A volatile stock market is one thing, inflation hits us all where it hurts with every dollar we spend.

I'm the type of investor that has no problem sacrificing upside with a suitable "hedge" against the negative... nothing ever wrong with profit.

How do you hedge against inflation?

There are plenty of complicated ways, here's a no-brainer move for anyone with over $25.


IBONDS:

Protect the value of your cash from inflation.

Are risk free and guaranteed by the government

Are paying a record 9.62% through October.


The catch:

Investment limit is 10,000 per person per calendar year.

Money is locked for 1 year.

Withdrawal during first five years costs you the previous three months interest. Although this is a 30 year bond, there is no penalty for withdrawal after 5 years.


Bottom line:

9.62% destroys any savings rate.

Inflation isn't going away over night.

After a year, you simply weigh the return (which is stated in advance every six months) and decide when you want to exit... Worst case scenario -- Inflation stops dead in it's tracks and they reset the rate to something like 1%... wait three months, sacrifice the 1% you made over the past three months and take your cash back.



https://clark.com/save-money/i-bonds/

https://treasurydirect.gov/indiv/research/indepth/ibonds/res_ibonds_ibuy.htm

thankfully i haven't raised rent on my tenants, but the complex owner up'ed the monthly maintenance fees at the beginning of the year, so it eating into the profits a bit. however, not a problem.

why? REITs, or Real Estate Investment Trust. i've got a portfolio based around REITs and equity capital companies. they pay quarterly and monthly, because REITs are mandated by law to give back 90% of their revenue back to the shareholders. that portfolio alone more than covered the fee increase on my units, and i'm just pouring more money into it, and then buying ETF's and individual stocks on the cheap.

the other portfolio is for pure growth. so i have all those quarterly dividends DRIP'd, and filled with emerging market and bond ETF's, as well as index ETF's. i'm only 34 so i dont care about market dips. just an incentive to buy more.

but literally anything besides a savings account is where the bread is. savings has emergency funds and thats it, not about lose value on so much cash every year like that.

that's why i stay trashing these dudes in this country so hard. here i am wanting to go out and grind, but the government said nah, so i have to make myself my own financial ecosystem.

so many jobs available, so many different ways to make money and earn passive income. i don't understand how any of these young men with no kids just aren't out here putting in work like that. i can't even imagine how much bread i could make if when i was 18, the economy was like this. i'd have two jobs easy, no college, stacking racks paycheck after paycheck.

yeah... things are about to get really bad if Secretary Janet Yellen is apologizing.



"I was wrong then about the path that inflation would take. As I mentioned, there have been unanticipated and large shocks to the economy [...] that I, at the time, didn't fully understand."

at least she owned it. we have elected officials who won't even acknowledge getting something wrong.

Nothing but communists and criminals in charge of the government.

Things are going just like they planned: Kill the middle class and wipe them off the face of the earth.

I'd rather they admit a mistake than lie about it, and I can see how they didn't anticipate all the crap that has come along to create this inflation being a rational explanation for the mistake. So we know what happened, and why, and now they need to figure out what can be done. But after the backlash on stimulus spending, all I see coming is austerity measures for the working class.

They didn't already exist. (the middle class)
In response to OldColddawg, final 5 of the last thread.
On the list of things the democrats don't know how to do is how to blame themselves for the disasterous results of their flawed thinking and thus policies.

You are right. Much of this was self inflicted with all the free money we were passing out...and probably still are when you get down to it.

If you and I have any disagreement is it might be on who we would call working class and what they do for a living. Some people might be making more money, but they are getting up and going to work just like everybody else. Mid-levels of management jobs are usually some of the first to be gutted.

When the guy or gal on the shop floor start getting cut, you can bet that many of those jobs in the middle floors of the corporate tower have been cleared out as well.

a lot of middle management workers are worried (i dont really care about their worries) because workers moving remote showed how useless a lot of them were. people who were able to keep their jobs while moving to remote schedule increased their productivity and got to spend more time with the family. middle management and some corporate executives are ticked only because their jobs became publicly useless and the half empty commercial properties are costing them money.

so there's that complexity when it comes to money, because for remote workers, yea goods overall went up in price, but they are no longer filling up once a week on gas to get to work everyday. going from filling up 4 times a week to 2 makes a difference, especially with the gas prices today.

i dunno if you and i share the same definition of working class, but i always thought of that as non-degree workers in industrial or manual labor jobs. that's a "sub-class" to middle class. sort of like how indie or metal is a subgenre of Rock music.

the working class are the main ones i'm worried about. they are getting hit in every direction imaginable, and the last couple of years with the pandemic has only made everything worse. not just domestically, but globally as well.

I guess I am more inclusive than you.

My point is you are wrong it is just one group hit by inflation.

Retired people such as myself are hit by inflation. You should care that all groups are hit. Everybody is paying the same new, higher prices for the same goods. Most of which has been self inflicted wounds. Well, at least as far as people who actually spend their own earned money of things like food and rent.

If we want to start talking about worthless jobs, maybe we should discuss all the things in this country that are worthless.

uhh, when did i ever say just one group is hit by inflation? i've reread my posts and couldn't find anything close to that.

fair enough...you said something about not being worried about people in the office and are most worried about people on the shop floor.

I worry about all of them.

i worry about anybody seriously affected by inflation. i'm simply talking about the middle management in the corporate environment when it comes specifically to working remote. that's my bad for not being specific on that. I don't consider managers at the warehouse middle management. i consider them part of the working class.

He was voted out in 2020

I actually agree with you that everyone is hit by inflation. What's hard to avoid understanding is that those working class people who make less, get hit harder than those who make more. If your wages already have you hovering at say 20 to 30 percent above the poverty level, it doesn't take nearly as much to put you at or below the poverty level.

That isn't meant to distract from those who make more. They have worked and fought their way up to making a better living and they're seeing that hard work being wiped away by inflation.

It's painful for everyone at all levels.

I am not stupid. I know if you have more money you have it easier, but you are still feeling it as much as anybody else.

You seem to be contradicting yourself in the same sentence. Either you feel it more when you can't afford to absorb the cost or you don't. "As much" would indicate to me that each are impacted and feeling it the same amount. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your intent here.

You are misunderstanding.

When I pay $4.20 per gallon for gas, I feel it as much as anyone else. Just because I might have some money left over at weeks end and someone else might not have much left doesn't mean I haven't felt inflation as much as anyone else. I just have more money. That doesn't have anything to do with inflation.

You're lucky. It's $4.89 here. I believe in Cali it's over $6.00.

I don't have a choice. I need gas to work. Just as trucking companies pass the increases off to customer's, I do as well - as much as i can, anyway. When things are priced too high, what do people do? Don't buy the product or service. In the end, all inflation gets passed down to the end consumer - and many are feeling it HARD right now, and all indications are it will get worse.

Thanks for helping clear that up for me.

I would strongly disagree. The impact of inflation is not suffered equally - because if you have disposable income remaining after you fill up - others don't. Some might not be able to fill up at $4.39 or whatever the price per gallon is. Some might have to choose between fuel or food.

Inflation increases everyone's cost of goods by the same % or dollar amount - that impact is far from equally felt. Taken to an extreme - the one percenters also pay more for everything, I doubt they even notice, there is certainly zero pain.

Yep. It's like you have a super-padded cup but you still feel the kick in the nuts, just not as bad.

I may not have been following all this, but that statement taken on it's own I think is ...
1= left over money, 2. = zero.
Then the inclusion of "as much as" ... by definition people with leftover money won't feel inflation as much as the broke.

If you really don't have what you need, it doesn't matter if it's a dozen donuts, or Le'bron James' house, if you truly can't afford the one, it might as well be the other. See, if you really can't afford the donuts, the donuts cost exactly the same as a Ferarri automobile, the amount of out of reach.

Well, there goes variety at the big retail chains. Bezos will make a fortune from this. And of course, the right will lay 100% of the blame on Biden, while dismissing all the crap that happened under Trump, Putin's war, and corporate price gouging that all took place pre-inflation. No way it's a market correction compounded by all those factors... no way.

trump has been out of office for one and a half years and Biden is 1/3 of the way through his presidency. stop blaming trump.

Do you realize how blind and lost you are in your hate for Trump?

It is really quite sad.

Keep propping up your "installed" leader while you are destroyed by his regimes policies!

Stop acting like this isn't the consequences of a long period of spending without paying your bills. This goes back before Biden, before Trump and before Obama. At some point the bills come due.

I don't like to brag about taking expensive trips, but I just back from the gas station.

Your Biden Economy!

Stocks sink, S&P enters bear market inflation, Fed meeting this week:

https://www.foxbusiness.com/live-news/stocks-today-6-13-2022

Question...who did you blame for the 2008 financial crisis?

That one's easy. (Not full-fledged blame, but the move set the table)

In November 1999, President Bill Clinton publicly declared "the Glass–Steagall law is no longer appropriate". Some commentators have stated that the GLBA's repeal of the affiliation restrictions of the Glass–Steagall Act was an important cause of the financial crisis of 2007–2008.

It was also around the same time that administration allowed for and began to encourage all sorts of lending practices to ram through tons and tons of loans that never should have flown. Mortgages were being given with no proof of income at all and at federal insistance, Freddie & Fannie were underwriting them. The entire crash was a series of deliberate constructions.

As for the current economic status, we're just beginning to feel the pain.
Inflation affects governments, too.... costs go up, they need more money.

The state of Ohio has ordered the Medina County Auditor to increase property valuations for tax purposes by like 27%.

So, homeowners are about to get double-whammied by inflation.

Right. Under the guise of "every American deserves a home" (whether they can afford one or not).

I'm sure you posted in BIG FONT all when Trump's stockmarket rollercoaster was rolling through too... smh.

30,516.74 Dow Jones Industrial Average
-6,068.32 (-16.59%) year to date
-876.05 (-2.79%) today

https://www.google.com/search?q=dow...904j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Post the numbers of losses that people who don't have a dime in stocks have taken over the last several years. The stock market is NOT the economy. How about the homeless? How about the people ravaged by covid? There are a lot of places to put your tears, but with 85% of stocks being owned by 1%ers, don't look for me to cry when they lose their gambling bets. And yeah, I get 401Ks are taking hits, it's still gambling. Let me know when the race track guarantees your bets, I'll go with you.

I'd also make a small wager that BIG money is being shifted into bonds, precious metals, and rare earth elements right now as a way to protect themselves from losses. That's probably contributing to this dip. Or it's an overdue correction spurred by wild inflation.

May I ask a question to all the Dawgs across the country.

I live in SC and everyone I talk to is in agreement that there have never been more Help Wanted signs than there are right now. Yet, we have pan handlers on the corner right across from businesses that have Help Wanted signs on display. Are folks in other parts of the country seeing the same things in regards to a shortage of workers for available jobs?

Worker shortage, yes. But no uptick that I've noticed in panhandlers. I am seeing more homeless though and that's probably drug/mental health-related. I think we are seeing the effects of the divides, covid mental/physical health, and people so beat down they just don't care anymore. They can stay home and be broke easier than killing themselves and still being broke. No idea how they are making a living other than the crazy number of gig workers I see delivering food and pickers in grocery stores prepping deliveries or pickup orders.

One more thing, I did see an uptick in remote work for big tech and smaller firm coding jobs during the pandemic. With no college education needed to become a programmer, there may have been a shift to that field or related fields too. But I have no numbers and it's pure speculation on my part. But those job offerings are abundant right now, and most pay very well.

Oh, and I just remembered, I've heard of at least six YOUNG people that I know of through friends of friends, getting DISABILITY over mental health issues for not being able to deal with crap in the world. I was floored by that and hope that isn't a trend. But I think it might be a thing right now.

Anyone with a pension, a 401k, an ira, any public employee..............they all, whether they know it or not, are invested in the stock market.

I was wrong. Only 53.9% is owned by the 1%:

Soaring markets helped the richest 1% gain $6.5 trillion in wealth last year, according to the Fed

The wealth of America’s wealthiest people, such as Warren Buffett and Jeff Bezos, increased by a total of $6.5 trillion last year, mainly driven by soaring stock prices and financial markets, according to the Federal Reserve.

The total wealth of the 1% reached a record $45.9 trillion at the end of the fourth quarter of 2021, said the Federal Reserve’s latest report on household wealth. Their fortunes increased by more than $12 trillion, or more than a third, during the course of the pandemic.

“The numbers are astounding,” said Edward Wolff, professor of economics at New York University. “The pandemic wealth boom certainly ranks at or near the top of all the wealth booms over the last 40 years.”

The top 1% owned a record 32.3% of the nation’s wealth as of the end of 2021, data show. The share of wealth held by the bottom 90% of Americans, likewise, has declined slightly since before the pandemic, from 30.5% to 30.2%.

The wealth growth at the top has potentially stalled or declined slightly so far this year due to stock declines.

The main drivers for the richest Americans last year were stocks and private businesses. About $4.3 trillion of the overall gains for the 1% last year came from corporate equities and mutual fund shares, according to the Fed data. The stock portfolios of the top 1% are now worth $23 trillion, and they own a record 53.9% of individually held shares, according to the central bank.

Despite claims of a democratization of the stock market, with millions of new retail investors opening trading accounts on Robinhood and other platforms, stock ownership in America has actually become more concentrated than before the pandemic. The top 10% owned a record 89% of individually held corporate equities and mutual fund shares at the end of 2021.

A Gallup in 2021 found that 56% of Americans owned at least some stock — slightly above the average of 55% in 2019 and 2020, but still down from the 62% high before the 2008 financial crisis.

More wealth inequality
Soaring stock prices have created a “feedback cycle” for wealth and inequality, said Wolff, the NYU professor. Because stock ownership is tilted toward the top of the wealth ranks, rising stock prices shift more money to richer Americans. Since the wealthy can afford to save and invest a larger share of their added wealth, more of the nation’s wealth gains flow to the stock market. That raises stock prices even further.

“Rising wealth inequality drives the stock market, which then drives more wealth inequality,” Wolff said.

Private businesses have also been a powerful engine of wealth for those at the very top. The 1% own 57% of private companies, according to the Federal Reserve. The value of private businesses held by the wealthiest increased by 36%, or $2.2 trillion, last year.

“Small business is really key when you talk about the sources of their wealth,” Wolff said.

The 1% have also benefited modestly from rising real-estate values. Their real-estate holdings increased by just under $1 trillion during the pandemic, to reach a high of $5.27 trillion.

But their share of the nation’s real estate actually fell slightly during the pandemic, as home prices and home ownership also increased for rest of the country. Real estate is far more broadly owned than stocks, so the rising in home prices has helped the middle class slightly more than the wealthy. The top 1% owned 14% of the nation’s real estate at the end of 2021, down from 14.5% before the pandemic at the end of 2019.

The bottom 90% of Americans added $2.89 trillion to their wealth last year from real estate.

“The housing boom has benefited the middle class,” Wolff said. “If it hadn’t been for that, wealth inequality would have grown even more than it did.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/01/richest-one-percent-gained-trillions-in-wealth-2021.html

But hey, if they made 6 Trillion, everybody else must be way up there too... I just don't understand when LOSING in the stock market suddenly came off the table. It happens people, there are no guarantees in speculation. If you can't afford to play, don't.

j/c...



https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3580

First I've heard of this. If it's about fixing supply lines, what the hell took so long in the House?

The politicians are figuring out that their jobs might be in jeopardy if they dont pull their heads out of their butts.

My guess is that the bill had to be introduced into the House, be taken up by the subcommittee, held hearings and voted on to move out of subcommittee for a debate in the House and then put to a full vote. The House of Reps was only in session a total of 5 weeks from April thru June after it had passed the Senate in late March and introduced to the House on 4/4/22.

https://rational360.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/2022-Combined-Congressional-Calendar.pdf

June 13, 2022
Congress Approves Shipping Reform Legislation to Help Ease Supply Chain Challenges

.......


“It seems that no one in America today doesn't know the phrase 'supply chain disruption.' That's why, as Chair of the Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime Transportation, I've held hearings on these ongoing bottlenecks and met with stakeholders across all industries who've felt the pain of these disruptions—including those who've had problems with ocean carriers," Rep. Carbajal said. "I am proud to see the bipartisan Ocean Shipping Reform Act on its way to becoming law this week with its final passage in the House today. I commend Representatives Garamendi and Johnson for their tenacity in getting this bipartisan overhaul of our shipping rules to President Biden's desk. I am proud of our committee’s work with them on this important legislation that will protect American manufacturers and farmers and counter trade imbalances with foreign exporting countries.”

“Nine multinational ocean shipping companies formed three consortiums to raise prices on American businesses and consumers by over 1,000% on goods coming from Asia. This allowed these foreign companies to make $190 billion in profits last year—a sevenfold increase in one year,” Rep. Garamendi said. “I introduced the ‘Ocean Shipping Reform Act’ to provide the Federal Maritime Commission with the necessary tools to protect American businesses and consumers and address America’s longstanding trade imbalance with China and other countries. This bill will help crush inflation and protect American jobs. I’m grateful to Chair DeFazio for his support and advocacy for this bill, and I am pleased that the ‘Ocean Shipping Reform Act’ will soon be signed into law by President Biden.”

https://transportation.house.gov/ne...ion-to-help-ease-supply-chain-challenges

Wondering why the feds are only doing a .75 rate hike instead of a full percentage point or higher. And I don’t know what people expect. Y’all really thought rates was gonna remain damn near zero forever?

It’s like people didn’t do the right thing and budget correctly, or learn any sort of lessons from the 07-08 crash. I keep seeing people complain about inflation, yet I don’t see any less dudes with ballsacks on the back of their lifted pick up trucks driving around any less. Or the suburban mom with 1 kid and a dog driving around and in the brand new Escalade or Tahoe. People got so use to spending far out of their means then act surprised when the economy pulls a 180 on them. And then I’m trying to figure out who out here is seriously impacted vs being fake, because the housing demand is still at historic highs. We’re what? Something like 3-4 million houses short of the current supply to meet the demand?

Somebody has bread out here. Wonder what them credit card balances and personal loans looking like though.

This isn’t the first time gas prices were high. Yet the moment they went down, Americans went right back out to buy these road queen trucks and big ass SUVs, then turn around and act surprised and upset when gas prices go up again, and this time even higher.

Swear people gotta learn everything the hard way. The property tax increase sucks, but oh well. If you didn’t get a fixed rate mortgage when the interest rates were low, that’s your fault. Some of y’all got these ARMs thinking you was pulling a fast one on the rates, and now getting hit with a property tax hike and an interest rate hike.

I thought we as adults were supposed to adapt and evolve. Guess not.

You make a lot of assumptions about people.

My truck is a 2000, 2 wd, sierra. I've had it 12 years - bought it with 175125 miles on it. In 12 years I've put a whopping 35,000 miles on it.

Daughter drives a 2014 Chevy Cruze - 90,000 miles on it. Wife drives a 2015 Jeep Grand Cherokee, 87,000 miles on it. We've lived in our house for over 22 years. Credit card bills are paid in full every month (other than a time or 2 per year when I buy stuff for work, or like today - 4 tires and brakes on my work van).

And yes, dude, inflation is hitting me. Hard. From what I/we spend, to people that I work for that aren't spending. It's hitting me. I don't have a guaranteed income like some do.

So, even common Joe's like me, that absolutely do NOT live an extravagant life style by any, ANY stretch, are feeling the pinch. And the pinch is getting tighter and tigher. I wish I could drive luxury cars, and build a new house, I just can't afford it. Wait - if I had 1 million in the bank, I wouldn't waste my money on fancy cars, or a new house. I'm smarter than that. I don't care what things "look like"

[img][/img]

Y'all need to stop feeding the troll.

I agree with you, but I asked him for a reason. There’s the whole correlation/causation/yell at a cloud thing.

First if you still driving around in a 2000, you’re truck is less fuel efficient than the new ones today. So your cost of ownership is actually costing you more money.

I mean that’s basic finance right there.

You could’ve been had a newer truck and had it paid off by now.

Also, the country exist more than 20 miles outside of your radius. You starting to remind me of AOC, who makes these comments based on where she lives as if everybody lives in NYC. Much bigger country beyond that.

And once again, just like Frank, you’ve been on record Saying the same damn thing about people going broke trying to keep up with the Jone’s.

But all of a sudden when SWISH says it, you have a problem. Freaking pathetic.

jc



We shouldn't let GOPers forget this bit. But this is probably Biden's fault too. Trump intentionally undermined Biden's admin here.

Trump says US will cut oil production to secure global deal

President Trump said Friday the U.S. would reduce its oil production to move forward with a tentative deal limiting global output, part of an effort by the administration to address sinking prices affecting American oil producers.

An agreement outlined during a Thursday meeting of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and other oil-producing nations known as OPEC+ would cut production by 10 million barrels a day, a 10 percent drop in oil production.

But that deal was stalled by Mexico, where President Andrés Manuel López Obrador has been hesitant to cut production levels following campaign promises to boost Mexico’s oil industry.

“The United States will help Mexico along, and they’ll reimburse us sometime at a later date when they’re prepared to do so,” Trump said, recapping a conversation with López Obrador.

Trump said the U.S. would cut production levels by 250,000 to 300,000 in order to assist Mexico in meeting the parameters outlined by OPEC+, but he could not provide any details as to how Mexico would reimburse the U.S. for cutting production.

“There’s no real cost because you’re saving it for another day,” Trump added when pressed for more details.

How Trump will force the domestic oil production cut is also unclear.

U.S. antitrust law prohibits oil companies from coordinating their production, and there is no direct mechanism for the government to dictate production levels to private oil companies.

“U.S. production has already been cut because we’re a market driven economy and oil is very market driven. They’ve been cutting oil all over the place,” Trump said.

The deal Trump is trying to shepherd across the finish line would stall a trade dispute between Saudi Arabia and Russia, with both counties increasing production as the coronavirus pushed demand for oil to drop by 30 percent.

