• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

The Race For 2024

It is also worth noting that many of these "I remember the good old days" folks are retired, living off their 401ks, and while they see their grocery and gas bill going up, have no idea what it's like for a Gen Z person trying to get by.
Well, maybe Gen Z would have had an easier time of it were they not so enamored of "quiet quitting" in the aftermath of the Pandemic largess.
That's not what "quiet quitting" is -- it's doing only the work that's specified in one's job description. Burning oneself out with workaholism without getting a big bonus for doing that doesn't seem like something worth doing to these people.

As to "pandemic largesse", only a right-winger could think that it's some enormous amount of money.
I remember seeing a cartoon back in the 80s where a woman in an upscale singles bar asks the guy hitting on her "look, are you making $40,000 a year or am I wasting my time with you?"
Times have changed.
The amounts have changed, but the gold diggers are sadly still with us.
If women are supposed to be economically dependent on men, then one should not complain about a woman who wants a good deal.
 
Libertarians select gay, Antifa-loving, Trump-hating, vaccine mandate-supporting, open borders enthusiast as their presidential candidate
Oliver, who describes himself as "armed and gay" has a history of taking radically left-wing positions.


The Libertarian Party has selected their preferred presidential candidate after a tumultuous weekend that saw speeches from both RFK Jr. and leading GOP candidate and former president Donald Trump. The nominee is none other than Chase Oliver, the Antifa-loving, Drag Queen Story Hour-backing, vaccine mandate supporting, open border enthusiast who hates Trump. Oliver, who describes himself as "armed and gay" has a history of taking radically left-wing positions.
 
RFK Jr. called out as “spoiler candidate” in CONTENTIOUS debate - YouTube - interview by Brian Tyler Cohen

RFK Jr. also said that there are lots of abortions late in pregnancy - he seems to have been listening to too many anti-abortionists.

On vaccines, he insisted that he is very concerned about their safety. But has he ever encountered a vaccine that he considers safe?

BTC mentioned that when in American Samoa they stopped vaccinating for measles, the measles rate went up a lot. But RFK Jr. claimed that it was due to a bad batch of vaccine. He seemed to think that COVID-19 vaccines cause COVID-19 deaths, judging from what he claimed was a correlation. He also claimed that red states vs. blue states have confounding factors like greater average age and obesity rates. But epidemiologists are usually careful about confounding factors.
 
Polymarket now shows Trump 56%, Biden 37% to win in November. Betfair shows 53% vs 35%.

This certainly does seem ridiculous. Trump is charged with 90+ felonies, is a traitor allied with Russia and the other worst geopolitical players; plans on fascist rule; and is a malignant narcissist. I am tempted to bet against this incontinent semi-literate cretin -- the loss of a fortune would seem inconsequential compared with the gloom and grief if this horrid creature wins.

And yet, Trump really is likely to win! Consult Thom Hartmann's free newsletter. Does this link work?
You're assuming an honest election.
Am I? :confused: :confused2:
In fact I would bet on a DIS-honest election, but the prediction markets have no tickets for sale on that outcome.
What I'm saying is that I think the betting is looking at the expected outcome, not how people actually feel. They're considering a stolen election a possibility.
 
There was no good answer. The loose fiscal policy was to keep us out of deflation.
Fiscal stimulus was necessary, yes. The problem is that the Biden administration kept it going too long, long after the economy reopened, which contributed to inflation.
Extended unemployment (which paid better than many jobs and contributed to staffing shortages) did not end until September 2021 for example. Fourth stimulus checks went out in 2022. And so on.
Stimulus checks would have almost no effect on employment.

And is there a place you can make more on unemployment than working in the job that you became unemployed from?! My one experience with unemployment (the housing collapse blew up my employer) the checks were a fraction of your previous income, capped at a certain maximum. No way to make more on unemployment than your previous job. You could make more on unemployment than some jobs.

Note, also, that there's another factor at work--Covid. The balance between jobs and workers is sensitive the small portion of the labor force that was taken out by Covid has caused a fairly substantial increase in wages for many positions. And that drives up the cost of whatever they produce. Looks the same as inflation but it's driven by different factors. It's the usual outcome of sufficiently deadly pandemics.
I do not think COVID was deadly enough for that effect, especially since ~80% of COVID deaths were in the >65 age cohort.
2% of Americans have "a lot" of impairment of their daily life from Long Covid. I would presume most of these people are not able to work. And, unlike death, that isn't so skewed towards the elderly. The sudden snap in the balance between workers and employers didn't change because of the stimulus money. It changed because of the workforce. Also, there were a lot of people who were near retirement, saw their jobs either vanish or become dangerous and chose to push retirement forwards a few years. That also took a bite out of the labor force.
 
