gatomontes99

Cite the section of the Constitution that says they can't.

Judges cannot block funding, or lack thereof, in a bill. This judge should be removed from office. If she cant follow the law she can't be a judge.

Do you think you should be calling me an idıot when you cite a problem that happened in the first year of this policy?

Up until 2007, the Federal Reserve was nothing more than a place banks had to keep cash to cover 10% of their deposits. The other 90% could go out in loans, treasury bonds, etc. It was a mandated 10%. Up until 2007, they got no interest for it. After 2007, the Federal Reserve paid out interest. Now, they are paying about $160B in interest per year of tax payer money. Ted Cruz wants to eliminate that: https://m.economictimes.com/markets/stocks/news/market-stability-threat-cruz-taps-trump-gop-allies-to-push-fed-overhaul/cruzs-controversial-proposal/slideshow/121822358.cms Cruz's controversial proposal Senator Ted Cruz is pushing a plan to end the Federal Reserve’s authority to pay banks interest on reserves. He claims this would save the U.S. government over $1 trillion. Cruz has discussed the idea with Donald Trump and Republican colleagues, emphasizing that half of the interest is paid to foreign banks—something he sees as senseless. (Source: Reuters) ‐--------------‐---------------- Here is the podcast where he talks about it towards the end: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/dems-poll-numbers-plummet-plus-how-to-save-%241trill/id1495601614?i=1000719464909 This will save the tax payers $1.6T over 10 years. It will put money back into the economy, instead of sitting in a vault. It will prevent us from funding foreign banks. The end result is a win, win, win for America. Yet, somehow this is contreversial.

Well, that was absolutely awful testimony. This guy has never worked for a business. Let's say you owned a has station and had a 10,000 gallon tank. Im going to ignore operating costs, taxes, etc for the sake of simplicity and illustrating the principle here. And I'll use round numbers for simple math. So, let's say your supplier sells you gas at $2 per gallon. So it costs you $20,000 to fill the tank. If you sell the gas at $3 per gallon, your revenue is $30,000 and your profit ($30,000 - $20,000) is $10,000. At some point, your supplier say that the next tank will cost you $3 per gallon. If you don't change your pricing you'll have just enough money to cover the next tank. Which means you wont have any money left over. You will have to spend profit to stay open. So you change your price to $4 per gallon. You make $40,000 on the tank. Your profit is $20,000 because that gas had only cost you $20,000. When you buy the next tank at $3 per gallon, you are left with $10,000. To you, your profits are the same. But, on your books, your profits are up 100%. So, what really happened to corporations during the Biden inflation era? They had "record profits" and yet, somehow they lost cash: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/QFR201INFUSNO# We can see the spik from the closures in 2020. They weren't paying employees and residual sales came in. Then, when they reopened and inflation spiked, their cash reserves dropped considerably while "making record profits". Reich is cherry picking data. He wants to make the claim that corporations are evil and greedy because they charged replacement costs to remain solvent. It is a damnable lie to claim "record profits" while corporations were losing cash.

Brandon is usually pretty good. Sometimes he's great. But this was another level.

Its a fantasy world to say that traveling to Scotland to sign a massive deal os waste just because he played some golf. Its a fantasy world to think that BRICS can succeed. You love in a fantasy world.

Just because, in your fantasy world, you want this to be true doesn't mean we have to participate. This is the most consequential 6 months + of any peace time presidency in our history.

You must not have any bones, because I've never seen anyone so flexible to that they twist themselves into that many knots. Every single president takes breaks at resorts, etc. And most of that number you put in the estimate is his security detail that gets paid either way.

As more comes out about the deal: $1.3T in new investments in the US 15% tariff on all EU imports Opened the market to US made cars and eliminated tariffs on those cars And the big one: EU will buy US LNG in lieu of Russian gas. That could help end the war in Ukraine.

That's not fraud or waste. FFS, he signed a trade deal worth $1.3T that got the EU to buy American LNG in lieu of Russian gas while raising tariffs on EU imports and opening up their market to US made cars and eliminating tariffs on saod cars. That is worth a few million bucks.

Speaking from experience?

The fascists, dictator, Hitler reincarnate needs an appropriate and devastating response. Que Rashida Tlaib! https://www.facebook.com/regjoeshow/videos/1493986342016625/?mibextid=rS40aB7S9Ucbxw6v The Hitler of America is no more! https://www.instagram.com/p/DMiZHqEsWWS/

Dictators usually take over the media and force them to spew propaganda. Trump literally cut ties with government funded media. Now he's a dictator for cutting the strings that allowed him to manipulate PBS and NPR had he so desired.

Wtf?

The regulations being relaxed is what helps.

What, in your fantasy world, is the conflict? Maybe you actually know there isn't a conflict of interest. Maybe that's why you try to frame something that is perfectly fine as clearly a problem and shame those that disagree before they have a chance to say anything. Maybe, on some level, you recognize your own crazy.

BBC The deal sets the tariff rate to 15% and requires the EU to accept US automobile standards.

I didnt say they brought it up. But all of a sudden, they decided that the files must come out and that they must be bad for Trump. They didnt have some new revelation. They wanted a distraction and what better distraction than something part of his base is pushing for? It helps their cause that there are victims' rights that have to be considered here as well. They don't need to get anything from this other than a distraction from the Obama scandal.

Not even sure what you are saying.

So? If it was a bad marriage, she would ha said that she left him for that and to go find herself. Instead, the entire article is about her needs and her only motivation seems to be her needs. If she didnt want to be seen as selfish, she should have at least mentioned some motivation other than self desire. That was the thesis of my OP. Who said that? Uh huh. She made it everyone's business. Yes. They are family. You move near them or they move near you if needed. That is what normal people do.

Uh huh. That's why liberals just all of a sudden decided the Epstein files where a big deal even though Biden had 4 years to do something about it? The case isn't flimsy when the documents that came out where classified, official, archived documents. The question as to why they came out now and not then is answered by who is in the office. The biggest regret Trump had about his first term was his staff. He likes this staff.

I know she omitted it. That means she doesn't consider it important. She framed the story as if she just cut ties and ran. No one said she should give up the right to live her own life. But, when you form relationships and have a family, it should be your decision to be there for them. You are asserting that she should be selfish. I don't agree with that.

If you talked to them, you sought advice. Maybe it wasn't "permission" but you at least discussed it. From the way this article is framed, that didn't happen. She ran away. As she is bragging about how great it is to ditch your family and do your own thing, she's definitely promoting it.

Really? Did you not talk to your parents about big choices you made? I know I did. Not when she puts it out there like she's some example to be followed.