Trump has had conversations with both leaders, including a call to Russian President Vladimir Putin on Friday morning.

U.S. production has already fallen amid sinking oil prices.

The number of rigs used to drill new oil wells is down by more than 400 from the same time last year, with nearly half of that decline coming in the last month.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration, part of the Energy Department, predicts domestic oil production will drop by 500,000 barrels per day through the rest of the year, a figure that could decrease by 700,000 barrels per day into next year. The U.S. typically produces about 12 million barrels of oil each day.

The administration’s main method for alleviating oversupply issues has been an effort to fill the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve with 77 million barrels of U.S. crude, but the $3 billion in funding needed to do so was not included in a stimulus package approved by Congress.

“For our part, the United States is taking action to open our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to store as much oil as possible. This will take surplus oil off the market at a time when commercial storage is filling up and the market is oversupplied,” Energy Secretary Dan Bouillette said Friday at a virtual meeting of the Group of 20 energy ministers, which is discussing a deal to reduce global oil production by an additional 5 million barrels per day.

Trump said Friday that record low prices have had some benefits, with drivers able to fill tanks in some parts of the country at price points not seen in decades.

“So there’s some good,” he said. “The airlines are trying to come back; having low fuel costs is good for them.”

https://thehill.com/policy/energy-e...ut-oil-production-to-secure-global-deal/

Trump is the best at failing time and again.

Basic finance?? lol

If he bought a "newer" truck his cost of ownership would be like 30k higher!

You think he spent an extra 30k on gasoline?

lol what a brain dead post. you think a truck built in 2000 is more fuel efficient than the newer truck built in the early-mid 2010's? you do understand what cost of ownership means, right? brakes, service, wear and tear, etc. it isn't just gas.

the fact that you honestly said 30k on gasoline has me laughing too. except i'm not laughing with you. i'm laughing AT you.

god you conservatives really know how to make yourself look stupid.

Watching the Left run this Country into the ground is your evidence?

Conservatives are gonna be years fixing this mess.

Fixing what? Giving corporations more power to destroy this country? You understand that corporations raised prices for absolutely no reason right? You want to give them more power to that?

You fight for your corporate slave masters all you want. Don’t expect me to go along with it.

You seem to think you are making a point, but you are not.
That article is from April 2020.... when the whole freaking world was at a standstill from COVID. *Everybody* HAD to cut production to stop prices from flatlining.

Also, to aid in the math, it is over two years ago and not in any way germane to anything happening today. Not at all.



As for cost of ownership silliness on older cars vs newer: it's an empty argument until/unless maintenance on the older car exceeds payments + maintenance on the newer car. Math 101.

Even with occasional repairs and regular maintenance, keeping my 2011 sedan is still a better financial choice than even leasing a newer sedan, much less buying one.

I’m sure the maintenance on your sedan cost less than a pickup truck.

God it’s like you guys don’t even think about what you’re saying before posting. Might as well compare cost of ownership of a smart car compared to a H2 hummer and claim it’s the same. Cause that’s what you just did.

But once again. Only you guys are allowed to criticize people who leave well above their means. But when swish does it, it’s silly.

Uhhh, I just compared a sedan to a sedan. Should I compare my truck to a new truck for you?

What the hell stuff are you making up in your head here???

let me do that real quick:

2013 F250 6.7 Powerstroke w/ > 200k miles.... the engine is currently hydrolocked and I need to replace 7 of 8 injectors (one was done last summer). It is STILL more economical for me to hang onto it and do all the work than it is to get a new one.

Yea I guess you’re right….if you ignore the fact that the original comment was about people living above their means, and how fuel efficiency with Arch’s old truck combined with cost of ownership increases the cost over a newer truck (not NEW, newer).

But yea you’re right bro. Just jump right on in and talk about your sedan like it’s got a 26 gallon tank with a V8 engine with the ballsack swinging back and forth.

And to emphasize, newer is not the same as new. I didn’t think I’d have to explain that to you, and yet here we are.

Somehow purp believes newer = new. So I had a 2000 truck, and got a 2015 truck, that’s somehow brand new in Purps world, not newer.

Am I talking to adults or right wingers on Twitch? I can’t tell anymore.

Thanks purp. I now know to speak to you guys as if you’re in the 5th grade.

so lets just go ahead and clarify it now guys.

when i say get a newer iphone, i dont mean BRAND new, just maybe think about a 11?

when i talk about a newer laptop. maybe not a NEW one? maybe a 2019.

let me know if i need to type small post and sentences at a time so we can all keep up, k? i know you guys don't like education, especially from liberal public schools, and i'm starting to learn the MAGA language, so i'm willing to work with you guys here.

imagine being ganged up on because i actually listened to fiscal conservatism by not buying crap i can't afford, saving money, investing into the stock market, and evolving with the times to make sure price increases doesn't affect me too much. self accountability and all that.

apparently now that's a bad thing. or maybe it's only a bad thing when Swish does it.

Which has nothing to do with the conversation at hand. Don't be a martyr.

What is the Section 179 Deduction
Most people think the Section 179 deduction is some mysterious or complicated tax code. It really isn’t, as you will see below.

Essentially, Section 179 of the IRS tax code allows businesses to deduct the full purchase price of qualifying equipment and/or software purchased or financed during the tax year. That means that if you buy (or lease) a piece of qualifying equipment, you can deduct the FULL PURCHASE PRICE from your gross income. It’s an incentive created by the U.S. government to encourage businesses to buy equipment and invest in themselves.

Several years ago, Section 179 was often referred to as the “SUV Tax Loophole” or the “Hummer Deduction” because many businesses have used this tax code to write-off the purchase of qualifying vehicles at the time (like SUV’s and Hummers). But that particular benefit of Section 179 has been severely reduced in recent years (see ‘Vehicles & Section 179‘ for current limits on business vehicles.)

However, despite the SUV deduction lessened, Section 179 is more beneficial to small businesses than ever. Today, Section 179 is one of the few government incentives available to small businesses, and has been included in many of the recent Stimulus Acts and Congressional Tax Bills. Although large businesses also benefit from Section 179 or Bonus Depreciation, the original target of this legislation was much needed tax relief for small businesses – and millions of small businesses are actually taking action and getting real benefits.

https://www.smbsales.com/2021-tax-deductions-for-new-used-equipment-purchases/#:~:text=Essentially%2C%20Section%20179%20of%20the,PRICE%20from%20your%20gross%20income.

Before I go any further, let me quickly go over what Section 179 is. It is the tax deduction that allows companies to write off the full purchase price of qualifying new and used equipment purchased during the calendar year. Companies can deduct the total of all eligible equipment purchased during the year, up to $1,050,000 in 2021. This makes Section 179 very attractive, since the company gets needed equipment and a nice tax write-off at the same time. For more information about Section 179, visit www.irs.gov or www.Section179.org.

While almost any equipment bought during the year will qualify, many companies will wait until later in the year, typically November and December, to make specific and/or larger Section 179 purchases. The reasons for this are many. For some companies, the end of the year simply sneaks up on them and they don’t want to lose out. Others may want to see how the year is going to look on paper. If the numbers look good, let’s buy that expensive backhoe (etc.) now and take the full deduction.

As long as the qualifying equipment is purchased and put into service by midnight on December 31, a company is eligible to take the deduction.

https://www.forconstructionpros.com...t-miss-out-on-section-179-tax-deductions

somebody help me out here. because apparently section 179 of the IRS code is fake news to you guys. it must not work like that, or you guys are getting played.

So, section 179 doesn't say you get it for free. You have to pay for it. And that deduction only comes off your gross income, not your tax bill. Great, go buy new equipment. You still have to pay for it. And you get a small fraction of it in tax benefit.

so when you get new or used equipment, you don't increase your productivity whatsoever? you just be buying it to do what? be less productive at work?

that's like me being a limo driver, buying a new limo, but then driving less and crying about expenses going up while not increasing the productivity the new limo was intended for. it seems like you don't understand that business purchase the equipment, use it to earn more contracts, and then at the end of the year claim section 179 to offset the purchase price.

i'm starting to understand why you still got a 2000 truck for work.

Why? No seriously, why? Nobody is stopping them from gouging and taking record profits while consumers suffer crazy prices. Letting prices flatline is how the markets should work in down times. Republicans love free markets as long as the can manipulate them and pick the winners and losers. It's all part of the great transfer of wealth to the top. Trump is just as guilty for gas prices as Biden, that was the point and it's true. And for the record, neither of them could have prevented this, unless Trump could have twerked for Putin or something to keep him from invading Ukraine. Meh, Trump would have sent troops to help his buddy, Vlad.

just remember bro: these guys love the free market. well the free market decided to raise prices just cause. so now they're blaming biden.

but the moment biden does something in an ATTEMPT to reel in the free market, they gonna be right back on here talking about communist woke marxist policies.

they love the free market so much that when the free market screws them, they blame somebody else. i dont know how to combat that level of stupidity.

You can't. Can't fix it either. We need a political sandbox. When you have code you can't trust to operate appropriately, you run in an isolated environment called a sandbox for analysis, to minimize the harm it could potentially do in the wild (run openly). We need that for GOPer politics until they come back to reality.

First, which proves you don't read and understand, I don't have 2000 work truck, okay? Got that? That particular vehicle has nothing to do with my work, okay? I mean, at under 3000 miles a year driven, I wouldn't think I'd have to explain that.

The rest of your post makes no sense.

Regardless, tax deductions - you can deduct the amount you paid, but it comes from the gross you earned. I'll simplify it for you: If you make $10, and you spend $1, your taxable income is $9 for the year. If you make $10, but buy new stuff that costs $10, your taxable income is 0 - FOR THE YEAR. Next year, you're back to paying taxes, while still making payments on the equipment you bought.


Oh, you think just buying new stuff gets you new business? Obviously, you have no business background.


And again for the record. that model year 2000 truck I have? Under 3000 miles per year, driven for recreational purposes. Why in God's name would I buy a new personal vehicle for some $60,000 to do that? I'm not you. "Showing" isn't anything I'm into. Looking wealthy isn't anything I care about.

But, I can see how you need the image with your BMW, that you were so damn upside down on, and your truck, same thing, and your current vehicles............just borrow money. Hell build a new house. I don't believe you have a job, so your wife must make serious coin for you to be doing all the stuff you claim.

Alright, this thread is complete.

Trump = bad

Biden = good

GOP = evil


We could have saved all this back and forth without Swish embarrassing himself.

And, oh yeah... Arch... get with the times, bro.

These new trucks have new features. I know it seems the same on the surface, one engine, four tires, etc... But the "newer" ones come with a cloning feature.

YOU WILL BE SO MUCH MORE PRODUCTIVE. (Can't make this stuff up )

I'll stay away from them then, I think we can safely say one of me is too much.

Lol bro you trying so hard, it’s cute.

I get it bro. You hate that I’m more fiscally conservative than you. I know it sucks that I come from a poorer background yet jumped over you in the tax bracket.

Oh, and you know building a crib helps keep people employed, right? Maybe I shouldn’t build a crib so I can own the conservatives?

What do you think is more productive: A WW2 era plane, or an F-22?

You don’t think being efficient is important in business? Never mind. I forgot I’m talking to conservatives. Y’all schedule is filled with a whole bunch of “executive time” lmfao

so, if I understand what is going on... the feds raised the rates by .75 to stop everyone from making large purchases and they think that will get prices eventually back in line?

seems like they are rolling out more punishment for the masses.

It's a little more in depth than that, but yes, raising the rate is 1 tool used in an attempt to stem inflation.

If you can slow the 'easy money', 'spend whatever cause rates are low' tide, it should help to some degree. when credit tightens, spending does also.

awesome... I heard the early 80's were horrific. (It's sad that Biden was already being referred to as Jimmy Carter 2.0)

You do know the 80’s was the era in which Reagan massively cut taxes, only to have to raise them back right? Taxes were cut in 81-82, then had to get raises back again due to him and his administration facing a future of huge deficits. Except he didn’t raise tax rates on the top brackets. Instead he raised tax rates on the middle class. Before being president, as governor of California he massively reduced spending into mental health institutions, and continued that at the federal level as president.

You do know Reagan was president from 81 through 89, right? If the 80’s were horrific, umm…

all i did was hop on google and search "when was reagan president?"

"when did he cut taxes?"

"did reagan raise taxes after cutting them?"

basic stuff.

Reagan only served until January of 1989.

so 81-89 is 8 years, 2 terms, correct?

Yep. So, we will get one of the best Presidents to fix this mess we are about to go through?

Don't knock Reagan - people on all sides approved of him. Unlike what we are dealing with between Biden and Trump.

In fact, Reagan - ended with the highest final approval ratings since Eisenhower in the 50's with a 63% approval rating.

https://www.thoughtco.com/presidential-approval-ratings-4074188

i can absolutely knock reagan. i can and will knock the hell out of reagan. reagan made a lot of things worse in this country.

seriously, what is 63% approval rating supposed to mean to me 33 years later when we get to see what ACTUALLY transpired?

Yep.

if you really think that a President still had any control over something 33 years later... you got some cray-cray going on.

Clinton enjoyed the Reaganomics wave (who had the second-highest approval rating since Eisenhower). into Lewinski's oral office until the stock market bubble popped.

so still having an affect = control?

are you now implying that Nixon's war on drugs has no effect on our society today because he's not president today?

are you implying that WW2 has no effect on the continent of europe because hitler isn't in control of germany?

are you saying that Genghis Khan has no effect on society even though at least 2 million people TODAY can trace their lineage directly back to him because he isn't in control of mongolia anymore?

are you hellbent on taking L after L after L with posting the most ridiculous crap imaginable?

oh sorry... you must be busy trying to rewrite history.

Nixon war on drugs was probably sleight of hand to keep everyone distracted from planning watergate and a ton of other shady stuff he never got caught doing.


the rest of the egregious comments are not worth replying to.

Who would that Best President be? If you say Trump, I'm adding you to the list.

Reagan. - that's who we have been talking about. He had the highest exit approval rating in like 75 years.


... I don't how many times I can say that I wouldn't vote for Trump If he ran in '24.

You gonna dig him up are ya? smh.

I have no clue what you are saying. Read the convo for context.

Your comment sounds like a wasted person getting in from the bar and interrupting a formal dinner.

Nope. not even high tonight. But nice try. Explain how you are going to get one of the best presidents to fix this mess then? You said you were talking about Reagan. And I scrolled up and read, you got a lot of nerve saying I look like the one just home from the bar.

The same way some of our Presidents in the past have stepped up at the right time.

Reagan
Eisenhower
Lincoln
FDR
Teddy Roosevelt
Washington
Truman
Jefferson


Our next president has a lot of work to do and big shoes to fill.

JC

Gas up to $5 a gallon

Food, when you can find it up 5% a month

Business all over with staffing shortages.

The list goes on and on. Progressives...I think that is supposed to mean making progress. My question is progress towards what?

What idiots they are.

staffing shortage means a lack of bodies. so there's plenty of jobs out there. oil companies out here making crazy amounts of money.

how come you won't tell your free market to lower prices?

DON'T YOU DARE BLAME PROGRESSIVES FOR THIS CRAP. It's on corps, Putin, Trump, MAGA, COVID, and YOU.

Because he would rather lie to himself and others for political points.

They want to blame people who wanted a living wage. People who got stimulus checks, always blame the poor and the less fortunate, that's what they do. And Trump sent out most of that money, but Biden gets blamed too. Running his mouth but doesn't have a clue. Progressives aren't playing games with supply chains, progressives didn't crap on essential workers, and we damn sure didn't vote for Trump or root for Putin. You have to be a fool to think things got this messed up in the little time Biden has been in office. I guess he begged SA to cut oil production too. Or played games with CHina so now they are playing games with us on sending crap we need. And Republicans let businesses send all our manufacturing overseas in the name of fast profits.

it's funny cause cutting taxes for the wealthy and corporations is effectively a stimulus check. they don't ever whine about that though.

People like Peen are infuriating. In their minds, Reagan is still in office and the Yuppies are the in-crowd. If Boomers like him would butt out, this country would be a hell of a lot better off. His way of thinking has been dead for 20+ years, he just hasn't figured that out yet.

Or realize how much wealth got transferred to the top on THEIR watch. They were asleep at the wheel letting us get sold down the river.

You should save more and pick yourself up by the bootstraps. Thoughts and prayers.

Eat my shorts homeboy. The 80's where gnarly, and it's when we learned to veg out, (when somebody wasn't gagging us with a spoon) The 80's were bitchin, Bodacious, Awesome, Wicked, Schweet, Righteous, Excellent, Most triumphant, Fantabulous, Outrageous, times.

Peen is a good homeboy. some guys just tend to get stuck in nostalgia and look back at the good times without recognizing the bad that came with it.

yea i heard the CIA also had a blast with the cartels in the 80's as well. gnarly.

He came at me and he knew what he was doing. I don't care if he's the second coming. That kind of garbage thinking is killing America.

oh im not commenting on his and your beef. i was just talking about him from the standpoint of nostalgia

Swish, the one thing the 60-90s had over your generation that is undeniable. We had great music. The rest will always be up for debate. But mumble rap? Nah.

jc

I hear Mexico has a surplus of people willing to work, maybe we should invite them in so old turds can get their $2.99 Denny's breakfast and leave their .50 cent tips.

oooo now we getting into the weeds (pun intended).

i'll grant you rock and country music. maybe i'll even grant you pop music from the 60's-90's.

but hip hop from the mid 80's until the beginning of 2010's was flat out iconic. and remember i'm a techno head. yall house music was hot garbage back in the day. it's so much better now. mumble rap i dislike as well, though i must admit the beats are straight up FIRE. thankfully that crap is losing popularity and rappers are going back to actually speaking english, so it was a phase. i blame Atlanta for that mumble rap nonsense. rock music today is hot garbage though.

Hey now 20 percent is .60 cents. that's what I leave.

Maybe 2010. But the best rap and its precursors started in the 80s-90s. Eminem hit the scene in the late 90s, so you are right, there was some good work in the 2000-2010 range. And there is some decent music today, but far from iconic.

I could have really got in the weeds and said, rap isn't music, but I'm not like certain posters. I like rap, even if it took me longer to appreciate it than most. I was a hardcore rocker and a blues fan in my youth. Only listened to country, pop, rap, classical, or bluegrass if I was in a situation where there was no other choice. By the time I started appreciating rap, Tupac and Biggie were gone, Em was taking over, Ice cube, llcj, and Ice T were all acting. But now I know most of the best from the genre and movement. But there was a time when I had no idea who Dre, Snoop, or Diddy were. lol, that's sad.

Hell, it was only 5-6 years ago that I found out Mark and Donnie Wahlberg were in NCOTB. I hated those boy bands.

Oh, finally made the jump from 15 percent? lol

rap isn't music...

cause we're boys, i'mma refrain from calling you Ben Shapiro

lol, thanks.

jc

keep tanking, stock market!!! let me eat up these shares like i'm pacman!!!

I will blame who I see as the problem, so I take your dare. I blame you.

They shouldn't have to lower their profit margin. They haven't raised anything above normal.

Lower the cost of crude and you will see gas prices drop. Your guy is the one who came in shutting down pipelines and exploration. He is the one who came in with all the tough talk...so now he gets what he wanted. Lower output in the oil fields.

Too bad he and like people don't understand how things work. That raises prices, so no, the oil companies shouldn't do a damn thing to help that idiot. Record profits are a function of crude prices. It isn't because the oil companies raised their margins.

Here’s a very fact based, informative article. I quoted a couple parts for those that refuse to open links. There’s a ton more information in the article I’d encourage everyone to read.

https://novelscience.substack.com/p...HrfZ-3XcMtVIgDdPNAPGnkBtL9RKA987A6YR_IB4


“Gas production is the highest it’s been in decades

Production has not meaningfully changed between the current and the former President, but still, we see an all-time high price of $5/gal (Sanicola, 2022).

America produced 11.185 million barrels of crude oil per day in 2021, compared with 11.283 million a year earlier under Trump (Cercone, 2022).
The amount produced in Biden’s first year exceeds the average daily amount produced under Trump from 2017 to 2018, according to data from the US Energy Information Administration (Cercone, 2022; EIA, 2022). “


“There are around 9000 unused drilling permits, although it’s not that everyone is choosing not to (some definitely are doing that). To encourage supply, the Biden administration has issued more permits on federal lands than in the previous administration’s first three years (Loe, 2022). This has been met with criticism from environmental activists (AP News, 2021).

For others, there are legal cases and supply chain bottlenecks for materials like piping. Still, the industry could meaningfully increase the supply in the US were they so inclined.
While the war will frustrate some industries, America gets less than 2% of its oil supply from Russia. In May of 2022, the House passed the Gas Price Gouging Prevention Act in a 217-207 vote. All Republicans and four Democrats opposed it (Daly, 2022).

The bill intended to prevent price gouging of customers by oil companies and gave the government the ability to fine companies for doing this (Gas Price Gouging Prevention Act, 2022).
Although a supermajority of Americans supported the bill, it remains stalled in the Senate and unproved by its Republican members. Morning Consult found that energy price-gouging legislation is supported by 77% of registered voters, including 83% of Democrats and 76% of Republicans (Martinez, 2022).
Effectively, the US has Senators who are both condemning gas prices and blocking action to prevent price gouging.”

For those in the back not paying attention. This is from the oil companies’ own mouths. Profits over everything else.

“Companies are intentionally keeping prices high

Many companies have admitted to choosing not to increase supply to keep profits high. Examples are included below. Where possible, the audio from the call or interview has been included so you can hear it from the executives directly. Excerpts were collected by Documented, an investigative journalism group focusing on corporate influence (Documented, 2022).

Marathon Oil

"Our cash flow-driven return of capital framework uniquely prioritizes our shareholders as the first call on cash flow generation, not the drill bit."