Mm, yeah.
I got that from adding up all the monthly percentages for the 4 years of Rump.
That's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Inflation rates are rates of change, not unlike speed. Speed is given in miles per hour (for example) even if you do not move for the whole hour. You just divide by the actual time to get the speed. Same with interest rates. Even when monthly rates are published, they are on a "per year" basis.

There is another reason why you can't just add them up, even if you were to multiply them by 1/12. Interest rates are given as a percentage. That means, unlike speed, it is a relative measure, not an absolute one. And if for example in January we have 3% inflation, that is 3%/12 or 0.25% increase in prices. The next month's inflation is then relative to that increased value, not the original. That is the basis of exponential growth and compound interest.
compound_intererest_traj.png

So i'm confused. Just what is 'cumulative inflation'? If not the total.
I hope I cleared it up a bit.

Best way to get cumulative inflation is to use an inflation calculator like the one at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

If I plug in 1/2017 and 1/2021 as start and end points, I get 7.7% cumulative inflation. If I put in 1/2021 and 1/2024 (first three years of Biden) I get 17.9% despite it being a shorter time.
 
"wholly made up case about the 85% cumulative inflation under Trump."
Mm, yeah.
I got that from adding up all the monthly percentages for the 4 years of Rump.
I have since added up the monthly percentages for Biden.
It too is in the high double digits.
So i'm confused. Just what is 'cumulative inflation'? If not the total.
Your method is going to produce an answer 12x the real value because the monthly rates are annualized values.

(And, technically, simply adding them doesn't produce the right answer anyway. The values involved are low enough that the deviation will be fairly minor, but doing it the easy way can really bite you in the butt if you look at too much. 6% for 12 years = 100%.)
 
There is another reason why you can't just add them up, even if you were to multiply them by 1/12. Interest rates are given as a percentage. That means, unlike speed, it is a relative measure, not an absolute one. And if for example in January we have 3% inflation, that is 3%/12 or 0.25% increase in prices. The next month's inflation is then relative to that increased value, not the original. That is the basis of exponential growth and compound interest.
The deviation in this case is fairly minor. His error was in not realizing the rates were annualized.
 
Stimulus checks would have almost no effect on employment.
No, but they did contribute to the phenomenon of more money (due to government spending) in the economy, which contributed to the inflation.
And is there a place you can make more on unemployment than working in the job that you became unemployed from?! My one experience with unemployment (the housing collapse blew up my employer) the checks were a fraction of your previous income, capped at a certain maximum.
That is normal unemployment. The extended unemployment that was started during the Pandemic but did not fully end until September 2021. It not only extended eligibility for unemployment benefits but greatly increased the amount that was paid out. The program provided additional $600/week initially and was later reduced to $300/week. $600/week is the equivalent of $15/h working full time, and even the later reduced amount is $7.50/h in addition to regular unemployment benefits and for doing no work.
That obviously messed with the labor market.

No way to make more on unemployment than your previous job. You could make more on unemployment than some jobs.
Again, not normally, but since the added Pandemic unemployment benefits were a fixed dollar amount and not a percentage of previous earnings, you could definitely make more than at your previous job.
Now, some quick and bold action was required because of how disruptive the Pandemic was, but these benefits lasted too long. Economy started to reopen by Summer 2020, and certainly by that Fall.

2% of Americans have "a lot" of impairment of their daily life from Long Covid. I would presume most of these people are not able to work. And, unlike death, that isn't so skewed towards the elderly. The sudden snap in the balance between workers and employers didn't change because of the stimulus money. It changed because of the workforce. Also, there were a lot of people who were near retirement, saw their jobs either vanish or become dangerous and chose to push retirement forwards a few years. That also took a bite out of the labor force.
I don't know about how big an impact long COVID had but older workers retiring earlier did definitely play a big role, I agree with you there.
 
