It's a matter of Bidenomics!

This is a perfect example... the guy was happier with the smaller trump check because trump signed it...

 

Yap, I will give Biden credit for his handling of the "de-Globalization pivot" started by Donny. Trump called it before Covid and Ukraine II. Continuing it with the Old Europey alliance hand in hand is a masterstroke of diplomacy. Nato is slowly gettting their **** together (that fat kid who drank diet coke for diets is now quitting all soda!) while Japan is spending defense/GDP closer to NATO standards.

There's still caution on data that causes exuberance in the stock market and asset classes as what we're witnessing right now. I won't give him full credit until early 2025. I'm not saying that people won't be making shitton of money next year, but it's not a general feeling that voters are willing to admit...which reflects a K shaped economy through asset classes (those who own homes and stocks feel and act rich, but those that don't...).

Maybe the actual time difference is between a year rather than a year and a half.
Queue of waiting ships down to June levels, 37% off late July highs

October 14, 2022​

Anyhow, price difference for imported goods were likely maintained by price gouging and replenishing of exhausted covid stocks.

You mentioned a yo-yo effect, the middle part is a bullwhip effect where retailers over order in order to meet demand. But if demand fizzled from oversupply, then prices would crater. We didn't really see that happen in large ticket items like new 70k+ cars or used cars. Retailers like Target took some hits but it wasn't a "let's make a fake holiday type of firesale" to reduce inventories.

 

Thank you for at least reading and acknowledging the entirety of the reply rather than cherry picking parts and pretending one opinion or fact negates the whole.

You mentioned you're a chatbot user, so it's now very easy to break down. For example:

It seems like Claude assumes I'm making the point that "Deficits/Debt don't matter" but I've been claiming the opposite in older topics (because 120% to GDP is far more serious than 80% years before), and I'm repeating that oft quoted claim on here. There's a gap in understanding the intended nuance of the reply, which is generally fair for all people well. It's why we debate on here and real life, and have unspoken rules to engage.

Obviously prompting can reflect biases or expectations. Your prompts and style can return different results, but it's a clear leap from you earnestly taking an hour or two googling words/phrases that flew over your head then combining it altogether for your own perspective in order to fully engage or reply.

And it's hella better engaging with someone continuously harranging you to prove them wrong with their half assed googles rather than understanding why you made the post in the first place.

 

I don't think you even know who was, what Stockman advocated, or even what he wrote in the article you quoted.

You just projected what you normally accuse me of (the cutting-paste) then plastered his name to make a silly point that wasn't even necessary.

So you took all of that and came back with a one-liner partisan gotcha.

Telling.

Okay.

You posted an old balance sheet without the negative balances so i let you run with it despite me continuing to say this years yuge losses will be the first time for the Fed.

This is the original thread for whoever cares.

Re: your podunk definition of deferred losses from accountingtools.com (is "accounting tool" you by the way??)

 

I don't like the sound of that.

 

You hate the sound of workers being empowered. Cool story man

 

It is massive benefit to large corporations that are more likely to use unionized labor.

 

It's also a giveaway of taxpayer money to the unions. I wonder who the unions supported in 2020.

 

Bidenomics drawing these boys in by the thousands.

 

Processed does not mean accepted but you know this and play stupid cuz you're too dumb to understand the rules in place. Whoever does not have DHS appointments or prior authorization will be deported. They deported close to 200k just in last few months

Conservatives are so utterly stupid its just baffling.

 

So you think they are turning these folks around this week? Smh

 

The 9th circuit has already found that the deportations biden was doing was legal as long they have do a original screening. biden is negotiating right now in senate legislation where CBP officals can deport folks BEFORE an assylm screenings. @Kim this would be a game changer cuz then you don't need to do any screening and deport them right away

As Kim has said numerous times what's needed is the ability of CBP officers to deport folks without the original screen. The issue at the border is not enough cbp officals are there to do original screen which hence leads to mass detentions and issues of gatherings like this in video.

Right now you can only deport people AFTER a original screen. Biden is changing that right now. I agree with biden. We need to deport people if they come to border. If they want to come for assylm apply in Mexico

 

Anyone with eyes can read I wrote in your reply, the articles, and responses I provided. That you can't concede anything is really you needing to Deal With It.

Feel lucky I'm wasting time on you so the work is done whenever you bring this up yet again. I know everyone else reading this is.

Did you?

Nowhere in the 2021 Balance Sheet references you provided anything of a deferred loss. You become an expert of it months later ofc.

Whereas in the Q1 2023 balance sheet:

The Federal Reserve System had an estimated consolidated net income of about $58 billion over 2022. Given the significant increases in policy rates in response to sustained inflation pressures, the Federal Reserve's interest expenses have risen considerably, and, as a result, net income turned negative in September.2 Because the Federal Reserve no longer has positive net income to remit to the Treasury Department, as of February 2023, the Federal Reserve's balance sheet now reports a deferred asset of about $36 billion. The deferred asset is equal to the cumulative shortfall of net income and represents the amount of future net income that will need to be realized before remittances to the Treasury resume.
​

So not only did you think I was bullshitting you, it "just happens" that I was lucky to provide balance sheets of operating losses by the Fed and on those same sheets mentioned how would the losses would be recorded as a deferred asset. And when I mentioned that future quarters of wrecked balance sheets via operating losses "doesn't count", it's not because I didn't know the Fed can manage the shortfall with a magic marker that no other entity has.

That all adds up!

Great job bringing up a months old BS issue and declaring victory by "educating me".

P.S. There is no formal Fed charter, but you already know that now.

 

Strange since large companies are fighting the hardest against them?

 

Of course they do, because they actually have to deal with it. Smaller companies generally don't have to worry about it. Only small company "organized labor" I've ever dealt with was actually just a system to deny equal benefits to those employees.

 

Yo-yo wasn't a good term. Basically, demand skyrocketed at the same time as supply was seriously restrained. That pushed prices up fast. The supply side is settling down (though not completely yet in some sectors), and the demand has softened quite a bit. A sawtooth pattern with uneven peaks and valleys is probably a better description—with those peaks and valleys getting closer to the center or toward more of a smoother and smaller sine wave (more like a typical economy).