"I want to make clear that should commodity prices continue to surprise to the upside, we will remain disciplined and have no plans to allocate production growth capital."

Listen

Pioneer Natural Resources

"We expect to generate over $10.5 billion of operating cash flow, which will be a record for the company."

"Long term, we're still in that 0% to 5%. It's going to vary. We're not going to change, as I said. At $100 oil, $150 oil, we're not going to change our growth rate. We think it's important to return cash back to the shareholders."

Listen

Occidental Petroleum

"As evidenced by our guidance for 2022, we do not intend to grow production in 2022. At the point where it is appropriate to invest in future cash flow growth, we will only do so if supported by long-term demand."
Listen

Diamondback Energy

"I can tell you definitively right now, what's being valued by our investors is a shareholder return program. And no one wants to see that shareholder return program put at risk with volume growth, not for Diamondback specifically for our industry in total...

"We've spent the last decade consuming capital and now we've got a little bit of sunshine in us where we can return that capital to our investors that have been waiting patiently and sometimes impatiently for this return."
Listen

Oil CEOs cashing in on a crisis

Of course, CEOs are not simply trying to save face with investors. In addition to industry-wide record profits, individual executives have grown their personal wealth. As BailoutWatch recently reported, oil and gas executives have cashed out millions since the start of the war.

Marathon Oil, Pioneer Natural Resources, Occidental Petroleum, and Diamondback Energy are hardly industry outliers. Their peers are committed to robust shareholder returns, record cash flow, and slow growth.

Devon Energy - February 16, Q4 earnings call

With this powerful stream of free cash flow, we delivered on exactly what our shareholder-friendly business model was designed for, and that is to leave the industry in cash returns. As you can see on the graphic, we rewarded shareholders with outsized dividends, opportunistic share buybacks, and we took meaningful steps to strengthen our investment-grade balance sheet...

What I was just going to add, remember that we are growing in the Permian. At the same time, we're keeping our overall production flat.

Laredo Petroleum - February 23, Q4 earnings call

Our capital investments are disciplined and are being allocated to our best opportunities. We are fortunate to have a strong portfolio of high-return oil projects in the US's premier oil basin. We are maintaining our capital discipline, keeping activity levels flat from 2021, keeping oil production approximately flat from our Q4 '21 exit rate.

APA Corporation - February 22, Q4 earnings call

By maintaining capital discipline and investing in a level slightly below our plan, we let the strengthening oil price flow directly through to the balance sheet reducing upstream net debt in 2021 by $1.2 billion. In one year, we accomplished what we thought would take multiple years and made great progress toward our goal of returning to investment-grade status...

With $6.5 billion of projected free cash flow, we will return $4 billion to shareholders under our current framework, that leaves $2.5 billion for debt reduction or additional shareholder returns through buybacks and/or dividend increases.

Continental Resources - February 15, Q4 earnings call

First, thanks to our capital discipline and the strength of our operations and execution, we generated record quarter-over-quarter free cash flow for the last four quarters and a record full-year free cash flow of $2.64 billion...

We are projecting significant cash flows with over 55% of cash flow from operations available to shareholders in the form of net debt reduction, dividends and share repurchases...

Our projections are based on a flat year-over-year CapEx relative to 2022, delivering a low single-digit compound annual production growth rate. We are targeting significant cash flow and dividend per share growth over this time frame.

Hess Corporation- January 26, Q4 earnings call

As a reminder, as you've said earlier, we've been consistent in saying that our cash flow compounding, as it does, we intend to return the majority of our free cash flow to our shareholders by further increasing our dividend and also accelerating share repurchases.

EOG Resources - February 25, Q4 earnings call

2021 was a record-setting year for EOG. We earned record net income of $4.7 billion, generated a record $5.5 billion of free cash flow, which funded record cash return of $2.7 billion to shareholders. We doubled our regular dividend rate and paid two special dividends, paying out about 30% of cash from operations...

This period of high oil prices allows us to further bolster the balance sheet. To support our renewed $5 billion buyback authorization and prepare to take advantage of other countercyclical opportunities, we plan to build and carry a higher cash balance going forward...

We don't need more inventory. We are focused on improving our inventory quality.”

I agree and strongly disagree. First, yes, Biden made his bed and has doubled down every step of the way. Not good, although the argument on the left is always over the ancillaries and not the posture that helped to exacerbate the problem.

But NO, not in my opinion... certain things that directly affect "way of life" should be more regulated in crisis situations. Oil companies shouldn't have a free ticket to charge what they want.

I'll put it in pure mathematical form... If I sell a good or service that is a requirement for society and charge, say, $10 with a 20% margin, I'm obviously happy and successful making two bucks. Now, if situation raises my cost to $100, should I now enjoy the same margin and $20 per unit profit on every sale? I say no, not when you are a trillion $ corp capable of playing puppet master with an entire species. There should be "raw profit" caps, pure unit, on things that affect American's well being and financial stability. jmo

which pipeline was shut down that was meant to supply the US?

What Is Keystone XL?
The Keystone XL pipeline extension, proposed by TC Energy (then TransCanada) in 2008, was initially designed to transport the planet’s dirtiest fossil fuel, tar sands oil, to market—and fast. As an expansion of the company’s existing Keystone Pipeline System, which has been operating since 2010 (and continues to send Canadian tar sands crude oil from Alberta to various processing hubs in the middle of the United States), the pipeline promised to dramatically increase capacity to process the 168 billion barrels of crude oil locked up under Canada’s boreal forest. It was expected to transport 830,000 barrels of Alberta tar sands oil per day to refineries on the Gulf Coast of Texas. From the refineries, the oil would be sent chiefly overseas—not to gasoline pumps in the United States.

https://www.nrdc.org/stories/what-keystone-pipeline

Dirty energy lobbyists claimed developing tar sands would protect our national energy security and bring U.S. fuel prices down. But environmental reviews by both the Obama and Trump administrations concluded that the Keystone XL pipeline would not have lowered gasoline prices. NRDC and its partners also found the majority of Keystone XL oil would have been sent to markets overseas—aided by a 2015 reversal of a ban on crude oil exports.

________

so i certainly hope you aren't parroting this Keystone pipeline nonsense. even your boy's admin said it wasn't gonna help the US. i mean the facts have BEEN out here for a while now.

the oil companies control the output, and they control the prices. combined with the info Port just posted, i'm trying to figure out if you're paying attention to what's actually happening, or simply parroting false narratives to protect your profits like you're Joe Manchin.

Who "shut down production"?

Did you have any idea that oil companies are sitting on millions of acres of land they are refusing to drill on? Leases they have taken out, control and refuse to drill on to increase oil production? Maybe you're looking in the wrong direction when looking for who is to blame.

The Oil Industry's Public Lands Stockpile

Oil and gas companies are sitting on millions of acres of idle leases that they've acquired through a rigged system | February 2021

https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/63745d4475104a33968081ff008e36b9

Wait, you have a list?

What does the list do?

Trying to be polite here.

First, PART of the price of gas right now is due to the 'summer' blends, as they say.

Secondly, having a lease on land doesn't mean there is oil under it. Is there potential? Of course, but that doesn't mean you willy nilly start drilling. It takes research. Planning. And lots of work. Then, you'd have to pay the costs of .... a pipe line, transport, etc. I would imagine 100's of millions would be involved in that, but I don't know that.

So, simply saying there are 9000 leases not being used is correct, it is misleading, at a minimum.

I didn't say there were 9000 leases not being drilled. I said millions of acres. You are correct that summer blends during the initial crossover from winter blends helps drive the cost of gas up. But this steady increase has gone on much longer than that and really has nothing to do with oil companies not exersizing their option to up production by drilling on lands they have under lease.

In regards to you point about research, drilling costs and logistics expenses, that too is correct.

But what one would have to believe if we feel that's the reason they aren't drilling on these millions of acres would mean you would have to believe that these oil companies didn't consider any of those factors when leasing the land. That they didn't do their research, they didn't take into account the logistics, they didn't do geological surveys or any of the factors needed in making a responsible business decision.

Now that may be a thought process you are willing to entertain. But if that's the way they're running their business, they would have gone out of business long before now. These are multi billion dollar corporations and they didn't get to be that way by throwing darts at a map to decide which land to lease.

Here is an example. Do oil companies have their own geologists?

Geoscientists in High Demand in the Oil Industry

https://www.science.org/content/article/geoscientists-high-demand-oil-industry

I think you made some excellent points. But I think we should both be able to agree that many of the points you brought up would have been addressed by an oil company before they acquired a lease. Would even someone such as ourselves take out a lease on land that was too expensive to deliver our products from? Would we take out a lease on land to garden or farm on that we didn't know would grow the food we wanted to grow? You brought up very basic points that anyone would have taken into consideration before they made a decision acquire those oil leases.

IMPORTANT READ:

More Major Disasters Hit U.S. Food Production – Are You Prepared For What Comes Next?
BY MICHAEL SNYDER June 16, 2022 in Cross-Posted, Opinions


The hits just keep on coming. Over the past few months, I have carefully documented the rapidly growing global food crisis, and I have explained that even here in the United States food production is going to be way below original expectations this year. Unfortunately, most of the population still doesn’t grasp what is happening. Most people simply assume that everything will turn out okay somehow. Meanwhile, farmers are telling us as loudly as they can that everything will most definitely not be okay.

In my entire lifetime, I have never seen America’s farmers this alarmed about what is ahead. And of course everything that we are currently witnessing in the U.S. and around the globe is setting the stage for the sort of historic famines that I have been relentlessly warning my readers about. I wish that I knew a way to get through to the millions upon millions of apathetic people out there that don’t seem to care that a major food crisis is coming, because the suffering that we are going to witness all over the world will be off the charts.

Many seem to believe that we are going to be immune from the coming shortages because we live in the United States.

Unfortunately, food production in the U.S. continues to be hit by one major disaster after another. This week, a historic June heat wave absolutely baked the center of the country…

On Monday night into Tuesday, 125 million people – a third of the population – were under heat alerts across much of the central and eastern states.

Cities such as Tulsa, Memphis, St. Louis, Minneapolis, Cincinnati, Raleigh and Charlotte were all under the heat warnings.

Chicago residents on Monday fled to their basements and nearby shelters when a surprise tornado ripped through the city as it experienced 100F weather for the first time in a decade.

Needless to say, this sort of weather was not welcomed by farmers in our agricultural heartland.

Records were shattered all over the nation, and I was particularly surprised to see a high temperature of 108 degrees in North Platte, Nebraska…

The mercury in North Platte, Nebraska, hit 108F, breaking the record set in 1952; St Louis’s record of 98 degrees from the same year was also broken on Monday, with temperatures reaching 100 degrees.

Charlotte, North Carolina, hit 98 degrees and Nashville, Tennessee, was at 97F – tying the previous record set in 2016.

‘To have an excessive heat warning this early in the year is kind of unusual,’ Mike Johnson, a meteorologist with the Memphis NWS, told CNN.

Yes, what we are witnessing is definitely unusual.

And summer hasn’t even started yet.

It is being reported that the extreme heat was responsible for “at least 2,000 cattle deaths” in Kansas alone…

The deaths add pain to the U.S. cattle industry as producers have reduced herds due to drought and grappled with feed costs that climbed as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine tightened global grain supplies.

The Kansas Department of Health and Environment knew of at least 2,000 cattle deaths due to high temperatures and humidity as of Tuesday, spokesperson Matthew Lara said. The toll represents facilities that contacted the agency for help disposing of carcasses, he said.

Another source is reporting that the true death toll in Kansas is actually somewhere around 10,000…

The current heat wave blazing through Kansas feedlots has killed an estimated 10,000 head of fat cattle.

Final death numbers continue to come in, but that early estimate was shared with DTN by livestock experts, who put the geographical center point for those deaths at Ulysses, Kansas.

Needless to say, cattle have been dying in other states as well, and hopefully I will be able to find some of those numbers for you all.

Meanwhile, Yellowstone National Park and surrounding areas have just been hit by historic flooding that was so bad that it is being called a “thousand-year event”…

Yellowstone National Park could be closed ‘indefinitely’ as devastating flooding continues to ravage the towns, roads, and bridges along the Yellowstone River.

Park officials characterized the severe flooding tearing through the region as a once in a ‘thousand-year event,’ that could alter the course of the Yellowstone river and surrounding landscapes forever.

Officials say that the river’s volume is flowing 20,000 cubic feet per second faster than the previous record measured in the 90s.

It would be difficult to overstate the devastation that this flooding caused.

For many ranchers and farmers, things will never be the same after this.

On top of everything else, another “mysterious fire” just happened. This time, it was a pizza plant in Wisconsin that totally burned to the ground…

More than 70 firefighters from almost two dozen departments in four counties battled a blaze at a pizza plant on Monday in eastern Portage County.

The American Red Cross reported that its volunteers provided food and water for firefighters battling a five-alarm fire at the Festive Foods pizza plant at 7811 Portage County D in the town of Belmont, near the Portage-Waupaca County line.

As I have detailed previously, we have seen this sort of thing happen over and over again in recent months.

In many of these cases, mysterious fires erupt very suddenly and grow to immense size even if firefighters are able to respond very rapidly.

And despite the best efforts of the firefighters, many of these food production facilities end up being completely destroyed.

Authorities are assuring us that all of these incidents are just “accidents”, and you can believe that if you want.

But to me it definitely appears that something very strange is happening. Recently, Zero Hedge republished a list of 97 disasters that have hit food production facilities in the United States that was originally published by the Gateway Pundit…

1/11/21 A fire that destroyed 75,000-square-foot processing plant in Fayetteville
4/30/21 A fire ignited inside the Smithfield Foods pork processing plant in Monmouth, IL
7/25/21 Three-alarm fire at Kellogg plant in Memphis, 170 emergency personnel responded to the call
7/30/21 Firefighters on Friday battled a large fire at Tyson’s River Valley Ingredients plant in Hanceville, Alabama
8/23/21 Fire crews were called to the Patak Meat Production company on Ewing Road in Austell
9/13/21 A fire at the JBS beef plant in Grand Island, Neb., on Sunday night forced a halt to slaughter and fabrication lines
10/13/21 A five-alarm fire ripped through the Darigold butter production plant in Caldwell, ID
11/15/21 A woman is in custody following a fire at the Garrard County Food Pantry
11/29/21 A fire broke out around 5:30 p.m. at the Maid-Rite Steak Company meat processing plant
12/13/21 West Side food processing plant in San Antonio left with smoke damage after a fire
1/7/22 Damage to a poultry processing plant on Hamilton’s Mountain following an overnight fire
1/13/22 Firefighters worked for 12 hours to put a fire out at the Cargill-Nutrena plant in Lecompte, LA
1/31/22 a fertilizer plant with 600 tons of ammonium nitrate inside caught on fire on Cherry Street in Winston-Salem
2/3/22 A massive fire swept through Wisconsin River Meats in Mauston
2/3/22 At least 130 cows were killed in a fire at Percy Farm in Stowe
2/15/22 Bonanza Meat Company goes up in flames in El Paso, Texas
2/15/22 Nearly a week after the fire destroyed most of the Shearer’s Foods plant in Hermiston
2/16/22 A fire had broken at US largest soybean processing and biodiesel plant in Claypool, Indiana
2/18/22 An early morning fire tore through the milk parlor at Bess View Farm
2/19/22 Three people were injured, and one was hospitalized, after an ammonia leak at Lincoln Premium Poultry in Fremont
2/22/22 The Shearer’s Foods plant in Hermiston caught fire after a propane boiler exploded
2/28/22 A smoldering pile of sulfur quickly became a raging chemical fire at Nutrien Ag Solutions
2/28/22 A man was hurt after a fire broke out at the Shadow Brook Farm and Dutch Girl Creamery
3/4/22 294,800 chickens destroyed at farm in Stoddard, Missouri
3/4/22 644,000 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Cecil, Maryland
3/8/22 243,900 chickens destroyed at egg farm in New Castle, Delaware
3/10/22 663,400 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Cecil, MD
3/10/22 915,900 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Taylor, IA
3/14/22 The blaze at 244 Meadow Drive was discovered shortly after 5 p.m. by farm owner Wayne Hoover
3/14/22 2,750,700 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Jefferson, Wisconsin
3/16/22 A fire at a Walmart warehouse distribution center has cast a large plume of smoke visible throughout Indianapolis.
3/16/22 Nestle Food Plant extensively damaged in fire and new production destroyed Jonesboro, Arkansas
3/17/22 5,347,500 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Buena Vista, Iowa
3/17/22 147,600 chickens destroyed at farm in Kent, Delaware
3/18/22 315,400 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Cecil, Maryland
3/22/22 172,000 Turkeys destroyed on farms in South Dakota
3/22/22 570,000 chickens destroyed at farm in Butler, Nebraska
3/24/22 Fire fighters from numerous towns are battling a major fire at the McCrum potato processing facility in Belfast.
3/24/22 418,500 chickens destroyed at farm in Butler, Nebraska
3/25/22 250,300 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Franklin, Iowa
3/26/22 311,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
3/27/22 126,300 Turkeys destroyed in South Dakota
3/28/22 1,460,000 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Guthrie, Iowa
3/29/22 A massive fire burned 40,000 pounds of food meant to feed people in a food desert near Maricopa
3/31/22 A structure fire caused significant damage to a large portion of key fresh onion packing facilities in south Texas
3/31/22 76,400 Turkeys destroyed in Osceola, Iowa
3/31/22 5,011,700 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Osceola, Iowa
4/6/22 281,600 chickens destroyed at farm in Wayne, North Carolina
4/9/22 76,400 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/9/22 208,900 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/12/22 89,700 chickens destroyed at farm in Wayne, North Carolina
4/12/22 1,746,900 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Dixon, Nebraska
4/12/22 259,000 chickens destroyed at farm in Minnesota
4/13/22 fire destroys East Conway Beef & Pork Meat Market in Conway, New Hampshire
4/13/22 Plane crashes into Gem State Processing, Idaho potato and food processing plant
4/13/22 77,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/14/22 Taylor Farms Food Processing plant burns down Salinas, California.
4/14/22 99,600 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/15/22 1,380,500 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Lancaster, Minnesota
4/19/22 Azure Standard nation’s premier independent distributor of organic and healthy food, was destroyed by fire in Dufur, Oregon
4/19/22 339,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/19/22 58,000 chickens destroyed at farm in Montrose, Color
4/20/22 2,000,000 chickens destroyed at egg farm in Minnesota
4/21/22 A small plane crashed in the lot of a General Mills plant in Georgia
4/22/22 197,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/23/22 200,000 Turkeys destroyed in Minnesota
4/25/22 1,501,200 chickens destroyed at egg farm Cache, Utah
4/26/22 307,400 chickens destroyed at farm Lancaster Pennsylvania
4/27/22 2,118,000 chickens destroyed at farm Knox, Nebraska
4/28/22 Egg-laying facility in Iowa kills 5.3 million chickens, fires 200-plus workers
4/28/22 Allen Harim Foods processing plant killed nearly 2M chickens in Delaware
4/2822 110,700 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
4/29/22 1,366,200 chickens destroyed at farm Weld Colorado
4/30/22 13,800 chickens destroyed at farm Sequoia Oklahoma
5/3/22 58,000 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
5/3/22 118,900 Turkeys destroyed Beadle S Dakota
5/3/22 114,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
5/3/22 118,900 Turkeys destroyed Lyon Minnesota
5/7/22 20,100 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
5/10/22 72,300 chickens destroyed at farm Lancaster Pennsylvania
5/10/22 61,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
5/10/22 35,100 Turkeys destroyed Muskegon, Michigan
5/13/22 10,500 Turkeys destroyed Barron Wisconsin
5/14/22 83,400 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
5/17/22 79,00 chickens destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
5/18/22 7,200 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
5/19/22 Train carrying limestone derailed Jensen Beach FL
5/21/22 57,000 Turkeys destroyed on farm in Dakota Minnesota
5/23/22 4,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
5/29/22 A Saturday night fire destroyed a poultry building at Forsman Farms
5/31/22 3,000,000 chickens destroyed by fire at Forsman facility in Stockholm Township, Minnesota
6/2/22 30,000 ducks destroyed at Duck farm Berks Pennsylvania
6/7/22 A fire occurred Tuesday evening at the JBS meat packing plant in Green Bay.
6/8/22 Firefighters from Tangipahoa Fire District 1 respond to a fire at the Purina Feed Mill in Arcola
6/9/22 Irrigation water was canceled in California (the #1 producer of food in the US) and storage water flushed directly out to the delta.
6/12/22 Largest Pork Company in the US Shuts Down California Plant Due to High Costs
6/13/22 Fire Breaks Out at a Food Processing Plant West of Waupaca County in Wisconsin
We can debate why this is happening until we are blue in the face.

But what everyone should be able to agree on is that we should all be getting prepared for what is ahead.

Are you ready for much higher food prices and widespread shortages?

Protect your wealth from Joe Biden, Klaus Schwab, or any of the globalists who want you to own nothing. Contact for a wide range of precious metals products or Our Gold Guy for physical precious metals.

The head of the UN World Food Program has warned that we are heading into the worst global food crisis since World War II.

By the time it is all said and done, I believe that what we will experience will be much worse than that.

So I would encourage you to stock up while you still can, because the clock is certainly ticking.

https://americafirstreport.com/more...on-are-you-prepared-for-what-comes-next/

The leases cost as little as $1.50 per acre. Some go for $2.00, maybe even $3.00

So they just take them out for the hell of it and do not plan to drill on it? And if they do plan to drill, you're suggesting they didn't do their basic homework before taking out the lease? And if they're not planning to drill on it, why do they sign an "oil or gas lease"? So they're just tying up millions of acres in oil leases because they can?

Ha, wasn't it Warren Buffet who said "Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful."?

I'm done with you. I thought you researched stuff.

