did not collude. In our system of jurisprudence we assume innocence. I'll stick with "crash and burn". The whole thing was hoax perpetrated by HRC and the DNC, just like the Steele dossier hoax.

Please more specific.

Thanks for posting something I could get my teeth into. I read all of this stuff. It is like a lot of economic news, a mixed bag. I do not think it proves much of anything, one way or another. As to your graph, employment bottomed early in 2010. During most recoveries employment gets back on track much faster. We only reached full employment about a year ago. I think the stimulus slowed the recovery. It failed by its own metric (it was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%). It was total pork, wasting about 850B. Had it been for infastructure it might have been almost worth it. There was a lot more idiocy, none dumber than cash for clunkers, "only" about 3B but totally nonsensical. Another problem was the near endless extension of unemployment benefits. As to deficits, I agree with you. They are bad. OTOH, I do not remember you complaining about them during Mr. Obama's tenure. Sooner or later debt service will kill us. I have been in favor of a balanced budget amendment for my entire adult life. There are almost no budget hawks left in Washington, D.C. If there is even a single Democrat budget hawk I am not aware of him. Most Democrats claim to be Keynesians. If you have actually read Keynes you will know he was aginst structural deficits. Rand Paul is the only budget hawk I can think of, offhand. You seem to think deficits are caused by the Trump tax cut. Nope. Total tax revenues are up since the tax cut passed. Corporate tax revenue is down but personal tax revenue is up. Spending is up even more than revenue. We need to get spending under control. I was in favor of the tax cut because corporate taxes were way too high. Even Mr. Obama said so.

Now that the Boris & Natasha hoax has crashed and burned we see the desperate pivot to name calling. All sound and fury, no evidence.

Can you be more specific? What is wrong with his economic policy? The economy is doing quite well. Unemployment is low, wages are rising. What is wrong with any of that?