Reply With QuoteYeah, that?s what the women of the world often accuse their husbands of doing. Only they do not call it false equivalence. Instead they say -Originally Posted by BigFatPie
Thats different!!!
Hall Of Fame
You must be familiar with the term *false equivalence* surely?
It?s interesting to note that the people responsible for the chaos of the last few days also think vaccines and fluoride in water are bad. There is literally no end to their idiocy.
Hall Of Fame
Yeah, that?s what the women of the world often accuse their husbands of doing. Only they do not call it false equivalence. Instead they say -
Thats different!!!
Trialist
The point is, we don't know who's guilty - and we probably never will.
DOGE has dramatically cut the enforcement staff at the SEC and Trump is putting friendly faces in key positions.
The only way the truth will out would be via a private lawsuit as per the one against Musk for his undeclared Twitter interests.
But without SEC intervention, how does anyone know who to sue. Convenient. It's just another facet of the robber-baron-ism.
Hall Of Fame
Well apparently you missed the part where the sleuths on this board already do in fact know. They have determined that Trump clearly engaged in securities fraud on a gargantuan scale. But they are giving Nancy Pelosi the benefit of the doubt because she allegedly ONLY 5 timed her money in 11 years.
Trialist
5 times in 11 years IS piss poor if you supposedly have an unfair advantage. It's 16pct p.a. There are fund managers doing it the hard way that can beat that.
Personally I don't think it's Trump himself making the trades. I don't give him credit for knowing what all the buttons do.
Hall Of Fame
Surely if it were any other OECD nation they would both be investigated.
Hall Of Fame
Well....after years of stagnation and a small group of senators trying hopelessly to limit and ban the ability for people receiving SNAP (government food assistance) to buy unhealthy food, it now looks like there is some traction with Bobby Kennedy Junior backing the group.
Apparently, nearly 10% of ALL purchases with SNAP credits go on carbonated drinks. It is seen by many as perverse that the US taxpayer is funding the purchases for those who also receive state funding to assist with health issues amounting from, obesity, heart disease and type 2 diabetes - all directly connected to their diets.
The soft drink lobby have many 'supportive' senators and why wouldn't you when you are projecting to get US$60 billion from SNAP fizzy drink sales over the next 10 years?
Of course there are many Republican senators as well as most of the Democrat ones who are against restricting what recipients can buy with their SNAP credits, but it's looking like the tide is turning. Democrats are breaking ranks and joining the crusade to wean Americans off this addiction.
It's something that should be in place in the rest of the world, where people receive a taxpayer benefit that is being misspent.
https://www.newsweek.com/robert-f-ke...unches-2057403
Hall Of Fame
What a lot are missing with Trump's latest announcement is that the tariffs are STILL in place. They are just paused for 90 days.
There's very little comment on here about how many governments approached the US to discuss what THEY could do to prevent the US from applying the tariffs. The US didn't approach them.
I follow Ben Shapiro, who could widely be held as a Trump supporter (although in 2016 he voted against him). I follow his podcasts and he is 100% against Trump with regards to tariffs and Trump's take on the Ukraine.
However, it has been talked about that Shapiro and many family members would stand to lose a lot of money with the stock market dropping. This isn't rare in the US as many people, from all walks of life, have stock market investments - over 60%, whereas the UK it is only at 26%.
There is no shortage of conspiracy theorists who state that Trump has manufactured this to make a fortune on the fluctuation. There's no proof, in fact it's more likely that the value in his own businesses fell just as quickly as everybody else's, so that kind of discounts that one, unless he's some kind of financial masochist.
It also affects the US's ability to borrow on the world financial market, which won't help his 'friends' either if that was the case.
The Chicken Littlers have pointed out all the negative aspects of the US tariffs, however, they conveniently leave out the positive sides.
The US has shown that at the flick of a pen, then can bring nearly all foreign governments to the negotiating table. The US is definitely not the economic power it once was in the 1950's and 1960's, but for influence, the US no longer has to send it's young men and women to the front line to fight and die for causes that are set by the establishment, but have no benefit for those dying.
It has also shown that China can't bully its trade partners and align them up against the US. Many have already rejected China's overtures. Seemingly again finding their 'balls' now that the US has stood up.
It's very interesting times and makes everything much more exciting, if we just take a breath, step back and let those in power make the decisions and get on with our lives.
Hall Of Fame
This is the correct answer. Finally some consistency.
Hall Of Fame
Not when you're well into retirement mostly funded out of investments in the market such as ISAs and SIPPs carefully built up over 30 years as we were encouraged to do.
Whatever the outcome of these moves the USA has seriously damaged its trust on the International stage in any sphere of operation.
Posting Permissions