The "Biden" Economy:

first time we have been below 30,000 in quite a while.


not good we are basically at pre-pandemic numbers

Basically yes. And the government is complicit in this shell game. The SEC purposefully changed reporting guidelines so that simply holding the leases could result in "prospective value"... as part of the recovery effort after the housing crisis. Do you blame oil companies for holding leases when they are offered for $1.50 - $2 per acre?

'Progressives" are trying to tank the country...and they have sucked normal Dems in to buying their crap.

Seriously, people can post all they want, but their elected leaders, thus my leaders, are totally inept and own this deal.

If you voted for this guy, you own it.

Just look at the idiots this guy puts in front of us...the Press Secretary is a joke. That is the best we can muster as a spokesperson? She can't answer anything without stammering while thumbing through pages of cliff notes.

Have you indulged in a word salad from the Secretary of the Treasury? She makes the PS sound like a rocket surgeon!

jc



i love history. i love learning new things. i also now understand this deep seeded hatred toward government assistance from what are now modern day conservatives/republican voters.

1964......this was part of the 50's and 60's that so many older people love talking about as the best times of america.

and i will always respond with "great for whom?"

and yea, this absolutely belongs in this economic thread.

1964....not 1864, not 1904, not 1944.

we got people alive and healthy today who remember those years. damn man....

3 ocean carrier alliances control 95% of shipping between Asia and the US and have hiked rates more than 1,000%. The White House wants to shake their control.

- The vast majority of international shipping is controlled by just three cooperative alliances.

- The White House says the consolidation has led to increased freight rates that spur inflation.

- A new federal initiative will use anti-trust laws to promote competition in the shipping industry.

Expensive shipping costs are the target of a new initiative that the White House announced on Monday, which directs the Justice Department to use anti-trust laws to push the industry's largest companies to be more competitive with each other.

Roughly 80% of all global shipping capacity — and 95% of East-West trade — is controlled by a trio of alliances that allow freight carrier firms to coordinate rates and schedules.

This consolidation largely flew under the mainstream radar until the pandemic completely disrupted the global supply chain. Ocean carriers responded to the increased demand and reduced supply by hiking the rates for shipping cargo between Asia and the US by over 1,000%.

When freight costs go up, the prices of consumer goods go up too, and White House experts estimate that shipping will add a full percentage point to inflation in the coming year.

And it's not only consumers who are stuck paying more — exporters have complained that the major firms aren't carrying US products to foreign markets.

Some carriers apparently found it more profitable to send empty containers back to Asia to reload, instead of carrying US agricultural goods to other ports.

These ballooning prices have been good for shipping companies' profit margins, soaring to 56% in the third quarter of 2021, compared with 3.7% in 2019.

For President Biden, such fat profits in such a historically low-margin business are evidence of anticompetitive practices. He plans to address the issue during the State of the Union address Tuesday evening.

Under the new initiative, a regulatory agency known as the Federal Maritime Commission will coordinate with the Justice Department to identify and prosecute violations under the Shipping Act and the main US anti-trust laws, the Sherman Act and the Clayton Act.

"Competition in the maritime industry is integral to lowering prices, improving quality of service, and strengthening supply chain resilience," Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. "Lawbreakers should know that the Justice Department will provide the Federal Maritime Commission all necessary litigation support as it pursues its mission of promoting competition in ocean shipping."

This heightened scrutiny of the shipping industry follows weeks of political messaging that blames corporate greed for making inflation worse. Other sectors that have come under the microscope include beef producers and oil companies.

Read the original article on Business Insider

https://www.yahoo.com/news/3-ocean-carrier-alliances-control-204146831.html

Republicans failing to acknowledge the real problems for political gain COULDN'T be part of the problem. YOu wonder why we have shortages? Here's the answer. But don't let facts get in the way. The POTUS can't cause global collapse by himself for simply being inept. No that takes strategy and partners.

Biden Blasts Ocean Carriers as Congress Readies Tougher Shipping Regulations

The first major overhaul of maritime rules in 24 years follows skyrocketing freight rates and severe supply-chain disruptions

U.S. lawmakers are preparing to toughen oversight of international shipping companies as the White House and American importers and exporters say historically high freight transportation costs are hampering business and contributing to accelerating inflation.

House Democratic leaders say they plan next week to take up a measure already passed by the Senate that would add new regulatory constraints to shipping operations and limit the ability of ocean carriers to levy the special fees that shipping customers say are driving up costs.

The bill would make it tougher for the shipping lines to refuse export cargoes, a practice that has grown over the past two years as carriers have sought to turn around empty containers quickly to return them to Asia and take advantage of high prices for Asian exports. It would also boost the workforce at the Federal Maritime Commission, the main U.S. shipping regulator.

President Biden highlighted the issue this week, calling on Congress to “crack down” on ocean carriers. Mr. Biden, a Democrat, said in a video Thursday that one of the main reasons shipping costs have gone up is because nine ocean carriers control the trans-Pacific market and “have raised their prices by as much as 1,000%.”

Speaking Friday at the Port of Los Angeles, Mr. Biden said it was time to let the ocean shipping lines know that “the rip-off is over.”

“One of the key ways to fight inflation is by lowering the cost of moving goods through the supply chain,” he said.

The high freight rates and tight capacity in the shipping sector tormented American retailers, manufacturers and farmers during the heights of the Covid-19 pandemic, when demand for space on container ships skyrocketed and ocean shipping lines, mostly based in Europe and Asia, made billions of dollars in profits.

Shipping industry and trade officials say the FMC already has the power to impose many of the enforcement tools proposed in the bill, but that getting the details into law will push the regulator to take action and strengthen its position against legal challenges from the shipping industry.

“The commission needs to be told straight out you do have the authority,” said Peter Friedmann, executive director of the Agriculture Transportation Coalition, which represents farmers. “That’s what this shipping act does. You do have the authority, you should use it.”

Agricultural exporters say they missed out on billions of dollars in revenue last year when ocean carriers declined their goods and instead rushed empty containers back to Asia for more lucrative eastbound trade routes. Importers say they were charged hefty penalty fees for failing to pick up and return containers, even on days when congested cargo-handling facilities refused to handle the boxes.

The bill, known as the Ocean Shipping Reform Act, passed the Senate by a voice vote in March. The House passed its own version that includes tougher oversight provisions by a 364-60 vote in 2021, but House leaders decided in recent weeks to take up the Senate version rather than try to reconcile the separate measures.

“The Senate bill accomplishes the same goals,” said Rep. John Garamendi (D., Calif.), a sponsor of the original House bill. “It just does it in a different manner.”

Mr. Biden blames a lack of competition in the ocean shipping industry for the high supply-chain costs that have contributed to inflation hitting a four-decade high. Eleven companies control a majority of the world’s container shipping capacity, according to the FMC. They also cooperate with each other under vessel-sharing agreements similar to those found in the airline industry.

The average world-wide spot market rate to ship a container rose eightfold during the pandemic to a peak of $11,109 in September 2021, according to the FMC. An agency investigation recently concluded that the ocean shipping industry is competitive and that the rapid increase in prices was driven by “an extreme spike of consumer demand in the United States that overwhelmed the supply of ship capacity.”

During the pandemic, many Americans cut back on spending on restaurants and travel and instead splurged on home office equipment, electronics and furniture. Import volumes to the U.S. in 2021 were up 20% over 2019 levels.

Freight rates have tumbled in recent months as U.S. consumer spending has softened and Covid lockdowns in China have weakened export volumes. The average spot rate to ship a container on heavily congested routes from Asia to the U.S. West Coast fell 41% in the past three months to $9,588, according to the Freightos Baltic Index.

A backup of container ships waiting to unload at the nation’s busiest container-handling complex at Los Angeles and Long Beach has also receded. The queue was at 20 ships on Thursday, according to the Marine Exchange of Southern California, down from a record 109 vessels in January and the lowest level since July 19, 2021.

The bill in Congress represents the biggest overhaul of ocean shipping rules since 1998. The World Shipping Council, a Washington-based trade group representing container shipping lines, said it would wait until Congress passes the bill before commenting on it.

Christine McDaniel, a senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, who specializes in international trade, said the regulatory overhaul could have unintended consequences on the financial ballast of a shipping industry that until a few years ago was struggling. She said she was concerned, for instance, about the provision aimed at preventing ocean shipping companies from unreasonably declining exports.

“To the extent that the government is going to tell ocean carriers what they can and cannot, or must and must not, ship is concerning,” Ms. McDaniel said.

The bill also shifts the burden of proof to ocean carriers to show that penalty fees were properly assessed against shippers for delays picking up and dropping off containers.

The FMC has launched enforcement actions against several ocean carriers in the past year for unfairly imposing penalty fees when supply-chain congestion tied up shipments and left importers unable to reach their containers within specified periods. The regulator on Wednesday reached a $2 million settlement with Germany’s Hapag-Lloyd AG for improperly assessing such fees.

FMC Chairman Daniel Maffei said the agency’s expanded role will require hiring more attorneys and economists and expanding the agency’s workforce by some 25% to about 150 people. The FMC needs to become a “more robust regulatory agency that makes sure everyone plays on a level playing field,” he said.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/congre...companies-cite-economic-pain-11654893760

Another source that is conservative.

Blaming Workers, Hiding Profits in Primetime Inflation Coverage

Rising prices directly impact virtually the entire population, so it’s not surprising that there has been a constant drumbeat of reports in the corporate media laying out the factors contributing to inflation as well as its economic and political consequences. But while the media cite many legitimate factors, including pandemic-induced effects on supply and demand, their choices of which causes to emphasize can have political and economic consequences of their own.

A FAIR study looking at six months of coverage across six primetime television news shows and NPR‘s All Things Considered found that segments on inflation put far more emphasis on the contributions of labor shortages and social spending—through driving up the cost of labor—than to the role of corporate profit-taking.

This portrays the economy as a zero sum game between workers and consumers, who appear to be intractably at odds if corporate profits are left out of the equation.

During the same period, the shows proved capable of hearing workers’ demands for higher wages when their coverage framed the issue as a “Great Resignation,” or during the shows’ scant coverage of “Striketober,” when a wave of labor militancy swept through much of the country.

This points to an inconsistency in coverage of the same labor market trends: When the shows were covering inflation, the “tight” labor market was mostly treated with the cool and icy calculation of market logic. But on the comparatively rare occasions when the shows covered the grievances of workers and their demands for dignified work—which are widely popular demands, given that most consumers are in fact workers too—the reports showed a more human side to what would otherwise be numbers on a scorecard, and mentioned the record profits of corporations.

Causal arguments

FAIR analyzed the transcripts from ABC World News Tonight, CBS Evening News, CNN’s Situation Room, Fox Special Report, MSNBC’s The Beat, NBC Nightly News and NPR’s All Things Considered between September 2021 and February 2022, using the Nexis news database. We searched for stories mentioning “inflation” and identified 310 segments.

We also searched for segments mentioning “labor,” “union” or “worker.” The labor search terms were meant to identify coverage of worker activism and how it compared to labor market coverage in the context of inflation. The search turned up 73 such segments.

We recorded the main causal arguments identified in inflation segments, grouped into six main categories:

Supply (“The supply of new cars was limited by that shortage of semiconductors.”—All Things Considered, 1/12/22)
Demand (“People just said they had more money from not going out and doing stuff last year.”—All Things Considered, 11/26/21)
Labor shortage (“There aren’t enough truck drivers. So, more containers get stacked up. They don’t get delivered.”—Situation Room, 11/10/21)
Social spending (“The spending plan could create more inflation to the extent that it’s pumping more dollars into an economy that has a lot of money flowing around in it.”—Fox Special Report, 11/24/21)
Covid-19 (“The emergence of the Omicron variant poses increased uncertainty for inflation.”—Fox Special Report, 12/22/21)
Profiteering (“There’s increasing evidence and suspicions that this market power has gone too far and is beginning to hurt consumers.”—All Things Considered, 9/13/21)
These categories were non-exclusive; a suggestion that Covid had caused supply problems, for example, would be counted in both categories. Many segments included more than one causal argument, while 116 attributed inflation to no cause in particular.

We don’t talk about profit-taking

Of the 310 segments that covered inflation, eight identified profiteering as a causal factor, while 50 put the focus on workers, either in the form of labor shortage or supply-side social spending arguments (the latter being a proxy for the former). While labor market trends have had an inflationary impact, the disproportionate focus on them, without mention of the underlying conditions that lead to labor shortages in the first place, erases the culpability of corporations. And as economist Dean Baker (Beat the Press, 11/10/21) explained, it would be a “perverse” solution to inflation to put “downward pressure on wages” by increasing unemployment, when companies are already incentivized to “innovate to get around bottlenecks…in ways that could lead to lasting productivity gains.”

An NBC Nightly News investigation by Jacob Ward (1/22/22) was one of the only segments that focused on the inflationary impact of market consolidation. Tyson, Cargill, JBS and National Beef, Ward reported, “control roughly 85% of all beef production in America, and saw their profits tripled during the pandemic.” Other references to the meat trusts were limited to Joe Biden’s plan to apply pressure to meatpackers and Tyson’s decision to raise prices due to “escalating costs” (NBC Nightly News, 12/10/21, 11/15/21). This angle was absent when it came to other powerful industries, however.

David Dayen and Rakeen Mabud of the American Prospect (1/31/22; CounterSpin, 2/11/22) raked through company earnings calls and CEO statements, and found ample evidence for profit-taking in the direct accounts of numerous retail executives:

Corporate profit margins are at their highest level in 70 years, and CEOs cannot help but tout in earnings calls how they have taken advantage of the media commotion around inflation to boost profits. “A little bit of inflation is always good in our business,” the CEO of Kroger said last June. “What we are very good at is pricing,” the CEO of Colgate-Palmolive added in October. Inflation is being enhanced by exploitation, with companies seeing a “once-in-a-generation opportunity” to raise prices.

Corporations with no choice

Despite this, the decision to raise prices was often reported from the perspective of small business owners. Five such segments appeared across CBS Evening News, including a Houston boutique owner (11/10/21) lamenting that she hates having to raise prices, but that “if they’re charging me, I have to turn around and charge my customers.”

One of the segments that directly addressed the decision from the perspective of multinationals appeared on ABC World News Tonight (10/22/21), where Gio Benitez reported:

Major companies facing rising costs now expecting to charge more, like Nestle, the world’s largest food and beverage company; Unilever, maker of Dove soap and Ben & Jerry’s; Procter & Gamble, from grooming products to diapers; and Danone, maker of yogurts and plant-based milks, even Evian water. Inflation shooting up by 5.4% in just a year. That supply chain crisis is taking center stage.

The profitability and market dominance of these firms, especially Nestle and Procter & Gamble, made no appearance—with price hikes instead attributed to corporations “facing rising costs.”

Despite this framework, recent polling from Data for Progress suggests that Americans aren’t buying it, with only 29% of respondents believing that corporations had no choice but to price-gouge. And with $19 billion being paid out to Procter & Gamble shareholders in the wake of a 14% rise in the cost of diapers, that skepticism is hardly surprising.

Ari Melber of MSNBC’s The Beat (1/11/22) covered inflation’s disproportionate impact on workers, even citing the “Great Resignation” as a factor in labor shortages, but did not mention monopolistic corporations’ price-gouging. Melber pointed out that it is average workers who “bear the risk in our version of capitalism,” as opposed to “pandemic billionaires.” He described this disproportionate impact as “classism.” The omission of the evidence for price-gouging was all the more stark in the context of reporting that ostensibly focused on the interest of workers.

Slamming social spending

Despite the mounting evidence that corporate greed plays a significant role in rising prices, the shows tended to focus on social spending as a possible factor, with 67 segments framing debates around both whether the already-passed stimulus bills were responsible for current inflation, and whether Build Back Better would worsen it.

These debates centered around both supply-side and demand-side factors. On the supply-side, the debate was whether social spending was keeping Americans from seeking work, given that the stimulus provided an alternative form of income. This in turn fueled the labor shortage and strengthened workers’ hands, the argument went, contributing to the rising cost of labor and the shortage of goods. It follows that businesses had no choice but to pass these rising costs onto consumers.

Washington Post opinion writer Charles Lane went on Fox‘s Special Report (10/8/21) to share his view that redistribution will slow job growth and increase inflation: “Two bills of spending that are more than $4 trillion. And we’re going to pretend that this is going to have no effect on jobs? No effect on inflation?”

While other networks proved more willing to provide an alternative view when discussing social spending as a possible inflationary cause, they rarely outright refuted the claim, let alone touched on corporate profits.

Kristen Welker (NBC Nightly News, 11/12/21) reported that although Biden was

insisting that while more spending generally drives prices up, his trillion dollars bipartisan infrastructure bill will bring prices down long term…. Moderate Democrat Joe Manchin suggest[ed] the president’s spending bills could raise prices even more.

And Republicans were “blasting the president’s policies.” The report cut to Rep. Jim Jordan (R.–Ohio), who claimed, “Their plan is basically, lock down the economy, spend like crazy, pay people not to work.”

To center debates over inflationary causes around redistributive measures, while failing to bring up the stacks of cash lining the pockets of the very corporations raising prices, leaves an impression of scarcity and implies a necessary struggle between workers and consumers. It also ignores the reality that countries like France and Japan, which had larger stimulus packages, actually saw less inflation.

Not only do supply-side social spending arguments blame labor for rising costs, they do so by claiming that workers have it too good. Redistributive measures can’t work, they presume, because if labor is not desperate enough to seek alienated, low-wage jobs, the economy will grind to a halt. Something has to give, and it won’t be the billionaires who happen to own the media outlets.

On the demand side, opponents of social spending argued that the stimulus put far too much disposable income in the hands of ordinary people, whose spending therefore outpaced supply. To argue that there is too much money in the hands of regular people, in light of more than a decade of quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve—transferring wealth to the very wealthy to prop up stock markets—brings to mind Martin Luther King’s statement that this country has “socialism for the rich, and rugged individualism for the poor.”

Inconsistent labor reporting

The six-month timeframe coincided with both “Striketober” and the “Great Resignation,” moments that together saw workers utilizing their temporarily enhanced bargaining power. While union membership is at a historic low, support for unions is at the highest it’s been since 1965. According to Cornell University’s Labor Action Tracker, there were 442 strikes and labor protests between September and February—likely an undercount, given the rise in strike activity not sanctioned by unions.

FAIR found that NPR’s All Things Considered included 28 segments on labor activism, but the remaining shows had at most half that amount. NBC Nightly News came in second place, with 14 activism segments, while Fox Special Report had 11, ABC’s World News Tonight had six, MSNBC’s The Beat and CNN’s Situation Room had five, and CBS Evening News had four.

While the coverage of strikes proved some shows were capable of hearing the concerns of workers bargaining collectively, the focus on labor shortages in inflation reporting highlighted a disregard for the perspective of labor.

When reporting on the John Deere strike that saw more than 10,000 workers walk off the job, Charlie De Mar (CBS Evening News, 10/14/21) noted that it came “as the company is forecasting its best earnings ever”; he listed workers’ demands, including “livable hours and benefits.

However, in the show’s segments that attributed inflation to labor market trends, workers’ grievances were mostly left out of the picture. Carter Evans (CBS Evening News, 12/10/21) reported that the rising costs of “just about everything,” from beef prices up by 50% to fuel prices up by 53%, were the result of soaring demand, while the supply chain was hampered by “a shortage of truck drivers to deliver the goods.” Never mind the evidence of price-fixing in a meatpacking industry fraught with consolidation, or the poor labor conditions driving people to resign from trucking.

CBS‘s Scott McFarlane (1/12/22) reported that “a survey by an association of the nation’s grocery stores finds 80% of them are having trouble recruiting or retaining workers right now,” citing this as evidence that labor shortages were a factor in empty grocery shelves and higher prices. McFarlane neglected to mention the low wages and safety concerns that prompted more than 8,000 Kroger grocery workers in Denver to go on strike that very morning (Wall Street Journal, 1/12/22).

Claims of a trucker shortage received the most emphasis, appearing in 13 unique segments across all shows. ABC‘s Whit Johnson (10/13/21) included “not enough truck drivers” among a list of inflationary pressure points. Fox News chief correspondent Jonathan Hunt (10/8/21) claimed that “supply and demand is not the problem…. There simply aren’t enough truck drivers to get goods to American store shelves.” News flash: If there aren’t enough drivers, that’s a supply problem.

While primetime audiences were made well aware of how few truck drivers are on the highways, they were left in the dark about how trucking deregulation has led to stagnant wages and lack of driver protections (American Prospect, 2/7/22). Segments reporting on ports remaining open 24/7 to alleviate backlogs (NBC Nightly News, 10/13/21) made no mention of the stolen wages and general precariousness of the labor making that happen.

Fickle supply chain

While there were multiple mentions of “supply chain bottlenecks” across the seven shows, the decades-long transformation of the global supply chain to maximize profits at the expense of its resiliency (CounterSpin, 2/11/22) was generally not a part of the story.

Just three ocean shipping alliances control 80% of the market, giving them substantial power to set prices and squeeze wages. In order to keep down the costs of production and distribution, shipping companies promoted a “just-in-time” delivery schedule, reducing warehouse costs but also raising the chances of disruptive shortages. Coupled with the outsourcing of manufacturing, just-in-time delivery supply chain “shocks” are less shocking than they might appear.

But according to Fox News correspondent Jacqui Heinrich (11/24/21), the White House’s accusations of price-gouging by the ocean shipping cartel as a driver of inflation were “ominous,” as they indicated that supply chain crises may take years to resolve. Not once did she mention the cartel in question made nearly $80 billion in the first three quarters of 2021, giving the companies ample and unaccountable price-setting capabilities (American Prospect, 1/31/22).

