https://www.wsj.com/articles/there-are-signs-inflation-may-have-peaked-but-can-it-come-down-fast-enough-11658568604

There Are Signs Inflation May Have Peaked, but Can It Come Down Fast Enough?

On 7/20/2022 at 2:28 AM, DrPhilly said:

Yeah that’s what I thought you meant. Their real hope would be someone other than Trump but that isn’t happening unless he passes away. 

I still think you're wrong there. The history is just not on his side. 

Then again he's still quite popular. His biggest problem was his inability to shut up. I still think it's far more likely he'll attempt to back the winner. 

7 hours ago, lynched1 said:

I still think you're wrong there. The history is just not on his side. 

Then again he's still quite popular. His biggest problem was his inability to shut up. I still think it's far more likely he'll attempt to back the winner. 

His legal troubles all but guarantee he runs. 

19 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

His legal troubles all but guarantee he runs. 

Interesting theory but he'd have to win to questionable benefit. Historical odds aren't in his favor to win.

1 hour ago, lynched1 said:

Interesting theory but he'd have to win to questionable benefit. Historical odds aren't in his favor to win.

If he runs it makes it that more difficult politically to charge him during the entire election process which can delay everything for two years anyway.

8 hours ago, DrPhilly said:

If he runs it makes it that more difficult politically to charge him during the entire election process which can delay everything for two years anyway.

If they charge him that's not much of a benefit. On the other hand a winning backed nominee could be beneficial.

48 minutes ago, lynched1 said:

If they charge him that's not much of a benefit. On the other hand a winning backed nominee could be beneficial.

 

2 hours ago, lynched1 said:

If they charge him that's not much of a benefit. On the other hand a winning backed nominee could be beneficial.

It would be a political risk to charge him. Of course, there is risk with not charging him as well. In any case, he should not be anywhere near the office again. 

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

It would be a political risk to charge him. Of course, there is risk with not charging him as well. In any case, he should not be anywhere near the office again. 

I don't know about that. He's not any worse than anyone else I've seen in DC. He's the one they're going after.

16 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

We're gonna get to 3.75-4 dollars a gallon. Dems are gonna call it a win, and it's going to be the "new normal" to continue to push EV. 

Push EV on a platform that cant handle a heat wave, let alone tens of millions of EV's. 

to quote  Bart Scott... Cant WAIT. 

Yep it will be $3.99 and people will say, "Oh thank God it isn't $5.50 anymore!"

46 minutes ago, lynched1 said:

I don't know about that. He's not any worse than anyone else I've seen in DC. He's the one they're going after.

Yeah, I know what you think  There are lots of people who could do damage if they were POTUS but Trump is in a league of his own.

40 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

Yeah, I know what you think  There are lots of people who could do damage if they were POTUS but Trump is in a league of his own.

Never assume to know what anyone thinks. It's the internet.

Being in a league of his own was the appeal. Trump was the result of all recent presidencies. The status quo.

Now you have an electorate increasingly pulling in two opposite directions.

 

 

17 minutes ago, lynched1 said:

Never assume to know what anyone thinks. It's the internet.

Being in a league of his own was the appeal. Trump was the result of all recent presidencies. The status quo.

Now you have an electorate increasingly pulling in two opposite directions.

 

 

I've read your posts for years.  I know what "lycnhed1" the EMB poster account thinks.  If you're just playing a part in here and you actually think something else IRL then fair enough.

Yeah, I get his appeal.  He took an electorate moving apart and threw gasoline on the situation and lit a MUCH bigger fire.  A massive net negative for the country.  Were there some positives?  Sure but they didn't come close to making up for all the negatives.

22 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:

I've read your posts for years.  I know what "lycnhed1" the EMB poster account thinks.  If you're just playing a part in here and you actually think something else IRL then fair enough.

Yeah, I get his appeal.  He took an electorate moving apart and threw gasoline on the situation and lit a MUCH bigger fire.  A massive net negative for the country.  Were there some positives?  Sure but they didn't come close to making up for all the negatives.

I've been posting here for years. Should be easy enough to sort through the contrariness if one is paying attention. Sometimes I do "play the part". Pure entertainment.

He (Trump) threw as much gasline around as any of his opponents have. He appeared out nowhere? In a vacuum?

His main negatives are his unpopularity with the media and his inability to lay off Twitter. 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, lynched1 said:

I've been posting here for years. Should be easy enough to sort through the contrariness if one is paying attention. Sometimes I do "play the part". Pure entertainment.

He (Trump) threw as much gasline around as any of his opponents have. He appeared out nowhere? In a vacuum?

His main negatives are his unpopularity with the media and his inability to lay off Twitter. 

 

 

 

But not trying to install himself as dictator, that's a feature, not a bug, right?

3 hours ago, we_gotta_believe said:

But not trying to install himself as dictator, that's a feature, not a bug, right?

That's a whole other bag of worms no one wants to address yet. 

1 hour ago, lynched1 said:

That's a whole other bag of worms no one wants to address yet. 

Does anyone know what this is supposed to mean?

10 minutes ago, mayanh8 said:

Does anyone know what this is supposed to mean?

Come on, you mean to tell me you've never addressed a "bag of worms" before, you uncultured swine?

9 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

We're gonna get to 3.75-4 dollars a gallon. Dems are gonna call it a win, and it's going to be the "new normal" to continue to push EV. 

Push EV on a platform that cant handle a heat wave, let alone tens of millions of EV's. 

to quote  Bart Scott... Cant WAIT. 

 

8 hours ago, Eaglesfandan said:

Yep it will be $3.99 and people will say, "Oh thank God it isn't $5.50 anymore!"

I think there is a chance for serious volatility over the next coming few years.

Imagine a scenario like this:

Fed continues to tighten given inflation and with the added benefit of messing with Russia and China.

This gives us a recession, which crushes inflation, so suddenly the Fed goes dovish.

The reality in the material world hasn’t changed through all of this though, so with a bunch of money now flowing, commodities skyrocket even higher than they were before.

It’s a scenario I’m keeping in mind over the medium term.

15 hours ago, Bacarty2 said:

We're gonna get to 3.75-4 dollars a gallon. Dems are gonna call it a win, and it's going to be the "new normal" to continue to push EV. 

Push EV on a platform that cant handle a heat wave, let alone tens of millions of EV's. 

to quote  Bart Scott... Cant WAIT. 

 

 

 

23 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

I am usually wrong about most things.  

Yes.

Anyone have any idea what the new definition of a recession is? The actual definition doesn't seem to be doing it for the current administration. 😮

10 minutes ago, Bacarty2 said:

You're an idiot.

I dont work for bloomberg, I didnt write that article. You see my grammar, you think I'd get hired as a writer. 

Use your brain. 

You believed it enough make a whole fear mongering thread based on an obviously retarded article. I guess bias does that to some people.

And after seeing like three of your posts I have a hard time believing anyone would hire you to do anything.

14 hours ago, lynched1 said:

Anyone have any idea what the new definition of a recession is? The actual definition doesn't seem to be doing it for the current administration. 😮

16 hours ago, lynched1 said:

Anyone have any idea what the new definition of a recession is? The actual definition doesn't seem to be doing it for the current administration. 😮

The current administration doesn't even know the definition of what a woman is and you expect them to be clear on recession?  Come on man.