All_Pro_Bills

Not a big KISS fan either but I attended a concert which was part of the last of a string of farewell tours. It was a good show. Played their hits, performed their antics, and lots of flames shooting up into the area giving off a lot of heat you could feel. Going onto the concourse to the rest room and concessions provided some entertainment seeing numerous fans dressed in KISS attire via the full body amour look. Always amazing people can be so passionate about such things. But nothing like the old days when the show ended and the lights went on to reveal the entire arena filled with pot smoke! Still in those days no metal detectors, bag searches, or pat downs were needed. While the atmosphere was a little crazy it was still generally civil.

Russia has eliminated the use of the US dollar in Central Bank reserves and has established bi-lateral currency arrangements with partners such as China and India. And has pretty much written off the frozen assets held in the US and European banking systems. So direct sanctions have little effect on them domestically. From all the bluster it sounds like the idea is putting pressure on India which is importing a lot of Russian oil. Using some and reselling the rest out the back door at a profit. How effective those sanction would be is TBD. Then of course there's China.

Sounds like a reasonable approach. Regards..

Easier said than done. But I'm willing to listen to the details of your plan. More sanctions? Sanctions against they're trading partners? Something else?

Is it really?

I think the distinction between those previous administrations and Trump is the city of Washington used to have a mayor, prosecutors, and law enforcement motivated to address crime. They acted in a professional manner, saw it as the job, and they did it to the best of their ability. Now Democrats have adopted a soft on crime policy approach in major cities, including Washington. Its not that they don't know how to address the problem, they just don't want to do anything about it. You see stories where some chronic criminal gets arrested assaulting some 80 year old walking down the street and its disclosed the guy was arrested 10 times in a year for the same crime and he's release on zero bail and the DA refuses to prosecute. On top of it, anyone that lifts a finger to defend themselves against thugs and on the loose mental patients received more scrutiny from the local DA then the low life that attacked them. How in the world do Democrats see this as a winning strategy? How can anyone be that stupid? Maybe its not stupidity but instead Rule Number One, anything Trump is for we need to be against regardless of all other factors. Now who's in a cult?

Just like that? Tell Putin that if he doesn't back down the US will enter the war? And just go back to your place in the world order where we are empowered to dictate to you what you can and cannot do? And you obey. That tough guy approach might work with the administration at Harvard but its quite likely it won't against Russia. Or China that is waiting on-deck to take Taiwan at a moment the US is occupied elsewhere.

As Russia will never accept those terms without previously stated security guarantees a war of attrition goes on where the math favors Russia absent any direct intervention by Europe or America. My dad used to lead lots of negotiations. Labor agreements, contracts, that kind of stuff. He said you need to do at least three things going in. 1) understand what you want out of the final deal and more importantly what the other guy wants. 2) defend your vested interests but be willing to concede points that you find non-critical or unimportant that the other side finds essential to the agreement 3) don't expect the other guy to agree to demands you make that you're in no position to make. You did #3. Russia leaves. Ukraine continues to lose soldiers and territory over time as the Russians slowly grind forward and the longer they wait the more territory they stand to lose. More weapons won't reverse this trend. @sherpa already explained this above no deal scenario.

Like I said 4 1/2 years of silence.

And there it is. An objective, sane, rational assessment of the situation from the perspective of both sides of the conflict. Kudos.

What agreed to terms and conditions do you believe will end this conflict? Let's start with the Elephant in the room. Russia wants to keep occupied Donbas and Crimea. Ukraine is adamant about not ceding any territory. Who blinks and what other concessions and considerations do they receive in return for blinking?

Over 4 1/2 years covering two administrations and still no release of the files and judges denying the current administration's request to unseal Grand Jury testimony because "there's nothing significant" in the testimony. Then release it.

This is what Liberals call a diverse and inclusive multi-cultural community. Something that should be celebrated. Sane and rational people will immediately see a problem with that delusion but the political Left won't and therein lies the problem.

So a demonstrable failure of de-fund the police policy and recognition there's a need for more uniformed patrol units on the streets.

Are you suggesting something needs to be done about crime?

It's like an old Henny Youngman joke. Guy goes to the doctor and gets bad news. The doc gives him six months to live. Patient says I've got bad news for you doc. I won't have the money in six month to pay your bill. Doc says okay. Then I'll give you an extra six months to live and make it 12!

This guy's definition is almost correct although his conclusion is wrong. Stagflation is inflation with no or negative economic growth. Unemployment is secondary and still low. And growth in Q2 is not negative nor are any GDP forecasts for the next several quarters predicting a negative print. So the contention we are currently in a stagflation environment is invalid.

Nor should we want to be like Haiti.

I'd be interested in how anyone could design a social policy to prevent homelessness. Because there are lots of causes, some chronic and some circumstantial. A person could be homeless because of a divorce, domestic abuse, death of a spouse, bankruptcy, loss of a job, chronic drug or alcohol addiction. Or they could simply have made the decision to "drop out" of society and deal with the consequences of the decision. I'm not a fan of the idea that pushing people out of the neighborhood solves the problem because they still have to go somewhere else. And I don't think a more "robust welfare net" is the answer. Its a do more of what's not working until it works type of solution. I'm not against the idea of helping people but from my experience of helping people it can go one of two ways. They're motivated to get back on their feet and use the support and financial assistance provided as a catalyst for them getting their life on track. Or, they become comfortable with the financial and other types of assistance and chose to spend their time doing nothing much to improve their situation. Because taking the assistance is easier than working. I think any assistance programs should be designed by social services experts, exclusive of any political motivation of any kind, to deal with both situations.

How much does it pay? I'm trying to decide between a gig as a paid MAGA poster or a paid progressive professional street protester.

Become familiar with M2 money supply growth if you want to know what's fueling inflation. I expect this report sets the stage for a Fed rate cut in September which will add more fuel to the fire. In that regard I agree with you that inflation is going to head higher. What they're counting on is real GDP growth will outpace that increase. Will it?

Obviously, the police union is part of Trump's fascist conspiracy to impose "authoritarian" control over Washington DC and soon to follow in 2025 other major cities. Then declare martial law and postpone the 2026 mid-term elections. And in the process, round up the political opposition and put them in FEMA camps in preparation for deportation to El Salvador. 😀

The war on drugs has been waged for decades. So far we've lost most of the battles. A family member worked for the DEA and bluntly said the war on drugs was a farce and pretty much everyone in the agency knew it. Now and finally, it sounds like they're willing to take the dog off the chain. I think the Mexican government secretly would welcome US action to exterminate the cartels. And restore some sembelence of order to the country. But since everyone is in on the take and afraid to rock the boat or get killed for supporting the idea they publicly renounce any US intervention.

Good questions. I hesitate to call 1/6 a hoax. Thete's no doubt some protesters got violent that day but I would call it a wild exaggeration, purely motivated by politics, to suggest the crowd went into the protest with intent to overthrow the government. If that was true then it would be the worst planned and executed insurrection the world has ever seen. As for Pelosi, it's never been investigated, no questions asked or answered by the J6 committee hearings what was going on in her office regarding authorization to deploy the guard. But it sounds like something we should know more about.

Even the guy that invented the PCR test warned of how the amplification factor could lead to false positives and the wrong conclusions about the virus.