News media that feature constant coverage of inflation may appear to be serving the public interest, but with an issue that directly affects so many peoples’ wallets, it’s important that the corporate media give an accurate portrayal of the contributing factors. And while sympathetic coverage of labor activism may seem pro-worker, that’s undercut when the debate about what’s making it harder for people to put food on the table is centered around low-wage essential workers saying enough is enough.

https://fair.org/home/blaming-workers-hiding-profits-in-primetime-inflation-coverage/

Full disclosure before the gotcha crew shows up:

What’s FAIR
FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation. We work to invigorate the First Amendment by advocating for greater diversity in the press and by scrutinizing media practices that marginalize public interest, minority and dissenting viewpoints. We expose neglected news stories and defend working journalists when they are muzzled. As a progressive group, we believe that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.

Just to point out, they blamed reporting on the left too.

Inflation blame game: Sorting out the culprits

The truth about who or what is actually at fault for inflation numbers not seen since the 1980s is more complex than any political talking points or anti-Fed screeds.

President Joe Biden blames Vladimir Putin. Republicans blame Biden and the Democrats. Some economists and Wall Streeters put it all on the Fed.

Everyone is pointing fingers over the dramatic spike in inflation in the U.S. over the past year that has wiped out wage gains, driven stocks to their worst start to a year since 1970 and generally put Americans in a funk about the nation’s direction.

A key reading on inflation released by the Labor Department Friday rose at a 6.3 percent annual rate in April, down from 6.6 percent in March but still highly elevated. The figure, called the Personal Consumption Expenditure index, covers the broadest range of goods of all the inflation measures and is closely watched by the Federal Reserve.

Politicians on both sides will look to spin the numbers to their advantage. But the truth about who or what is actually at fault for inflation numbers not seen since the 1980s is more complex than any political talking points or anti-Fed screeds.

“It’s not just the Fed or the end of infrastructure or the exact kind of stimulus or any one single thing,” said Harvard economist Megan Greene. “I actually thought the Fed had pulled it off last year waiting for inflation to come down on its own as the pandemic waned. Then Omicron hit China and Russia invaded Ukraine. A lot of this is just very, very bad luck.”

Here’s what the numbers show and what experts told POLITICO about what’s behind an inflation rate that has driven 75 percent of Americans to say the nation is on the wrong track and squashed Biden’s approval rating below 40 percent.

Spoiler alert: There are no single villains. And it’s all quite complicated.

`Putin’s price hike’

Biden and Democrats say high prices are largely a result of Russian President Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, which has sent oil and food prices soaring.

“Inflation is still too high and Putin’s price hike continues to impact food and energy prices,” Biden said on Friday in a statement after the latest numbers were released. “There is more work to do, and tackling inflation is my top economic priority.”

Biden is correct that the invasion rocked the oil market and contributed to higher inflation the past two months. But prices began rising sharply well before Putin shocked the world and attacked Ukraine in late February.

Inflation sank to a pandemic low of 0.1 percent in May 2020 even as both the Fed and Congress began pouring trillions into the economy and the central bank kept interest rates at historic lows. But as soon as some Covid restrictions began to lift in the summer of that year, inflation began to rise, picking up strength in February 2021. The Consumer Price Index, the better-known inflation gauge, hit 7.5 percent in January of this year. It was at 8.3 percent in April over the previous year.

Biden was also correct that energy costs comporised nearly 70 percent of the monthly increase in inflation from February to March of this year as markets reacted to the war. But many thought Biden was saying 70 percent of inflation over the past year stemmed from the war. That is not the case. Even after taking out the energy hit, the annual rate in March would have been over 7 percent, still easily wiping out wage gains running around 5 percent. So-called core inflation was at 6.2 percent in April.

Wendy Edelberg, director of The Hamilton Project and a senior fellow in Economic Studies at the Brookings Institution, said the war certainly contributed to recent inflation, further damaging supply chains and driving up energy prices, but not the way Biden described it.

“The truth is, consumer demand fell off a cliff in the spring of 2020 as the virus hit and as it rebounded, it was inevitably going to be messy,” she said. “But the ingredients for why the economy has been as strong as it has and the incredibly robust way that demand bounded back ahead of supply completely surprised me.”

`Biden-flation’

Republicans are hammering Democrats on the midterm campaign trail for what they like to call “Biden-flation,” attributing the sharp spike in prices to overly generous stimulus that fattened consumer wallets during the pandemic and discouraged them from going back to work. It’s clearly having an impact, with polls showing dismal ratings for Biden’s stewardship of the economy.

The debate continues to rage over the full impact of Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, passed in March 2021 with only Democratic votes. And economists say Republicans are probably right that at least some of the rise in inflation comes from the plan’s $1,400 in direct payments to qualifying Americans and an extension of enhanced unemployment benefits and child care tax credits through September of last year.

That injection of cash into the economy came after the roughly $4 trillion in emergency Covid relief passed under the Trump administration. Sorting out exactly how much inflation resulted from the additional stimulus is challenging.

But price hikes in the U.S. did start outpacing other developed countries last year, according to a San Francisco Fed study, indicating that the extra spending played some role in speeding up inflation. Other advanced economies faced similar problems with supply chain disruptions and supply and demand mismatches. But the U.S. has it worse on inflation. Inflation in the Eurozone spiked to 7.4 percent in April, still below the U.S. but elevated by a big spike in energy costs following the Ukraine invasion. It was 5.9 percent in February.

“This was the largest fiscal and monetary response in history and that’s great, but elements of how it was delivered weren’t the best and we probably overdid it,” Brett Ryan, senior U.S. economist at Deutsche Bank, said of the U.S. “From one perspective, all the spending worked, [and] we bounced back very fast. But all those stimulus checks pushed demand up very fast and left already strained supply chains even further behind the curve.”

Did the Fed blow it?

The Fed is the chief inflation-fighting authority in the U.S., so it naturally comes under heavy scrutiny when prices spin dramatically higher. The central bank’s mandate, after all, is to keep inflation low – its target is about 2 percent – while also promoting full employment.

So did Fed Chair Jerome Powell and his colleagues blow it by keeping interest rates low for so long and continuing to support the economy through hundreds of billions of dollars in asset purchases? Can we just blame all of it on the Fed, as some economists and Wall Street traders do?

Not all of it, economists say, but some fault clearly lies with the central bank.

Powell was a chief proponent early on of the idea that the price hikes would be “transitory” and ease more quickly as supply chain problems got fixed and more people went back to work. Biden and the White House adopted that term as well before having to ditch it.

Because inflation has turned out to be longer lasting, the Fed had to quickly shift gears in December and say it would pull back its highly stimulative policies. Uncertainty over just how far and fast the Fed will have to move created huge volatility and large losses for stocks this year.

“The Fed is now so far behind on inflation that people are getting worried about the consumer,” said Jim Paulsen, chief economist at the Leuthold Group.

Central bank defenders say Powell faced a near-impossible task. He has endured tremendous, bipartisan pressure to keep rates low to boost the economy – including from then-President Donald Trump, long before the pandemic – making a much earlier pivot to tighter policy difficult. And just how much of a game-changer an earlier move would have been is not clear.

“If you had perfect hindsight you’d go back and it probably would have been better for us to have raised rates a little sooner,” Powell said in a Marketplace interview earlier this month. “I’m not sure how much difference it would have made, but we have to make decisions in real time, based on what we know then, and we did the best we could. Now, we see the picture clearly and we’re determined to use our tools to get us back to price stability.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/27/inflation-blame-game-sorting-out-the-culprits-00035712

Politico is NOT a lib rag. They have their own insights but share blame across the board... hmm.

jc

What is Bidens plan to lower prices?

The only thing I've seen is he wants to shift blame and do what he can where he can. Problem is that most of it, he has no control over.

One way to drive down inflation is to stop spending your money on anything but necessities. Don't travel, don't buy luxury goods, and don't spend on the frivolous. When corps start losing, prices will plummet. We have as much power as any government in the world with our wallets. None of these factors driving inflation can exist long-term without the huge demand, period. That's what the Fed will be doing basically. Raising rates to curb spending/borrowing.

And the best way Biden can help IMO is to help create American competition for all these foreign goods and shipping companies. Including competition for American companies that are price gouging. When corps are driven by profit and shareholders' best interest, the only way to hurt them is in the wallet.

He has none. His (and his supporters) only concern is an incessant finger-pointing campaign to shirk any and all responsibility for a plan by placing blame in the laps of others. You hear it every day, so you already know this.

Biden's plan for fighting inflation: "Folks, prices are higher"
Pete Buttigieg response to supply chain issues: "This may last years and years"
Janet Yellen on inflation: "I'd like to talk about gun violence"

We could replace them all with the cast from the Muppets, there would be more progress and it would be *nearly* as entertaining.

Hmm, I just said the same basic thing about Biden.

And Muppets are what the right is all about, we just had four years of vile muppets. Or did you mean puppet muppets? Then I agree.

So... All I have read is that Biden is blaming everyone.

Ironically, his team of people are the ones who can actually do something about it.

No dem administration can do what is needed with 50 Republicans Senators and 2 Dems who act like Republicans. Just saying, congress is in deadlock and can only seem to pass legislation that is good for the corps. On the other hand, there are no Republicans that can be trusted not to abuse the office while Trumpian politics rule the day. And the next time they take power, we will probably have to remove them by force if we ever want them to go.

Can they try? Maybe take a stab at something? Sit around the campfire and come up with an idea or two??

Just in general....it seems all of this has happened since President Biden took over with his anti-business agenda.

The bottom line is anti-business agenda's are also anti-American people agendas.

With the push to use more ethanol, I wonder how long it will take to see food shortages? I guess we are already seeing them. I mean it takes 26 lbs of corn to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. That is that much less corn going towards food and feed stocks.

I will admit I don't know it that takes raw corn so to speak or left over corn after some processing for food stock.

Experts worried a popcorn shortage could be around the corner

Hey, I don't mind fair criticism of dems, because they have proved themselves to be inept time and again. I just don't like the baseless blaming. And when I say dems, I'm not talking progressives as a group. Progressives ARE under the dem banner and are not blameless, but until the POTUS is a real progressive, and the centrists treat progressives equally instead of just captured voters, progressives have no real power outside of elections. That said, yes dems can talk about how to solve issues and do, but the gridlock will not allow actual implementation of said solutions without compromising so much that the watered-down solutions lose all efficacy. This is where dems are inept, they act like it's still the 80s and 90s where both sides can get in a room, compromise, and come out with a plan that makes everybody happy. This hasn't been the case since the early 2000s.

On the other hand, Republicans are ruthless in going after their policies, but they are so far off the rails and or in the pockets of corporations that every piece of legislation they pass, eventually becomes another nail in the working class coffin. If you don't believe me, go back and look. I mean hell, we are in the worst inflation of our lifetimes, and where are they with their ideas and trying to help their constituents? The only thing they are doing or have done for years is obstruct ALL dem progress, pass legislation when they are in power that favors elites and corporations (usually under the ruse of helping people), then blame dems when people take the hits. It's nuts.

At least progressive actually care about the 99% and want to do whatever they can to make life better for all. They talk a lot about leveling the playing field and making sure everyone pays their fair share, but that's mostly due to the vast inequalities that are hurting working-class and poor folks. Generally, the progressives want all ships to rise proportionately and want capitalism with a social checks and balances system. This is why I pivoted. I'll be fine no matter who is in, Hell my life isn't far from over. But right now, I fear what this country will be for my grandkids and beyond when they reach my age. That and the Republican party that I thought I knew died in the 2000s, only to slowly be replaced by the bastardized version we have today. I used to think Republicans had more integrity than dems, that's so far from true today it's disgusting.

So, personally, I think progressive policies, at least as a starting point for negotiating IN THE PEOPLES BEST INTEREST, are the only way forward. And until we crush this abhorrent greed, corruption, and radicalized hate, in both parties, we are dead in the water. So I don't care when the stock market nose dives, or the economy goes to hell in a handbasket, or even when the people on the right side of history get violent; because all of those things lead to change. It's our job as citizens to vote for the right kind of change.

After all of that, my conclusion is that it won't matter who is in office until the people come together and take their government back from all the bad actors, then focus on actually making life better for everyone, starting from the bottom up.

Wrong again. This is an accumulation of crappy policies and actions from both sides that have led us here, with a big old crapstorm of bad luck, like covid and Putin's War.

Inflation is definitely one of those sectors where corporations are taking advantage. Which actually sucks because a lot of businesses - mostly small - are actually suffering, but that doesn’t stop the megacorps from jumping on the train.

A lot of the larger sole source defense contractors are trying to price gouge by citing inflation but none of them - that I work with at least - are actually opening up their books to show us. It’s even worse at the subcontractor level.

On the other hand, the funny thing is there was one company I am working with now that pushed like crazy to get a firm fixed price contract (where you pay them a lump sum and they have to deliver no matter what, as opposed to a cost contract where you reimburse their actual costs incurred and give them a separate fee). With fixed price, the company has the highest potential profit margin and it’s easy to drive up the price if you’re the only one who makes the product. Now that this company has been a little burned by inflation, they are asking for an equitable adjustment for recently negotiated contracts to maintain their profit margin because of inflation. I asked if they would be willing to reopen other past contracts where they got windfall profit and reimburse us for those. You can guess what the answer is.

And you’re right, both parties have enabled this poor, entitled behavior for decades now.

Good posts. I don't agree with everything, but we're not that far apart...

I'd like to go back to this, because I missed it the first time:


Many people will look at this as some silly cop-out, or a way to excuse blame... it's not, it's part of the solution. On the surface it's easy to compare to the "every vote counts" dichotomy. On one hand, no election will change because "I" didn't vote... on the other, what if everyone had that mentality and didn't go to the polls? WE all need to speak with our wallets individually to have any effect collectively; and let's face it, it's really our only hope. This crap isn't changing in DC, and it won't change on Main St either, if we all just wallow in our misery and keep doing the same thing over and over.

I've come to the conclusion that most of this inflation is a product of greed, pure and simple. And if I think you're being greedy -- I ain't payin'.

Cheez-its, 6.99? No thanks. Found a knock-off at Aldi's at half the price. My mentality? I'll never buy Cheez-its again. Silly? Childish? Maybe. But that's my mentality with everything; every company, every restaurant, every service that I feel is taking advantage.

I have a buddy in the restaurant biz, sorta. Through the whole pandemic his attitude became "Eff 'em, they're paying it". He made a habit of changing everything from hours to pricing with the excuse "because covid" whether it was true or not. His employees got sick of a Russian-roulette schedule, his customers alienated him. He's closed. After 20+ years of hard work, great product at a fair price... done. The place up the street that always played second fiddle? Packed, day in and day out, their prices marginally higher than they were two years ago.

At the risk of making this sound like "Hints from Heloise", I'll expose another part of my mindset. My shopping habits have changed to "buy in bulk, stock-up, take advantage when on sale" to the point that my wife makes fun of me. When the "Dollar Store" (whatever their name is, the everything's a dollar store) said they were raising prices to $1.25, I stocked up.

"You crack me up! You just spent $90 on a bottle of Mezcal last week, now you're racing out to save a quarter!"

"First, I spent $90 on Mezcal because I love it, and I've earned it. Second, it's not a quarter, it's 25%! Lastly, that Mezcal is the same price as it was last year, $110... I waited 'til it was 20% off!" (Anyone else notice how liquor prices have remained stable at a time when we need them most? Now this is an industry I can throw some extra support!)

Anyway, I'm rambling... This is what happens when I'm trying to pass a kidney stone and visit Dr. Mary Jane in the morning.

Thanks, OCD, for some real insight.

Just be careful listening to me, I might radicalize you.

I do. This is usually your response when you can't find anything of substance to come back with. If oil companies are signing leases where the express purpose of those leases are oil and gas exploration, they should be required to use them for that purpose in order to acquire more leases. Not just be able to hoard millions of acres and expect even more. If you're not drilling on lands you obviously decided was oil or gas rich, it's you who are holding production down.

Well then, talk to the gov't. about it.

excellent breakdown on what's going on with the gas and oil prices.

I blame them for not using these leases for their intended purpose. I also blame the system that allows them to do so. But I'm not sure how any of that changes the fact that they have decided these lands are oil rich enough to lease but not oil rich enough to drill on. They're certainly not building houses on or farming these lands. So what other purpose besides oil exploration could they use them for?

So yes, I expect our government to hold them accountable to drill on the current leases they have before giving them even more leases. Oil companies exploiting these leases is no more or less wrong than our government allowing it to happen.

I guess what it boils down to is this. We keep hearing about how Biden isn't giving out new oil leases. Which in and of itself is factually untrue. Portland's articles made that quite clear. They blame nobody but government for high fuel prices even when it's a global issue. What we never seem to hear about is the millions of acres of leases the oil companies currently purchased for the express purpose of exploration but refuse to drill on. So pointing out that there are two issues here and not simply one I think is quite appropriate.

There are certainly several other factors to be sure. This isn't the only one. However it's one that never seems to be touched upon that certainly deserves to be IMO.

Yeah, lets never hold big business accountable for anything. Because I mean "they can do it so that makes it okay".

I know, right? I wonder how long it will be until she's staring at an eclipse with no eye protection?

jc

guys, please start investing into REITs if you haven't already. we all know no matter what happens, who's in charge, or what the political leanings may be, the stock market is inevitable.

nobody is gonna do anything about these investors buying up land that's supposed to be zoned for residential development, nobody is gonna do anything about these super small ass parcels of land these housing developers "sell" for construction in subdivisions, etc. i continue to vote for people who want (read: pretend) to fix these problems, but we all know the wealthy and corporations are gonna win out anyway. so vote for people who at least have. good intentions, but don't be dumb by not investing into REITs and emerging market ETFs, cause they're gonna make their money whether or not us everyday americans invest in them or not.

stocks are cheap, and probably gonna get cheaper. just buy and save yourself the headache in the long term.

One could argue that they are... locking up land at dirt-cheap prices for possible exploration. With the icing on the cake being that they are a tax deduction... basically making $1.50 per acre just $1 per acre.

Really, the whole argument about land leases is a little silly. At least for either side to make it some big deal that it is not. But let me ask you this...

If you go to a garage sale and there are giant boxes of baseball cards for $1 each, are you buying them? Can't look inside and see what's there before the purchase, you only know that they are as described -- baseball cards. Who wouldn't, right? Worst case scenario, they're all trash and you're out a buck. Best case? Well, the sky's the limit.

Some may rush home and start diligently going through the boxes, listing them on ebay, making a few (or a lot more) bucks on their investment. Others may just stack them in the garage, because they know, no matter what, those cards will always be worth more than the purchase price and always go up in value.

So, the real question (to me) becomes... What kind of idiot sells giant boxes of baseball cards for a buck??

I'm about to look into them as it is time to move some money around. Any links or inside (read: personal experience) info would be appreciated.

I find it odd that just earlier today you posted this......


Yet when oil companies do the exact same thing you seemingly do not hold them to the same standard. As I said, I blame both the oil companies and the system that allows this to happen. I don't see it as an either/or situation.

If every family and person in America depended on the price of baseball cards to help curb inflation I could understand your point. But that's a different issue all together. So yes, I blame the way the system is set up and since our economy hinges on fuel costs and everyone seems to blame production for the cause, I also blame the oil companies.

for sure.

so Purp and the refs, i believe this isn't considered insider trading because we're on a public message board, just like those Reddit users did with AMC and all that.

if anybody doesn't want to put their bread into anything somewhat risky, just stick with Vanguard index funds and ETFs and call it a day.

for real estate specifically, VNQ is the best. its a REIT ETF by vanguard and that holds a lot of other REITs publicly traded on the market. so with REITs, just like any stock they pay quarterly, but some actually pay monthly, as by law they have to pay 90% of their revenue back to shareholders. you have some that do residential investment, some that do commercial real estate, and some that do both. you can also find capital management companies that deal with debt securities and all that, like OXSQ and BKCC

So a few that I have is ORC, GOF, O, and NHI. NHI pays quarterly, but it's a dope one to have because they deal with investing into health care facilities. and since we all know the US and good health don't mix, the medical industry will continue to grow for the foreseeable future.

there's plenty of others out there, some high risk that pay 12-15% yields, some less risk that pay around 4-6% yields. some monthly, some quarterly. just research REITs and make sure you read up before buying, and obviously try to diversify the volatility out of your portfolio as best as you can.

other than REITs, stick to ETFs that track the index like normal, and if you're hellbent on investing into individual companies, stick the too big to fail corporations. we all know there's absolutely a such thing as too big to fail in this country, so the more corrupt and scum-baggy the corporation is, the safer your investments will be.

and FYI for everyone, i dont do any of that day trading nonsense. i just buy and hold.

Swish… I’m invested in Ellington Residential Mortgage REIT. They pay out a fat 14% dividend. My small investment with them alone pays all my fees on my trading platform, and then some.

You find it odd?

I didn't say it was right, just reporting the news, it's not that hard to wrap your mind around what's at play here.

How the hell can I "hold them to a standard", anyway?

Thanks bro.

ooo that's nice. ORC pays like 16% or something like that. imma jump into ellington. right now my REIT portfolio is pulling about 13% overall. i'm on Etrade as my platform and been with them since forever now. but the REITs is paying a little over half of my monthly subscriptions already (netflix, youtube, etc) and some utility bills. imma keep dumping residual income in REITs and see i i can get all my everyday expenses covered, and then keep it going after that as well.

The same way you said you hold every other business to that standard. I know you can't stop using fuel, but if everyone suddenly started cutting their consumption as much as possible it would be following the example of the standard you seem to propose holding every other business to. And let me ask you, when you hold those other businesses responsible for greed, do you blame it on every government loophole that allows them to game the system too?

https://digg.com/money/link/global-inflation-rates-last-two-years-2020-2022-rise-increase-nVYqXp7y3o

We started in on this topic in the last thread. Stumbled on the link just now.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cn...n-the-hard-way-not-to-fight-the-fed.html

Look for more selling pressure next week as investors learn the hard way not to fight the Fed

The S&P 500 is on its way to its 10th down week in the last 11, and is now well into a bear market. On Thursday, all 11 of its sectors closed more than 10% below their recent highs. The Dow Jones Industrial Average fell below 30,000 for the first time since January 2021.

i swear i seen the exact same articles in 07-08, 2018, and in 2020.

hey investors, don't buy the dip....cause only we're allowed to!! and then in a couple years, guess what the articles are gonna say?