Last edited:
That's not what "quiet quitting" is -- it's doing only the work that's specified in one's job description.
It means doing the absolute minimum to not get fired. Sometimes it backfires and it certainly instills a slacker attitude.
59a44aef-9e25-4be7-bd5e-09f1bdf65473_text.gif


As to "pandemic largesse", only a right-winger could think that it's some enormous amount of money.
Only a left-winger would think that it is not an enormous amount of money.
The combined cost of the stimulus checks, the extended unemployment benefits (extra $600/week in 2020, $300/week in 2021, plus an extension in eligibility period and no work search requirements), expanded child tax credit ($300-$360 per child per month) and the pause on student loan repayments add up to a lot of money.
The stimlus checks were ~$800G and the extra unemployment was $700Gl. Total assistance to "individuals and families" amounted to $1.8T.
Where $5 Trillion in Pandemic Stimulus Money Went
In what universe is that not "some enormous amount of money"?
If women are supposed to be economically dependent on men, then one should not complain about a woman who wants a good deal.
Who says they are supposed to be economically dependent on men?
But many women want it both ways. Ability to earn money for themselves, but still expect men to pay for their wants too.
 
The Libertarian Party has selected their preferred presidential candidate after a tumultuous weekend that saw speeches from both RFK Jr. and leading GOP candidate and former president Donald Trump. The nominee is none other than Chase Oliver, the Antifa-loving, Drag Queen Story Hour-backing, vaccine mandate supporting, open border enthusiast who hates Trump. Oliver, who describes himself as "armed and gay" has a history of taking radically left-wing positions.
I remember that guy. He ran for Senate in Georgia a few years ago.

Minor party candidates for major positions in the US are a waste of time and can only be spoilers in most cases.
Georgia is an exception though, as we require a runoff if no candidate is >50%. Oliver forced Warnock and Walker into a runoff in 2022.
 
Last edited:
Polymarket now shows Trump 56%, Biden 37% to win in November. Betfair shows 53% vs 35%.
What I'm saying is that I think the betting is looking at the expected outcome, not how people actually feel. They're considering a stolen election a possibility.
These sites have changed the rules since 2020. Then it was just the electoral-vote counts predicted soon after the November election. They want to pay off winning tickets ASAP. (In the olden days, this was almost always soon after Election Day.)

Betfair has expanded its rule, adding for example
Betfair said:
. . . This market will be settled once both the projected winner is announced by the Associated Press and the losing candidate concedes. If the losing candidate does not concede, or if there is any uncertainty around the result (for instance, caused by recounts and/or potential legal challenges), then the market will be settled on the winner decided by Congress, on the date on which the Electoral College votes are counted in a joint session of Congress.
. . .
Polymarket is even more cautious, requiring unanimity of three news sources including Fox, and, if controversy remains, postponing settlement to see who is actually inaugurated on Inauguration Day!
 
It is also worth noting that many of these "I remember the good old days" folks are retired, living off their 401ks, and while they see their grocery and gas bill going up, have no idea what it's like for a Gen Z person trying to get by.
Well, maybe Gen Z would have had an easier time of it were they not so enamored of "quiet quitting" in the aftermath of the Pandemic largess.
That's not what "quiet quitting" is -- it's doing only the work that's specified in one's job description. Burning oneself out with workaholism without getting a big bonus for doing that doesn't seem like something worth doing to these people.

As to "pandemic largesse", only a right-winger could think that it's some enormous amount of money.
I remember seeing a cartoon back in the 80s where a woman in an upscale singles bar asks the guy hitting on her "look, are you making $40,000 a year or am I wasting my time with you?"
Times have changed.
The amounts have changed, but the gold diggers are sadly still with us.
If women are supposed to be economically dependent on men, then one should not complain about a woman who wants a good deal.
And leave it to Derec to take a reference used to show "times have changed" and twist it into "women are bitches, amirite?"
 
Polymarket now shows Trump 56%, Biden 37% to win in November. Betfair shows 53% vs 35%.
What I'm saying is that I think the betting is looking at the expected outcome, not how people actually feel. They're considering a stolen election a possibility.
These sites have changed the rules since 2020. Then it was just the electoral-vote counts predicted soon after the November election. They want to pay off winning tickets ASAP. (In the olden days, this was almost always soon after Election Day.)
No, I mean the bettors are expecting dirty tricks.
 
Is there a rule that we should only respond to posts we disagree with? If we agree with a poster, must we wait until a third party diagrees, then disagree with him?