OMG ANOTHER LARGEST TRANSFER OF WEALTH IN US HISTORY! but somehow, this time it's different.

I agree. Real Estate trusts are a pretty good bet.

these oil and gas companies man....sitting on record profits, piles of cash, stock values up AND they paying decent dividend yields.

BP, Exxon, Valero, etc all shooting through the roof.

Please tell me what Biden is supposed to do about that? is he supposed to force the gas companies to lower their prices? aren't some of you just gonna call that communism?

yall love the free market, until the free market starts raising prices for no other reason than "cause you gotta pay anyway". then you STILL find a way to blame the government for what the free market does.

so i ask all you guys who blame biden for this: what is he supposed at the federal level that you won't turn around and call socialist, marxist, woke policies?

i've asked that multiple times, still didn't get an answer. i'm sure if some of you bother, it'll be some roundabout way to blame biden, offer no solutions, and just be mad to be mad.

oh well. the best i can do is care, but if y'all don't want anything meaningful done, then im starting to wonder why bother caring at all? i'm not hurting at the pump, and i have to fill up on 93. can't help people who won't help themselves.

I'm not on the side that is fighting against you and I am not blaming most of this on Biden, but I have a few suggestions. I don't want to argue, though. Just some brainstorming that I was thinking about while reading on the subject awhile ago. Wanna hear? No fighting, though.

Duplicate post. Not sure what happened.

only if you stop labeling everything as a fight. good lord bro...

A few things:

--Suspend the climate accounting rules.

--Give approval for more export facilities.

--Speed up the process for leases and permits for the oil companies, whether they are on or off-shore.

--Get rid of the dated Jones Act.

--Make it easier to get pipelines approved.

I am not saying these are all good ideas or that many will be in favor of them, but they do exist.

By Devika Krishna Kumar and Chunzi Xu (Bloomberg) —

Waiving a century-old shipping law to let foreign-flagged vessels transport fuel between U.S. ports — a favorite talking point of a US refinery sector trying to get the White House off its back — would only save East Coast drivers about 10 cents a gallon at the pump, JPMorgan said.

A potential waiver of the Jones Act is one of several tools the Biden Administration is weighing to reduce the effects of record energy costs for Americans. However, like most moves being considered by lawmakers, it’s unlikely to bring sustained relief.

A 10 cent per gallon cut would be about 2% of the current average New York state pump price, according to auto-club AAA. Pump prices in the US mounted a record rally since the beginning of the month until they dipped slightly this week. At $5 a gallon, the national average is still more than 60% higher than a year ago.

American Maritime Partnership Slams Calls for Jones Act Waivers to Help Lower Gas Prices

“Unfortunately for US drivers looking forward to hitting the road this summer after two years of lockdowns, the tools at the Administration’s disposal which might help lower fuel prices are likely limited in both number and potential impact,” JPMorgan Chase & Co. analysts including Natasha Kaneva said in a note.

It currently costs around $4.66 per barrel to move fuel from the US Gulf Coast to New York Harbor on a Jones Act-compliant vessel, according to data from price reporting agency Argus Media. A non-Jones Act ship for a similar route is nearly $1 per barrel cheaper as of earlier this week, according to Argus.

Waiving the Jones Act — as suggested by Exxon Mobil Corp. as a means to lower pump prices — will make regions like New York Harbor more competitive against overseas buyers in Latin America, who are currently sucking up a massive amount of US fuel to the detriment of suppliers trying to bulk up inventories on the East Coast.

But a blanket Jones Act waiver could alienate some of the biggest shipbuilders, vessel owners and organized labor in the country. Waivers for routes where Jones Act vessels currently dominate — such as from the US Gulf Coast to Florida — would be “toxic,” Andy Lipow, president of Lipow Oil Associates, said in a phone interview with Bloomberg.

https://gcaptain.com/jpmorgan-says-waiving-the-jones-act-unlikely-to-ease-pain-at-the-pump/

so the waiver would MAYBE save americans 10 cents at the pump. it's an ok idea, but that requires the gas companies to actually implement the savings.

oil companies already have tons of land that is already approved for drilling. the oil companies are the ones who decided not to ramp up drilling, Vers. remember, they straight up won't do it, which is why Biden had to start releasing an extra million barrels a day in our reserves, which still didn't make a dent.

you have to remember that half of what you suggested are long term policies, but that money would be better spent diversifying our energy sector overall. that will do nothing to lower prices in the short term, and damn near everybody is worried about the 'now'.

even a holiday gas tax is a gimmick, because the cost of gas was naturally gonna rise anyway do the fact that its summer, so gas companies always raise prices around this time.

the offshore drilling isn't gonna do anything, because oil companies already have the means to produce more oil onshore, but they refuse to do it.

look at the stock price and yields of the oil companies. they are prioritizing spending their profits on stock buybacks and giving money back to shareholders. and they SHOULDVE ramped up production due to the war in ukraine, but won't because now they get to charge more per barrel. oil companies don't want to drill more because if the demands goes down, they have excess oil and thus lose profit.

i'm not knocking the options, but you gotta realize that its basically glorified bribery to the oil Gods, who are already rolling around in cash. right now there is zero reason for oil companies to ramp up production, so other than maybe announcing this as a state of emergency and taking direct action (which will have conservatives screaming their lungs out), all biden - or any president - can do is WISH that the oil companies do the right thing.

which as corporations, they are under no obligation to do so. and if they're ever told/forced to, Biden will be called a communist and republican voters will demand that republicans do everything to stop him.

i was told that presidents dont control gas prices. so i'm trying to understand why oil companies don't take the same level of heat for causing this crap in the first place like biden is.

Vers, lets sit back and imagine yourself as an oil exec.

you're seeing massive profits, massive returns, and you're shareholders are happy. you are obligated to do what's in the best interest of the shareholders, and are under no legal, moral, or ethical obligation as a corporation to do what's in the best interest of consumers (the public). no matter what the president says or tries to do, and no matter how ticked off the public is, you know that they have no choice but to pay the outrageous price at the pump, and all they can do is be mad.

so knowing that the government can't make you drill more, even though you can if you want, why would you?

Swish, I am not on that side. I'm not blaming Biden for all these issues at all. I understand the greed of the oil industry. It's like the greed in most industries. I was just answering the question about possible things Biden could do to help. I am not even sure how practical they all are. I read your article about the Jones act. Ten cents? LOL...Anyway, I just like to educate myself and I remember reading about this a couple of months ago and those things are from memory. I probably left some out and maybe I worded some of them wrong.

Declare inflation an emergency and use the Defense Production Act to make them supply gas at a reasonable price with minimal profit. If you do that to a handful of price gouging corps, they will all get the message relatively fast.

i feel you. i'm just pointing out that the free market (big oil) decided to do this. if the free market decides not to do anything to reverse course, what can we do that wouldn't be called socialism?

Sounds like a GOPer wishlist.

will they? or will that be another excuse to storm the capitol building?

Who cares if it's called socialism, they need to be reined in. Unbridled capitalism looks more and more like financial fascism every damn day. Nationalize production until the corps learn to stop playing games.

If Big oil cries that they can't make a profit, the minions will rise.

again, i dont care what they call it. but government power has been so eroded over that last 30 years that any sort of government action is considered a threat to freedom.

Well if GOPers don't like it, they can pay their 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9 dollars a gallon. Many economists are expecting this inflation to last until late 23-early 24. Supply chain disruption and no regulations are killing us.

Oh, I'm blaming Big Oil, too. All those huge industries are corrupt in their quest for profits. LOL bro, you gotta know me better than that. I despise those folks.

I just want prices to go down. I'm a simple man. I think that Biden's long range plans on this topic make sense, but there has to be a transition period. It can't happen overnight. I suggest a give-and-take where we move to more renewable resources while not punishing the public and easing some of the regulations that are currently in place. The idea being let's work together as much as possible. It will never be a great marriage, but gotta ease the pain of the people.

Gas Prices. no.

Until the price of crude is lowered, as pegged on the world market, prices will remain high.

Russia has been cut off as a supplier around the globe and nobody is pumping more to make up for the shortage in supply. Until that changes, the price for crude will remain high because the demand isn't going down.

There is a pretty fine balance between production and consumption. When one is disrupted, prices always go up. We have seen it on a smaller scale when hurricanes have knocked out a refinery for a period of time. At least when that happens we have some reserve capacity at other facilities to cover some of the production shortage.

When the world supply of crude is decreased, we, meaning our country really don't have much capacity to increase the amount of crude in tankers around the world.

I don't think we should be able to dictate to the oil companies, or any company what they charge as a gross profit margin when running the business. Remember, there is a difference between gross profit and net profit. The oil companies haven't raised their gross profit margin at all, but as cost of good increase, it does translate to more profit dollars on the bottom line.

Commodity trading and selling is different than say Ford buying a car part from company X, then finding another company where they can get it cheaper. Oil prices, pork bellies, corn etc. are set on a national if not world stage. Crude is set on a world stage. If demand outpaces available supply, you are going to pay more. It's like going to an auction. If you are the only bidder, you can get the item for the reserve price. If 4-5 others are also bidding, it goes to the highest bidder.

well since you don't want to do anything to stop companies from exploiting our society.....

i endorse Biden to start allowing the government to buy and/or create government owned oil, tech, gas, pharma, and car companies in order to compete with the free market. straight up bought and owned by the government (taxpayers).

since we don't want to to put a leash on our precious free market, government needs to jump directly into the "competition".

suspend all land and offshore leases designated for drilling and development, and have the government owned companies create the infrastructure there.

My post is going to be more of a question than a statement.

Aren't there anti price gouging laws?
Wouldn't they apply here?
Supply issues, increasing prices, significantly increasing profits?

We just need to keep creating progressives. Sooner or later, we'll be able to fix this mess.

I've said that for years. Especially oil and pharma.

seems like you and i actually LIKE competition.

Buy? Government should just seize all production and then "hold" it for the people.

That will fix all the issues.

LOL, and I get called a socialist. Funny how hard times make people rethink their politics. I'm glad that people are waking up to the evil side of capitalism. Although I think capitalism is the best wealth-building tool, it is dangerous without the built-in socialism-based checks and balances. The horrible thing about all of it is that money, capitalism, socialism, etc., are just artificial constructs that we've imposed upon ourselves, so we can all live together and have better lives... But people suffer so damn much when those things go off the rails, and one must wonder why we keep them. Everything has to be about winners and losers when it could just as easily be about winners and winners if we just set it all up to make sure everyone has at least basic needs protection. But you will never sell that to the Boomers.

I was being sarcastic.

Capitalism isn't evil. It is another tool. Tools are abused. People are the problem. We should regulate people.

Agreed.

I don't know. Hope this link shows up: https://www.forbes.com/sites/rrapie...but-far-less-than-apple/?sh=2a54174236ed

(may have to open it in a private setting).

For everyone bashing "big oil", look at Apple's profit. Anyone complaining about that? (again, I hope it shows up).

Nice little chart here: https://imageio.forbes.com/specials...-AAPL/960x0.png?format=png&width=960

Again, hope it shows up: from the article: "In the most recent quarter, ExxonMobil reported $5.5 billion in net income. If that’s “more than God”, I wonder how President Biden would quantify Apple’s $25.0 billion for the quarter. Five times more than God? Oh, and ExxonMobil also paid $2.8 billion in taxes for the quarter, so it seems that they are paying their taxes. "

The President and others are just flapping their lips in panic. They are going after airlines...what else?


It's always someone else's fault. The reality is they own it and caused a vast majority of the problems.

Apple always gets a free pass because they're cool. Steve Jobs' charitable contributions were probably still zero when he died.

Fun fact: As everyone always hates on Walmart for "exploiting" employees... Apple employees average $1.25 per hour more.

Profit per employee per year?

Wal-mart: $6000

Apple: $400,000


https://www.forbes.com/sites/timwor...6300-whos-the-exploiter/?sh=2ae7a8ab4bac

Well, I've noticed the libs haven't spoken to this. I guess apple is more important to them than oil, and oil is a way the libs attack profitable companies (of which most are invested in, whether they realize it or not). Or, maybe they speak with 2 forked tongues.?

No that's not actually reality, but I wouldn't expect that from you. Both Trump and Bidens admin contributed, but so did the last 40 years.

Well it’s Father’s Day/Juneteenth. So us libs we’re outside chilling while you’re doing…something.

We don’t care what happens to Apple or any other CORPORATIONS.

Big oil, big tech, big pharma, all the industries need a damn leash on them. Unlike you we don’t pick and choose which industries need a boot on their necks.

Oh and wait, does our vehicles fill up on Apple, or gas? Are our utilities powered by Apple, or oil and gas?

How in gods name did you go from gas prices - which we all consume - to Apple products, which isn’t a necessity? How did you jump from one commodity to a product?

Arch, do you know the difference between a commodity and a product?

Conservatives make the silliest arguments ever.

OCD, is there an app where I fill up my ride with iPhones or AirPods?
Do we grill iPhones on a pan, pressure cook it? Or do we just eat the glass?

Hey how many MacBook pros can I grow in my backyard per year? Do I need a license for that?

Are there special seeds for androids? What if I want the Mac Pro? Ya know, the big boy computer they use in the film industry. Can I grow that, or do I need to put it in an incubator like I’m growing a baby for 9 months?

Get your hands on some old iPod nanos. Plant those. In a couple months you’ll have and iPhone 6. Harvest. Plat the iPhone 6. In a few months… boom… a MacBook Pro.


Results may vary.

We only buy apple products to own the Trumpians who can't figure them out. Apple products are almost unhackable because nobody owns enough of them to make them worth hacking. I just got my first one a few months ago, an Apple iPad pro with the M1 chip! It's great for artsy things, but you can't put an ad blocker on chrome. And I just read a report a few days ago that the chip they love so much had a fatal flaw leaving your device wide open at the kernel level and it's unwatchable. Apple's response? Their software security makes the chip's flaw unexploitable... smfh iPad, smart keyboard case, and an apple pencil cost me better than a grand just to find out it's wide open. I would try to start a class-action lawsuit over this but users would get peanuts and the attorney would get filthy rich. Screw that.

I don't know if everybody knows this or not, but you can't develop or test apps for apple without buying their products first. Then you have to pay $100 bucks to get a developer's license to boot, or you can't submit your apps to the app store. They are the only OS doing this crap. So why would anyone give a damn about Apple losing money but the Chinese sweatshops that build them? Hell, their market share is only about 23% worldwide.

Good burn arch. You and Peen have been nailing the last few days. Or was this a Tucker talking point? Sounds like something that chucklehead would say to have the base parrot.

I never said that, or feel that. I am just not in favor of knee jerk reactions by anti-business progressive "thinkers".

There is a difference between exploitation and market forces driving up prices. Gas prices aren't up just because Exxon decided they were going to start charging $5 a gallon because they felt like it.

I agree with that. There are other forces at work as well. You have to wonder with every product how many middlemen are in play, taking a slice for doing nothing. Or if they have a Martin Shkreli in the mix. Then you also look at "ridiculous tax" to see if some BS special tax has been added for one reason or another. Some prices could be increased due to raw materials going up or "having a shortage", shipping increases, warehousing increases, etc. Heck, I have a family member who works for an outfit that receives goods like boxes of breakfast cereal packed in shipping boxes, pulls them out, and repackages them into store displays on pallets, then sends them out to retailers. They also split the numbers from full factory containers or pallets into individual retailer quantities on pallets for different stores. They create nothing of value, just act as middlemen, making the buying and displaying of goods smoother for both ends of the supply chain. His job amounts to a team leader-type position, but I think he makes just over $30 an hour for it. So yeah, there are always other factors. But don't think for a second there is no, or limited, corporate greed going on as a primary driver at every stop in the supply chain from raw material to the consumer's cart.

They literally are up because of that.

Oil prices vs Gas Prices.

3/8/2022 - Oil $123.70, Gas $3.53.
5/30/2022 - Oil $118.87, Gas $4.34
6/20/2022 Oil $110.32, Gas $5.00

Meanwhile oil profits are up 200-300% in 1 year.

Let me know when you have to buy a cell phone in order to get to work or the grocery. People have to buy gas. Gas is at pretty close to the same price everywhere. You can't buy cheap gas. You do have the option to buy a cheap cell phone.

How many do you think there are? I suppose in some cases there might be another layer, but basically you have producers/manufactures, whoiesalers, and retailers. There really isn't much better way to do it, at least if it is a store bought item. Online a wholesaler might be the only other layer and sell directly online. Unless it is a small business it is pretty hard to concentrate on making their product and then deal with all the shipping. I wouldn't say those "middlemen" do nothing.

Wholesalers buy in bulk, keep storage facilities and ship direct to retailers where people can go in and buy product.

Like I said, maybe some are set up with another layer...and it is still probably needed jusy due to volume.

Gas at the pump might go from the crude pumping operations, to a few central terminals where that is then distributed to various refiners. At that point it may go through the same process. Refiners to bulk distribution terminals where smaller distribution terminals distribute to the pump. Again, I don't know for sure, but due to the massive volume it probably does. I don't think a refinery ships directly to maybe thousands of distributors. It's probably hundreds where it gets cut down again to the pump delivery operation.

I am not sure what pretty much means, but I filled up in Tennessee before I left and paid $4.34. I just filled up as I got down here to Venice, Fla and paid $4.79. To me that is a pretty good price difference.

You also have the option to buy an electric car.

Apple is popping profits beyond belief.

Hey, the thread is about the economy. Some turned it into gas, and bitching and moaning about gas companies, and corporate greed concerning gas prices - while totally ignoring, what I assume the bashers consider corporate greed from apple.

Ain't nobody needs a smart phone to live. No one. Does it make life easier? I don't know. I see people on their phone all the time that can't even communicate with people right beside them. But apples profit (about 4+ times higher than oil companies) is poo poohed.

With electric vehicles so damn widely available, why not just go buy one of those?

Average gas price in S. Carolina: $4.53.

Average gas price in California: $6.40.

Pretty close to the same price everywhere?

I paid $5.76 on Sunday.

Thankfully I work from home full time now and drive very little during the week.

why do you answer your own question? you're the one saying you're being impacted by inflation, including gas prices. why don't you buy an EV?

Maybe. Are those spot prices....it doesn't matter. May/June is when the gasoline changes and summer additives are added...prices have always jumped in the summer.

As for profits, it is a gross profit margin commodity buyers work on because prices change daily. It why you see gas prices change all the time....usually a few pennies. In Jan the price of crude was around $78.

You have to understand pricing. If you are working on a 50% gross profit margin, if what you are buying costs $1, you charge $2. 50% of $2 is $1. After that they pay their obligations.

Perhaps in your density and total ignorance of my job, you have no clue. I mean, you're the one that told me I should buy a brand new truck, when the truck I was talking about was my hardly ever used 3rd vehicle. What kind of tax savings are involve there again? Oh, none.

Smoke another one, tell us how great your investments are, and you cars. You do better there.

yea so you didn't answer the question, so imma ask it again:

you're the one saying you're being impacted by inflation, including gas prices. why don't you buy an EV?

also, quote where i said brand new. i'll wait. you just told the entire board you didn't read anything in our argument, and got the audacity to call someone ignorant.

Quit looking the fool. You just told the entire board you have no clue what I do for a living, and you have no clue about a personal vehicle I have, driven less then 3,000 miles a year

Yup, inflation is costing me. Perhaps in your situation gas prices, food prices, insurance prices (trust me, they're going up) So, really, knowing nothing about me, you're going to attack me? For real?

I know why so many don't post on here anymore.

So you can’t answer a basic question of why you won’t buy an EV?

You also can’t quote where I told you to by BRAND NEW?

Do you often have trouble answering straight forward question?

That post is kind of deceptive. Oil was at 122.00 on June 8th and has been coming down since then, not March. The overall trend is going up not down.

https://oilprice.com/oil-price-charts/

Dude, you have no idea what I do for a living. An e.v. just won't cut it. And on another issue, which you obviously haven't gotten yet, my truck that I spoke about? It's not my work vehicle. It's something I put, on average, under 3,000 miles on per year.


Here, let me spell it out for you: An E.V. won't do what I do. Period.

For you, perhaps instead of bitching about the profit oil companies are making, maybe you ought to take your own advice and go buy an e.v. But, money isn't tight for you. Right?

Oh, have you seen the prices of used trucks? Probably not, as you just ignore reality and buy luxury vehicles.

I've answered every question you've asked, and I've not done it in a personal, attacking way. I could.

?? i neither nor or care what you do for work. i simply asked you why you haven't bought an EV since you're the one saying inflation is affecting you. i mean damn broskie, look how defensive you got over a simple question.


^^^ you posted that. not me, not anybody else. you took forever to answer a simple question. i didn't ask you about a work truck today. i didn't ask you about work at all today. you're the one assuming im asking about EV and work, and getting oddly defensive about something not brought up.

here's what i posted:

nothing in that quote said "work". nothing in that quote said used trucks. and nothing in that quote brought up your mileage.

i simply asked:


i haven't bought an EV yet because i dont have to. i want to wait until i move into a bigger house and get solar panels. also, i'm not the one whining about being affected by inflation.

you are. and am i not allowed to speak out against oil companies because i'm not impacted by prices?

are you implying that nobody is allowed to speak on something that they aren't directly impacted by? does that mean you can't speak about abortion because you don't have the ability to get pregnant? does that mean you can't talk about football because you aren't a football player?

can i not advocate for other people simply because im not affected by <insert situation>?

do you realize how ridiculous you're coming off right now?

all you had to do was say you can't buy an EV because it doesn't fit what you're doing in your life right now. that's it. that's all you had to do.

and i've seen the prices of used trucks. i'm not exactly sure what's that's supposed to mean, btw. obviously if i could afford to get a luxury suv, i can afford to buy a pickup truck.

i'm not sure if you're trying to talk down on me for being good with money or.....lmao. ignore reality by not knowing about pick up trucks cause i bought an SUV....lmfao whaaat??!!!

Whatever you want bud. What ever you want.

Thanks for posting that. I didn't want to get in to overall trends, etc....its why I brought up spot pricing, then quickly changed direction. I will also add that there is price lag. Prices tend to follow costs. They are slower to go up and slower to follow down

Kind of deceptive?
I would say straight up intentionally deceptive.
At first glance, your like, "why aren't the dates evenly spaced?"
Then you look at the charts and it becomes clear.
https://tradingeconomics.com/commodity/gasoline

J/C

The whole situation does make you wonder what the subtle counter-current is to everything that is going on right now. Usually something that begins to reveal itself years down the road. For instance, when we went to Lexington last weekend, the Supercharger station for Tesla was mobbed. 3 months ago, there was hardly anyone there. I imagine EV deliveries and consumption are really starting to rise. Perhaps we're seeing the subtle counter-current beginning in response to the gas prices.

Same with the Great Resignation. Companies I imagine are starting to turn more to atomation and working with the downsizing. With the move to remote, I also imagine that the larger urban centers are going to start suffering more. I've seen a lot of Silicon Valley companies "in source" to Dayton, Ohio recently.

It'll be interesting to see how things play out over the next 5-10 years.

So you're going to drive to California to buy gas? Where ever you live you'll be paying about the same price anywhere you go. You can buy a $200 cell phone or a $1000 cell phone anywhere you live. No need to be obtuse. And the price of cell phones doesn't impact every segment of our economy. Some of the crazy BS people try to uphold is mind boggling.

So you are only going to buy goods and services from local companies. Don't act like high fuel prices elsewhere doesn't affect you locally.

j/c:

Wait, he is spinning the facts again, just like he always does. He said this:


That is untrue, so he moved the goal posts yet again to spin yet another one of his lies.

Oh it certainly does. It negatively impacts all Americans. It seems as if the point flew right over your head. I'll try to simplify it. You don't have a choice when it comes to paying high fuel costs. People can quibble that it's not as high in some places as others if they like. But it's expensive everywhere.

It impacts all of our lives in the prices that we pay on everything. It's an essential commodity we all must pay for. Point being is that there is no option within your community to purchase "cheap gas". The price is very similar at every location within your community. I didn't bring up the silly comparison of cell phones to the price of gas or that somehow Apple's products were a necessity and that somehow if we were going to complain about corporate profits we should bring Apple into the conversation.

The reason why is that nobody is stopping you from buying a cheaper cell phone. That option is available everywhere. American families aren't being forced to make decisions what they will be forced to do without because they have no choice but purchase an Apple cell phone.

I totally agree that the high cost of both gas, and even more so diesel fuel on a nationwide scale negatively impacts us all. I'm actually not sure how you arrived at thinking otherwise from my posts. But hopefully that clears up any confusion.

Actually it did not go over my head. The point was you picked a specific, and pad antic, argument to fight with someone you disagree with from jump. I merely pointed out in the same snarky and pedantic way your example holds no weight.

I suppose you missed the point.

You are only here to fight. lmao

Ah, invocation of the classic "I know you are but what am I?" to admit your faulty arguments were there just so you could rumble and tussle.

And there you go again.

Go on, one more time so you can earn the nickname.

The fact you believe I actually give a damn about what people like you and Curly think about me is what's so hilarious. Nickname huh? You mean like Trump uses to try and demean anyone and everyone who disagrees with him? I can see why some of you would cling to things like that. I mean when all else fails, right?

My first thought:

Wit' tha seven, seven-eleven, seven-eleven
Seven, even Back Do' Lil' Joe
I picked up the cash flow

So.....

The economy.....

Muy mal

Introduced in Senate (03/24/2022)
Gas Price Gouging Prevention Act

This bill prohibits any person from selling, during a proclaimed international crisis affecting the oil markets, gasoline at a price that (1) is unconscionably excessive, and (2) indicates that the seller is taking unfair advantage of the crisis to increase prices unreasonably. The President may issue a proclamation of such a crisis that specifies the geographic area covered and how long the proclamation applies.

The bill provides for enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission and imposes enhanced civil penalties and criminal fines. It also authorizes state attorneys general to bring a civil action to enforce the prohibitions of this bill.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/3920?r=27&s=1

House approves bill to combat gasoline ‘price gouging’
Economy May 19, 2022 4:05 PM EDT

WASHINGTON (AP) — A closely divided House approved legislation Thursday to crack down on alleged price gouging by oil companies and other energy producers as prices at the pump continue to soar.

A bill backed by House Democrats would give President Joe Biden authority to declare an energy emergency that would make it unlawful to increase gasoline and home energy fuel prices in an “excessive” or exploitative manner. The bill directs the Federal Trade Commission to punish companies that engage in price gouging.

“At a time when people across the country are feeling the pinch at the gas pump, Congress needs to be doing all it can to bring down costs for American families,″ said Rep. Kim Schrier, D-Wash., who co-sponsored the bill.

She called it “infuriating” that spikes in gas prices were “happening at the same time that gas and oil companies are making record profits and taking advantage of international crises to make a profit. This must stop.″

The measure was approved, 217-207. Republicans unanimously opposed the bill, along with four Democrats.

It now goes to the Senate, where a similar bill is pending but faces steep odds amid a 50-50 split between Democrats and Republicans.

The focus on price gouging comes as gas prices hit an average of $4.59 per gallon Thursday — 49 cents a gallon higher than a month ago and $1.55 higher than a year ago, according to AAA.

ExxonMobil, Chevron and other major oil companies announced surging profits totaling more than $40 billion in the first quarter of the year, a fact Democrats repeatedly cited in floor debate. Many of the companies are spending billions on stock buybacks and dividend payments to investors.

READ MORE: Why both climate activists and the oil industry are unhappy with Biden’s new drilling leases

“Big Oil is price gouging families because they can,” said Rep. Katie Porter, D-Calif., another co-sponsor. “Enough is enough.”

Republicans and industry groups called the bill misguided, saying there is no evidence of price gouging. Oil is a global commodity and prices are set on the global market.

Gas prices rose late last year amid supply chain problems and increased demand as the economy recovered following the COVID-19 pandemic, but prices have spiked ever higher since Russia’s Feb. 24 invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. has banned imports of Russian oil and other countries are seeking alternatives to Russian energy, driving prices up.

Biden, aware of the political stakes, has vowed to do all he can to ease “pain at the pump for American families,” including ordering release of record amounts of oil from the nation’s strategic reserve.

Republicans say the answer to higher gas prices is to increase production here in the United States.

Louisiana Rep. Steve Scalise, the No. 2 House Republican, called the bill an attempt by Democrats “to distract and shift blame from the administration’s self-inflicted energy and inflation crisis.”

Scalise called the bill “a socialist price-fixing scheme that hurts small businesses and consumers the most.” He accused Democrats of ”politicizing” the FTC by giving the commission “wide-ranging powers based on undefined parameters that will allow it to usurp market forces and set government-controlled gasoline prices.”

The American Exploration and Production Council, a lobbying group that represents independent oil and gas producers, called allegations of price-gouging false and counter-productive.

The FTC has conducted numerous investigations that have shown that changes in gasoline prices are based on market factors — not illegal behavior, said Anne Bradbury, the group’s CEO.

The vote on the House bill comes as Interior Secretary Deb Haaland said she will release a long-delayed, five-year plan that allows Interior to conduct new offshore oil and gas lease sales. The current plan expires June 30, and administration officials had not said when or if a replacement would be released, even as they canceled three offshore lease sales scheduled in the Gulf of Mexico and off the Alaska coast.

Haaland told the Senate Energy Committee the new plan will be made public by June 30. The plan does not issue specific leases or authorize any drilling project.

READ MORE: Should big oil pay for climate damage? Some cities and states say yes

“As we take this next step, we will follow the science and the law, as we always do,” Haaland said Thursday, vowing a “robust and transparent review process that includes input from states, the public and tribes.”

The Biden administration has come under pressure to increase U.S. crude production as fuel prices spike because of the pandemic and the war in Ukraine.

Biden also faces pressure from Democrats and environmental groups urging him to do more to combat climate change, even as his legislative proposals on climate and clean energy remain stalled in a sharply divided Congress.

Sen. Joe Manchin, a West Virginia Democrat who chairs the energy panel and plays an outsized role on energy policy, said Thursday that “even as we see Russia wage a war enabled by energy insecurity in Europe, this administration has made its opposition to domestic oil and gas production crystal clear.”

Manchin said he supported a pause on new oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters announced by Biden soon after taking office in January 2021. By last summer, he told Haaland, “the time for a pause had come and gone.”

Now, 16 months after the pause was announced, “we still have no new leases,” Manchin said. “I’m sorry to say it has become crystal clear that the ‘pause’ is in fact a ban.”

Interior conducted an offshore lease sale last fall, responding to a court order, but the sale was later vacated by a federal judge.

The administration has scheduled onshore lease sales next month in eight mostly Western states. However, officials scaled back the amount of land offered for drilling and raised royalty rates charged to energy companies by 50 percent.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/house-approves-bill-to-combat-gasoline-price-gouging

Senate committee deadlocks on Democrats' gas price gouging legislation
by Breanne Deppisch, Energy and Environment Reporter | May 25, 2022 01:21 PM

Members of the Senate Commerce Committee deadlocked Wednesday on advancing legislation to combat gas price gouging, with members voting 14-14 on the Transportation Fuel Market Transparency Act.

The Senate bill is similar to H.R. 7688, the Democratic anti-price gouging bill that cleared the House last week. Much like that bill, the Senate legislation also seeks to create greater transparency around gas prices and would give the Federal Trade Commission additional authority to monitor and crack down on allegations of price gouging by energy companies. Democrats have rallied around the anti-gouging legislation in response to record gas prices, which have dragged them down in the polls and which Republicans have blamed on their energy policies.

The bill would also require the U.S. Energy Information Administration to publish more information about markets to help ensure fair competition and transparency.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairwoman Maria Cantwell (D-WA) said of the legislation: "Congress has given the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission [oversight] of the commodities future trading commission and the ability to police bad actors, so that they can be caught and punished, but we also need a policeman on the beat as it relates to the transportation fuel market."

BIDEN PROPOSES RESTRICTIONS THAT WOULD BLOCK GIANT PEBBLE MINE IN BRISTOL BAY

But unlike the House bill, the Senate effort is all but certain to stall in the evenly divided chamber, as it would require the support of at least 10 Republicans, who have sharply disapproved of the measure.

Still, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has vowed to force a vote on the bill as a means of putting Republicans on record and tying them to the high prices.



https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...crats-anti-gas-price-gouging-legislation

Republicans Vote Against Gas Price Gouging Bill

Republicans only moan and complain about gas prices. Doing something would wreck their whole act.
Republicans Vote Against Gas Price Gouging Bill

By John Amato — May 20, 2022
In a fairly close House vote on Thursday, a Democratic bill cracking down on price gouging by the energy industry passed 217 to 207.

Oil and gas companies have bragged about their enormous profits to the dismay of many, except of course, Republicans.

The bill may be caught up in the Senate with Manchin being the Debbie Downer, but the kicker is that every House Republican voted against this bill.


Every one of them.

NPR reports, "A bill backed by House Democrats would give President Joe Biden authority to declare an energy emergency that would make it unlawful to increase gasoline and home energy fuel prices in an “excessive” or exploitative manner. The bill directs the Federal Trade Commission to punish companies that engage in price gouging."

The only thing Republicans do well is go on Fox News and other wingnut outlets and scream and yell about rising gas prices. When they have a chance to help voters, they refuse.

We remember, though.



https://crooksandliars.com/2022/05/republicans-vote-against-gas-price-gouging

Cool story.

Please explain the double-standard on the left that gas prices are high because oil is traded on the world market but yet blame republicans for not passing a 100% toothless "price-gouging" bill.

You're not going to prove any "excessive or exploitative" pricing by the big boys. What are you going to do then? Close down the mom & pop charging 20 cents more??

Window dressing by a bunch of idiots on both sides that split the vote on every issue, and would find an angle to do so over an asteroid approaching the earth.

Want proof of that? These record profits have been going on for over 5 years and there are still 30 BILLION in subsidies for oil companies...

Anybody in Washington talking about that??

I want to know what these mean:

(1) is unconscionably excessive, and (2) indicates that the seller is taking unfair advantage of the crisis to increase prices unreasonably

Those are subjective criteria.

So does the rest of the world. Every story on the web has the same lack of details. Along with the "give the FTC the ability to punish them". I'm sure they're shaking in their shoes.

Seems like nothing more than "yo, blaming Putin is losing steam in the polls, there has got to be a way to blame republicans for all this."

Laws that use standards that boil down to "we can't define it, but we know it when we see it" are unconstitutional and any law maker that votes for such a bill should be sent back to high school civics.

j/c

None of this is difficult no matter how much people carry on about it.

All one has to do is look at fuel prices in the past when oil was the same price per barrel as it is now. Compare the two and then make excuses for the stark contrast. Because that's what you would have to do.

It never ceases to amaze me the excuses people can come up with for corporations to even price gouge themselves as consumers on a daily basis.

Agree. Just to clarify though, I'm not making excuses for the oil companies. I'm pointing to the outright curruption that is already baked in to our politics and the fact that this "bill" would do nothing to solve the real problem.

As far as your point -- yes, 100%. The naysayers will point the disparity and point to elevated costs of transport, refining, and all the other b.s. people cite when making lame excuses. To be fair, part of that is true, but maybe to the tune of half of what we're experiencing with the elevated costs.

Lastly, "because covid" has been the biggest farce of an excuse in world history... People on every level of every supply chain are exploiting it to the best of their ability, not just here, around the entire globe.

And to add, you have been spot on with a lot of your info of how world markets work and how a war would disrupt these things, when many people (including, scratch that, especially our politicians) talked like there were simple solutions and Biden was too lame to institute them... Case in point -- land leases -- we've argued about a lot of the layers of the issue, but you're right, giving back leases will do nothing to solve this problem in here and now.

I agree with you that in this case it's the Biden administration and democrats as a whole using political talking points rather than finding actual solutions. But much like we agree on the increased leases being nothing more than a talking point by the other side, I'm slightly confused what it is republicans think he can do about it that would really make any difference? And I mean things that wouldn't be the opposite of what they've claimed to stand for, for decades. They never want business interfered with. Any type of regulation is a no no. The whole Keystone Pipeline crap is just that, crap. Yet another political talking point.

So I understand exactly how frustrating fuel prices are. I'm paying the same price as everyone else. So is my entire family. I just wish either side would come up with an actual plan to present that would change it. Instead, as per usual we get all the finger pointing with nobody actually coming up with a plan to fix it.

Man, that is so true. All the companies I deal with and their suppliers are trying to rip up deals to get more money by saying “Because COVID!” so I ask specifically how COVID has affected them when I compare the CPI and PPI rates against what they are claiming and they basically just repeat “COVID!!!!”

I feel like it’s all form and no substance at this point. Talking points as you say.

The Dems ran on talking points and getting them to actually do what they said they would do is like pulling teeth.

The Republicans are basically taking the stance of associating almost anything bad in the world right now to being the Democrats fault, while providing little to no plan of their own.

I just feel like the two Bobs in office space looking at the one guy (in this case almost all politicians) and just asking “Sooo…what would you say…ya do here?”

You've been missing a lot of work lately...

I can't say I've been missing it Bob.

So where are all the GOPers that decried runaway inflation now that prices are coming down? Yall should celebrate with a song:

Lmao.

Gas prices down to $4.25... we should all be dancing in the street.

Hail Biden!

1

Im paying more than 5 per gallon, and inflation is rampant because of this.

I guess libtards are happy because 1 step closer to universal govt teat sucking (communism)

Looks like a bunch of libtard projection to me.

Whatever gamegirl.

Pretty accurate, although I think the "personal responsibility node" is depicted as much larger than nature allows.

Alternate reality derp.

You get it.

3

Yeah, just one more crazy conspiracy theory to add to your list that is no less a lie than the rest of them.

gas prices 2022-Jul 4.77

gas prices 2021-Jul 3.12

.... and you'll continue to use this line of debate until the prices come all the way back down... Like they always do.

Everybody with more than eight working brain cells knows that this stuff is cyclical. What goes up must come down. That's how the market works.

Enjoy it for now, but remember this- it is no more Biden's fault than it would have been Trump's, had he been able to pull off his coup.

4

In case anybody cares, I'm keeping count of the right-wingers going out of their way to poo-poo any good news about the economy and or inflation. so far 4 out of 4 right-wingers have done it. Go figure.

Nobody is "poo-pooing" any good news, and certainly not "going out of their way".

Pick one day a week and act like an adult.

If you think people should celebrate in the street for gas prices that are still the highest in the history of humans, you're absurd... Especially hailing a president who has accepted responsibility for absolutely nothing since election day.

You. Need. Help.

I don't think that at all, but the right is quick to discredit dems and Biden for what was mostly Covid, Putin, and Trump's BS that put his admin in this mess. So when I point out things are turning around, I should be able to do it with the same amount of zeal y'all use to try and tear him down every day. FFS I was busting GOPer balls... do I need to draw it in crayon for you to get that?

Yep.

Poor Joey. Dealt such a horrible hand. You're definitely phrasing correctly though... "things are turning around", because he's certainly still doing nothing but pointing fingers.

I'd say yes, but I'm afraid you'd probably eat the crayons.

Except, Biden has had 2 years, Trump isn't president, covid is still here, and putin's war is still going on.

So, really, none of your excuses for biden and screwing up this economy matter.

First rule in politics:

Never take the blame, always take the credit.

Touche. But he definitely didn't cause much of what's going on, like Donny and his pal Vlad did. You can't argue that point. Unless you truly do need a crayon map.

Now you're catching on... I learned that from Trump, the hard way. YOUR TURN. First POTUS ever to constantly bash and threaten half the country. Psycho sicko fascist asshat.

If you learned it from Trump you haven't been paying attention.

By first rule I mean, it was the first one ever created. It applies to all politicians since time began.

Yep. Everything "going on" is Donny and Putin's fault.

Hopefully you and your party continues to cling to that narrative, it's gone over like a fart in church so far. Just make his next campaign slogan "I didn't do it" since no matter what the question is (good or bad) it will be 100% correct.

Oh, I agree with that 100%. Trump is just the first POTUS in my life to take it to the extreme and weaponize it against half the citizens in the country. Not to mention the businesses, other non-political people, and organizations he harassed incessantly.

Just a question, is there anything Trump did in office you agree with?

I can think of one: he lost it.
...and we see how things went after he did that.

At the moment there were a few, but over time he turned me sour on them too. I think he's a straight-up traitor and should be hunted down and shot on sight personally. He has proved to me that he is rotten to the core. And believe me when I say I was a hardcore Republican until 2008. I used to think all dems and progressives were tree huggers. But I hated what the tea party was and did, and I blame Bush for the 08 crash that cost me a ton. I still like him, but he was inept as hell. Later I realized he had forces working against him that wanted to drag the party far right. Then I was done. I called myself an independent, but the more I started to watch politics closely and saw things I never thought I would see in this country, I evolved into a progressive. I think the government should be more about taking care of everyone and not just the rich and powerful. I've seen too much suffering in my years to continue turning a blind eye to it. And I think our system, at this point in time, is fundamentally broken and needs a complete overhaul.

However, like some on here would have you believe, I'm neither big on "handouts" nor "free rides". But I am big on leveling the playing field, ending suffering, and providing everyone equal access and opportunities to climb the social ladder. I don't think a quality education should be limited by money or where you are born or who you know. This is my biggest pet peeve in America. The dumbing down of America is plain to see and IMHO will be our undoing. But there are quite a few other things I fully back. I'm not big on the culture of the LGBTQ community, but I damn sure believe they have the right to live how they want to live and love who they want to love (age appropriate of course). And I think the solution to most of our problems should start with a STRONG social safety net, again not for "handouts" but "hand-ups". Anyone can fall on hard times, have health issues, make a mistake, etc. Things like that should not wipe you out or make you less IMHO. And we as a nation should do our best to make everyone a productive well-rounded member of our society. It's that simple to understand where I come from. But I don't have all the answers, and nobody I know does. This is where we need to come together and get past the divides and hate. I feel that if we can't be reasonable and rational people who choose to work together instead of tearing each other down, IMHO we're doomed as a nation.

However, I've never been a fan of the kumbaya guys who act as if they want to come together only when things are going their way. I'm more of an oh-hell-nah in-your-face guy right now, who can hopefully return to a work with you guy when the crazy BS is gone. In my lifetime, the divides have never been this bad. Additionally, I REALLY do think Trump is a traitor and a mob-style criminal idiot.

rude.

well, I'm not a "right-winger" and everyone else knows/understands that except you.

aye lets get together and start a solar farm

I’m in

Tree-hugging hippies, the bunch of you!

I feel the need to show love to trees now after chopping the one up in my back yard that went down with that crazy windstorm we had last month.

Conversely, I had one drop a branch last summer right across where I was about to build a fence. I found out that the same tree dropped a branch that caused the the previous owner of the property to get off his tractor and subsequently get run over by it. I said "nuh, uh, tree... not happening to this guy" and I cut it and eight of his closest neighbors down, just to be sure.

lol dead ass bro, i was looking at all the land for sale in the area, definitely easy to put up a solar farm, just need the capital. i think the community scale solar programs are interesting because people will buy in as long as the solar panels aren't an eyesore on the neighborhood. or some of these sales that are like 20-30 acres, massive tax breaks and its mostly just clearing out the land (obviously the hard part) since installation is pretty straight forward. either that or the utility scale.

i've been hesitant to go all in on the actual property investing, but something like this would be a layup for SBA loans and grants.

just thinking out loud for now, though. i mean we were supposed to become pirates and go jack some russian yachts, but only purp was down and we got a schedule to maintain.