Polymarket now shows Trump 56%, Biden 37% to win in November. Betfair shows 53% vs 35%.
What I'm saying is that I think the betting is looking at the expected outcome, not how people actually feel. They're considering a stolen election a possibility.
These sites have changed the rules since 2020. Then it was just the electoral-vote counts predicted soon after the November election. They want to pay off winning tickets ASAP. (In the olden days, this was almost always soon after Election Day.)
. . . [Polymarket is even more cautious, requiring unanimity of three news sources including Fox, and, if controversy remains, postponing settlement to see who is actually inaugurated on Inauguration Day!]
No, I mean the bettors are expecting dirty tricks.

Was " No" a typo for "Yes"? :cool:

(You deleted the part of my quote that made it clear I was agreeing with you.)
 
We can argue about how much of it was Trump's fault, but the average voter has the memory of a goldfish. If Biden doesn't find a way to get ahead of this then Trump will hammer him for it. The average voter sees what they see at the grocery store and the gas pump. How will Biden convince them to trust him instead of their lying eyes?
Time. Becoming used to it is generally why most politics is what happened yesterday. Except for Dobbs, which still echoes. W beat Kerry, and his numbers weren't good either and Iraq was going south.
Mm, yeah.
I got that from adding up all the monthly percentages for the 4 years of Rump.
That's not how it works. That's not how any of it works.

Inflation rates are rates of change, not unlike speed. Speed is given in miles per hour (for example) even if you do not move for the whole hour. You just divide by the actual time to get the speed. Same with interest rates. Even when monthly rates are published, they are on a "per year" basis.

There is another reason why you can't just add them up, even if you were to multiply them by 1/12. Interest rates are given as a percentage. That means, unlike speed, it is a relative measure, not an absolute one. And if for example in January we have 3% inflation, that is 3%/12 or 0.25% increase in prices. The next month's inflation is then relative to that increased value, not the original. That is the basis of exponential growth and compound interest.
compound_intererest_traj.png

So i'm confused. Just what is 'cumulative inflation'? If not the total.
I hope I cleared it up a bit.

Best way to get cumulative inflation is to use an inflation calculator like the one at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

If I plug in 1/2017 and 1/2021 as start and end points, I get 7.7% cumulative inflation. If I put in 1/2021 and 1/2024 (first three years of Biden) I get 17.9% despite it being a shorter time.
That's funny, because for me (anecdotally), I was paying for inflation to replace carpet and a roof before inflation was permeating the economy... because of the pandemic's impact on the supply chain. Most of the globe felt it. The US was a little higher, but blaming stimulus checks? No, it was the inflation for production which made prices go up, which made wages go up to follow. That made the inflation more widespread.
 
Today on "Reasons not to panic", I present this from Electoral-Vote.com. It isn't a matter that the Democrats are spending more, it is that they are spending more in all places that matter most. Again like in 2020, they aren't neglecting the Northern Wall., all the while forcing spending by Trump allies in the South. While Trump has a capacity to permeate the media for free, campaign ads can be much more controlled on message. Also, the Biden campaign hit the ground running in spending. One thing that W did back in '04 was control the narrative (and pay a bunch of Vets to lie about Kerry). They spent, they spent early. Control the narrative and that makes the job a lot easier.

You'll notice no Campaign spending on ads by Trump. One reason? The narcissistic fuck put Lara Trump in charge of the RNC, and he is also bleeding money to lawyers for his court cases. Trump proved in '16 that he could be outspent and still win... barely. I think some right-wingers mistake the burn that left in the Dems to never let something like that ever happen again.
 
Is there a rule that we should only respond to posts we disagree with? If we agree with a poster, must we wait until a third party diagrees, then disagree with him?

Polymarket now shows Trump 56%, Biden 37% to win in November. Betfair shows 53% vs 35%.
What I'm saying is that I think the betting is looking at the expected outcome, not how people actually feel. They're considering a stolen election a possibility.
These sites have changed the rules since 2020. Then it was just the electoral-vote counts predicted soon after the November election. They want to pay off winning tickets ASAP. (In the olden days, this was almost always soon after Election Day.)
. . . [Polymarket is even more cautious, requiring unanimity of three news sources including Fox, and, if controversy remains, postponing settlement to see who is actually inaugurated on Inauguration Day!]
No, I mean the bettors are expecting dirty tricks.

Was " No" a typo for "Yes"? :cool:

(You deleted the part of my quote that made it clear I was agreeing with you.)
Means I misunderstood.

I was thinking more along the lines of purging rolls etc rather than a variation on 1/6.
 
Back
Top Bottom