I can get a good deal on fertilizer...

Is the wood good for smoking?

I like where your head is at.

https://www.businessinsider.com/des...ow-income-checks-offset-inflation-2022-7

Americans Who Can’t Afford Homes Are Moving to Europe Instead

More Americans are relocating to Europe, driven across the Atlantic by the rising cost of living, inflated house prices, a surging dollar and political rancor at home.

Italy, Portugal, Spain, Greece and France are among the most popular destinations. Sotheby’s International Realty said requests from Americans looking to move to Greece rose 40% in the April-to-June period compared to a year earlier. In France and Italy, US demand is the highest it’s been in at least three years, according to Knight Frank real estate specialist Jack Harris. And Americans made up 12% of Sotheby’s Italian revenue in the first quarter, compared to just 5% in the same period a year ago.

(Thes are just the first two paragraphs, much more info in the free article)



https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...rices-and-strong-dollar-fuel-relocations

Tech allows its talent to work remotely. I can see this becoming a trend across a couple of sectors; Tech, Entertainment, and many Professionals whose jobs will give them the opportunity to work remotely or internationally in foreign offices.

If they can’t afford a home in the states, it’s about to get painful for them in western Europe. The prices are even more higher than here.

Now if they have the mindset of “well if imma rent anyway, might as well be somewhere with better <pretty much insert anything>,” then I completely understand the decision to bounce.

you would think they would move to Canada.

You know the economy is turning bad when the Browns sign Josh Rosen

They are targeting smaller towns I think, it says something about it in the article.

‘Bella Vita’
For Atlanta-based Stephanie Synclair, 40, buying a home in Italy was a long-time dream that came true this April.

Paying $3,000 a month to rent a four-bedroom house for herself and her son in Atlanta, she found it impossible to scale up and become a homeowner as prices skyrocketed, even though she had $300,000 of cash on hand.

She turned to Italy, a country she always loved, and was able to buy a 3,100-square-foot house in Mussomeli, Sicily, as well as a smaller home next door and an 800-square-foot storefront — all for 60,000 euros.



“I would never have looked to buy in Italy if the market in the US hadn’t been so crazy,” the entrepreneur said. She plans to work remotely and imagines a “bella vita” of good food and wine, along with a local literary club and art space she plans to launch in her storefront, “reminiscent of Paris’s art scene in the 1920s.”

The average price of a home in Atlanta reached $404,575 as of June 30, up 19% from the previous year, whereas an 800-square foot property in the Palermo region of Sicily cost 86,560 euros on average, according to real estate platforms Zillow and Idealista.

“The rising cost of living has made it more expensive to live in any major US city than in European cities,” said Michael Witkowski, vice president of US-based expat consultancy ECA international. “Expensive home prices as well as a strong US dollar and political tensions are all contributing factors to the growing allure of Europe.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...rices-and-strong-dollar-fuel-relocations

Are you trying to bring pure football into political threads? Crazy talk that is.

Caught covid, and threw ketchup on the oval wall. Priceless!

Ash, Maple, and Mulberry. Some is good, some isn't.... the mulberry will get burned, the Maple will go on the sawmill and get turned into live edge slabs, the Ash will get turned into posts & beams for my barn expansion.

Is that the place in Italy that's practically trying to give fixer-upper stuff away?

Mulberry is my casualty as well. Cut 1 inch thick discs out of the biggest part (about 15 inches in diameter) and wife is going to try to make charcuterie boards out of it. One thing that was crazy was how quickly the termites and carpenter ants built nests under the logs when they were lying on the ground. Practically overnight.

No idea, good question. But the euro is down a good bit, so it could just be timing.

That's true. I bought tickets for "Die Wiesn" and it was practically a 1:1 ratio. I don't remember the last time that was the case for the exchange rate.

Sigh... Now prepare for the Biden Recession.

If there is a recession, which I also think will happen, it won't be due to Biden's ineptness, nope the GOPer obstructionists and Trump will share most of the blame. But Biden is the man, so you will all blame him for it all and he should shoulder his fair share.

Trump caused the recession by not snuffing out COVID... just ask Kamala. If Joe would have been prez, we wouldn't have even had COVID.

https://www.npr.org/2022/07/20/1112...as-more-democrats-sour-on-him-poll-finds

Biden's approval rating in the poll is now at 36%. That's a 4 percentage-point drop from June, and inside the numbers, it's attributable to a 9-point decline within his own party.

For context, Donald Trump's approval within his party when he was president was never that low in the poll, not even after the Jan. 6 insurrection (77%) or the Charlottesville, Va., white supremacist demonstration (76%), at which one person was killed — and whose participants Trump dismissed as "very fine people, on both sides."

In this survey, four times as many respondents said they strongly disapprove of the job Biden is doing than approve — 43% to 11%. And only 30% of Democrats said they strongly approve of the job the president is doing.

Not only are his approval ratings lower than those of any president at the same point in their presidencies since World War II, but he is facing inflation that's the highest it has been in decades as well as high gas prices.

A recent New York Times/Siena College poll found that two-thirds of Democrats said they preferred someone else to be their party's standard-bearer in 2024, citing, principally, Biden's age.

My question is who would they get?

So they give Biden's overall approval rating and then cite Trump's approval rating "within his own party". Afterwords they didn't give Biden's actual approval rating within his own party. They simply provided what percentage hope they run a different candidate in 2024. So you think only those Democrat who "strongly approve" of the job he's doing would say they approve?

Do you even read these things before you post them?

It's quoted from NPR. If you have a problem with the source, take it up with them.

I took it up with the person who posted it.

Oh, the irony.

The same could be said about your extremist comment.

I mean, you would say that in an poor attempt at a rebuttal. But, that would be about it.

Of course it would.

It's an opinion piece, so I know one side will ignore it. But I'll post it for those who are interested.

It’s the (pandemic) economy

The impact of the pandemic on the U.S. and global economy was catastrophic. Economic historian Adam Tooze characterized its impact as being “the swiftest and most comprehensive contraction of global economic activity ever.”

There are clearly other factors at work with regard to the economic problems confronting the U.S. and rest of the world, but it is safe to assume that the present economic conundrums would not exist without the pandemic. President Biden is being blamed for issues that are largely beyond his control and not of his making. Inflation is the primary focus of most Americans, who are concerned about rising prices for gasoline, consumer goods and utilities. FiveThirtyEight found that inflation has had a significant impact on Biden’s approval rating.

The discontent over inflation is accompanied by fear of recession as the Federal Reserve raises interest rates to respond to spiraling prices. The stock market has been volatile, plunging in reaction to concerns over an uncertain economy. Yet, unemployment is also historically low, and the American public is traveling again at pre-pandemic levels — a sign of consumer confidence.

Peter Goodman wrote in the New York Times about what has been termed a “force hiding in plain sight” — the economic shock of the pandemic. Goodman suggests that the present economic crisis is in reaction to the pandemic and has been exacerbated by Russia’s disastrous attack on Ukraine. He quotes University of Texas economist Julia Coronado as saying, “Pretty much everything in our lives has been disrupted by the pandemic, and then we layer on that a war in Ukraine.”

Supply and demand, which is fundamental to the cost of goods and services, were affected dramatically by the pandemic. People largely stayed at home. Jobs were lost and businesses were closed. Supply chains were disrupted. The nature of work and education changed. How people viewed their jobs and their future in the workforce was altered.

Lockdowns meant that the home became central to day-to-day lives, which altered patterns of consumption and how the economy functioned. For example, going to movies and restaurants was drastically curtailed, even halted. The restrictions of everyday life during the height of the pandemic had an impact on how people viewed their day-to-day activities. Working from home, another pandemic-related change, affects issues such as office space, public transportation and the functioning of businesses that no longer connect to the pre-pandemic economic reality of going into the office regularly.

Understanding the role that the pandemic has played in determining the present economic state in the U.S. and globally, as well as the economic future, is key to determining responses to present crises. Biden has been criticized for putting too much money into the economy and thereby increasing the likelihood of inflationary pressure with his American Rescue Plan, but the plan was literally a lifeline for millions of Americans — who, in turn, helped stabilize the economy.

In addition, the U.S. just joined 17 other nations in responding to supply chain issues via the Supply Chain Ministerial Forum. This effort is a good example of a response to the international dimension that the pandemic and related crises are having on the U.S. and the global economy.

Familiar tools such as the Fed’s raising of interest rates are being used to respond to the rise in inflation. There are risks to this approach, but the calculation is that it is a risk worth taking. The issue of placing political blame on the Fed chairman plays an important role in the argument of whether there will be support for the Fed in its effort to raise interest rates and stop inflation from careening out of control.

As economic writer and scholar Sebastian Mallaby recently pointed out in the Washington Post, “If (former President) Trump or a Trumpist wins in 2024, he or she will probably attack the Fed at the expense of growth and jobs, even though the best thing the Fed can do for the economy is to deliver stable prices. Vacancies on the Fed’s decision-making committee could be filled by hacks with no stomach for the short-term costs of containing inflation.”

The economy is fundamental to how people view their future, and how they view their future determines how they vote. This does not mean that tough analysis on economic policy choices is not warranted. It is, but if that analysis is to be sound it must include an honest assessment of the circumstances surrounding the present state of the economy. This is an existential issue, because, while the medical response to the pandemic has changed for the better as a result of innovations, the pandemic is far from over. It is also a safe bet that there will be future pandemics that will impact the daily lives of Americans.

The present economic crisis is not so much about inflation as it is about trusting and empowering political leaders to act responsibly in managing the economy under difficult and evolving circumstances. That trust must be based on facts and sound analysis and not on a faux populism buttressed by disinformation. There is too much at stake to do otherwise.

William Danvers is an adjunct professor at George Washington University’s Elliott School and worked on national security issues for the Clinton and Obama administrations.

https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3573069-its-the-pandemic-economy/

Fed hikes interest rates another 75 basis points as recession warnings flash

The Federal Reserve announced another steep interest rate hike Wednesday, ramping up its efforts to bring inflation down from four-decade highs.

The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the panel of Fed officials responsible for monetary policy, said Wednesday it would boost the central bank’s baseline interest rate by 0.75 percentage points to a range of 2.25 to 2.5 percent.

The Fed has now hiked interest rates by 75 basis points twice over the past two months, a remarkably fast increase that is likely to slow the economy. All 12 voting members of the FOMC supported the rate hike.

Fed officials have hinted at another 75 basis point rate hike for weeks since the June FOMC meeting. The bank raised rates last month by 0.75 percentage points for the first time since 1994 after inflation surged higher in May than economists expected.

While the Fed’s rapid rate hikes have throttled the housing market, suppressed stock values and spurred a small rise in layoffs, they’ve yet to make a noticeable impact on inflation.

Consumer prices rose 9.1 percent annually in June and 1.2 percent last month alone, according to Labor Department data released this month. Though war-related supply shocks beyond the Fed’s control drove much of the June inflation surge, prices across the economy grew at much faster rates despite the central bank’s actions.

Fed Chair Jerome Powell and other top officials have insisted the bank will do whatever it takes to bring inflation back down toward its 2 percent annual target, even if it means higher unemployment and a potential recession in the short-term.

He also acknowledged the Fed has little ability to bring down food and energy prices, but would continue to hike rates if inflation didn’t turn around.

Powell and many economists argue that allowing inflation to spiral out of control would cause a deeper economic downturn than one caused by higher interest rates. Without aggressive steps to fight inflation, they warn, price increases will eventually cause unemployment to spike, but give the Fed and Congress little room to support the economy with stimulus.

“The process is likely — highly likely — to involve some pain, but the worst pain would be from failing to address this high inflation and allowing it to become persistent,” Powell said last month.

Though the economy on the whole has remained sturdy, the pain is already growing for many households with little room to handle higher prices.

Surging food, gasoline and shelter costs have pushed many struggling households toward food banks and difficult cutbacks.

Higher interest rates are boosting borrowing costs on credit cards, some automobile loans, and other loans without fixed interest rates, squeezing families on both sides of the balance sheet.

U.S. gross domestic product also fell during the first quarter of 2022 and economists say it’s likely GDP declined again in the second, meeting what had long been a rule-of-thumb definition for a recession.

While economists say the strong job market is a reassuring sign for the U.S. economy, some believe the Fed has already pushed the U.S. to the precipice of a recession and should slow down its fight against inflation.

“From here, it is possible that the Fed slows its tightening pace, reassured by the likely peaking of inflation and pullback in inflation expectations as oil prices have fallen,” wrote Seema Shah, chief global strategist at Principal Global Advisors, in a Wednesday analysis.

“However, with the labor market still a picture of strength, wage growth still uncomfortably high and core inflation set to decline at a glacially slow pace, the Fed certainly cannot stop tightening, nor can it downshift gears too much.

https://thehill.com/policy/3576406-...asis-points-as-recession-warnings-flash/

White House says Biden will make decision on student loans

The White House said on Tuesday that President Biden is mulling whether to extend the pause on federal student loan payments and whether to forgive student loans on a broader scale ahead of a pandemic-related moratorium on payments that are set to resume on Aug. 31.

“He’ll make a decision,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said. “I’ll let him speak.”

She noted that Biden told reporters last week that “the end of August” is his timeline for making a decision. Biden in April extended the pandemic moratorium on federal student loan payments and interest accrual through August.

“The president understands firsthand how burdensome this can be for many Americans … across the country,” Jean-Pierre said. “That’s why he took the action that he did when it came to pausing repayment.”

She said she didn’t have anything more to share on loan cancellation.

Other White House officials have been mum when asked for updates on whether Biden will forgive any amount of student loans by executive action.

Top economic adviser Brian Deese said he didn’t have anything new to share on student loans, adding on Tuesday that “the president spoke to the timeline on this issue.”

A Department of Education spokesperson told The Hill on Tuesday that the administration is still assessing whether to extend the payment pause but that borrowers will be communicated with “directly” about the end of the freeze.

“The Department of Education will continue to assess the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and the economy on student loan borrowers. We will communicate directly with borrowers about the end of the payment pause when a decision is made,” the spokesperson said.

The statement follows Wall Street Journal reporting on Monday that student loan servicing contractors have been told to not send billing statements.

Before Biden announced the last extension in April, the Department of Education had asked companies to not send out notices about resuming payments.

The pause on student loan payments was first enacted in March 2020 under President Trump and has been extended multiple times since.

The White House has previously indicated that it is nearing a decision on broad student loan debt forgiveness, zeroing in on canceling $10,000 per borrower, but has not yet reached a final decision.

The administration in June announced a plan to discharge all outstanding federal student loans borrowed by former Corinthian Colleges students, providing $5.8 billion in loan cancellations to 560,000 borrowers. The group loan discharge applied to all former students who attended any campus owned or operated by Corinthian Colleges Inc. since the company was founded in 1995 through its closure in 2015.

https://thehill.com/homenews/admini...den-will-make-decision-on-student-loans/

I feel like he'd have to extend it beyond the midterms at least, for political purposes if nothing else.

if he doesn't extend it, it will definitely help fix the recession because people will have to start paying their student loans again.

j/c…

?

I think that's his best play. Cancelling student loan debt is going to be a polarizing move, but deferring repayment (again) until after the election quietly satisfies people sufficiently as far as I am concerned. For a while at least.

inflation exists because there is too much money in the marketplace and the average American has too much money. Because of that, the feds & Dems are scrambling to raise interest rates to oppress everyone financially.

Once everyone is properly put back in their place, the Democratic party can run on issues that make you feel like the govt is helping you. Ironically, the Democratic party is really the one who took from us in the first place.

Worst Inflation% in US history

20211 Joe Biden - Democrat 9.1%
2021 Joe Biden - Democrat 7.0%
1981 Jimmy Carter 8.9% (switched to Reagan and went down)
1980 Jimmy Carter 12.5%
1979 Jimmy Carter - Democrat 13.3%
1978 Jimmy Carter - Democrat 9.0%
1975 Nixson - Republican (end of gold standard) 9.1%
1974 Nixon - Republican 11%
1951 Harry Truman Democrat 7.9%
1947 Harry Truman Democrat 8.8%
1946 Harry Truman Democrat 18.1%
1942 FDR - Democrat 9.9%
1941 FDR - Democrat 9.0%
1920 Woodrow Wilson - Democrat 15.6%
1919 Woodrow Wilson - Democrat 14.6%
1918 Woodrow Wilson - Democrat 18.0%
1917 Woodrow Wilson - Democrat 17.4%
1916 Woodrow Wilson - Democrat 7.9%

https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2022/7/view-the-chips-legislation

Weird. I could swear some of these were progressive ideas, But Manchin and Schumer are the bill's sponsors... Hmm? It's almost like they are pitching something to progressives with progressive talking points, meanwhile, I bet the text and how it all works is not so much progressive. We'll see. I don't trust Manchin any farther than I could throw him.

The 'Nay' voters...



The democrat that voted against the bill's passage was TX Rep. Lloyd Doggett

https://clerk.house.gov/evs/2022/roll400.xml

What is the purpose - are people going to start threatening these individuals?

I'm not sure I understand the question, SB. Should voters not be interested in how their representatives voted on a particular bill? This is fundamental.

An informed voter strengthens democracy and holds their elected officials accountable no matter your political leanings.

Dope!

I really didn’t mean to go down this rabbit hole, but deducing all that from student loans is quite something. It’s also a policy that he didn’t put in place but has just been extended from the previous administration.

I do understand the correlation you’re mentioning about inflation and democratic administrations, but your last prior example is from 1981 with two administrations between there.

There’s also an even deeper rabbit hole to discuss the cost of education in and of itself, but that’s for a different thread.

Regardless, the point I was originally making was what objectively would likely happen.

I see what you did there…

j/c:

America goes into RECESSION after second straight quarter of negative growth but Biden insists: 'We are on the right path'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...ks-second-straight-quarter.html#comments

And McConnell is not happy about it because he got outplayed.......

McConnell assails Manchin's surprise economic deal after Democrats stripped his leverage to block it

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell bashed a nascent agreement between Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Democratic leaders that revived swaths of their agenda on Wednesday.

"Democrats have already crushed American families with historic inflation," the Kentucky Republican wrote on Twitter. "Now they want to pile on giant tax hikes that will hammer workers and kill many thousands of American jobs."

The agreement between Manchin and Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer resuscitates various Democratic initiatives that were considered dead only two weeks ago. The 725-page bill — titled the "Inflation Reduction Act" — would empower Medicare to negotiate prescription drugs, extend financial assistance for people to buy Obamacare health insurance, and finance a variety of climate and energy programs to transition the US from fossil fuels.

Manchin released a statement announcing the deal less than five hours after 17 Senate Republicans, including McConnell, joined every Senate Democrat to approve a $52 billion bill to strengthen the semiconductor industry. These are computer chips powering smartphones, medical devices, and other high-tech items facing pandemic-related shortages.

McConnell had previously threatened to hold up the semiconductor legislation if Democrats tried advancing their health, climate, and tax bill. The latter measure is getting passed with only Democratic votes in the budget reconciliation process, allowing them to skirt GOP resistance.

"Let me be perfectly clear: there will be no bipartisan USICA as long as Democrats are pursuing a partisan reconciliation bill," McConnell tweeted a month ago, using another name for the bill.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, a confidant of McConnell, sought to downplay the prospect that Manchin and Schumer outmaneuvered Republicans on the so-called chips bill. The Texas Republican was among those who gave it a thumbs-up.

"I always assumed if they had the votes to pass reconciliation, they would do it," Cornyn told Insider on Wednesday. "And there's nothing we could do to stop them."

Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana accused Democrats of double-crossing them. "They sucked Republican votes up like a Hoover Deluxe and then got their votes and then bam, announced this new tax increase," he told Fox News. "We look like a bunch of – well, I'm not going to say what we look like."

The semiconductor bill now heads to the House, where House Republicans are starting to line up in opposition. Rep. Kevin Brady of Texas, the top Republican on the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, said Senate Democrats had been "deceitful" for drawing GOP support on the chips bill, then announcing a broader agreement to revive Biden's agenda.

One prominent House progressive said she could understand if Republicans were angry at Manchin. "We've all been there," Rep. Pramila Jayapal of Washington told reporters.

https://www.businessinsider.com/mcc...RTFl_gPpZ_hO73jJ3S6PjtFbO6yGE_WPukp4w2H4

Crocodile tears.

I don't think either of us are crazy about Manchin. But let's look at how this all went down. Had Manchin voted with Democrats the first time around, the Republicans would have blocked the bill that got the 12 semi conductor plants. I hate corporate welfare. And I don't like it this time any better. But I will say that I consider us having our own ability to produce semi conductors a matter of national security.

It seems none of the Republicans knew there were back room dealings between Shumer and Joe Manchin. As such many of them joined with Democrats on the semi conductor bill because they thought the other bill was dead. Then only hours after Republicans helped pass the semi conductor bill they sprung this on them. And it all went down right about the time I thought the Democrats didn't have any idea how this game is played.

That's what scares me, dems don't remotely know how to play the game in this political atmosphere. Manchin got what he wanted here somehow, the devil is in the details.

It's like I've been saying. Some people are never happy even when they get much of what they want. For some it's an all or nothing proposition.

Here are some of the details....

Schumer-Manchin reconciliation bill has $369 billion to fight climate change — here are the details

The legislation, called the “Inflation Reduction Act of 2022,” provides $369 billion for climate and clean energy provisions, the most aggresive climate investment ever taken by Congress.

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/env...0myM4Y0PjV9uphpoGQXsufgPzkBsEDf69tx0EOXE