patrick.net

SubOink says

- I think they believe their own BS

SubOink says

untrue to men he knows to be idiots"

lol

Logan, you think the 30 year bond bull market is done?

SubOink says

I think people like Peter Schiff are not lying - I think they believe their own BS

Nobody is right all the time, but the general inflation/stagflation thesis is holding. You don't have to be an extreme gold bug or market bear, but wrt inflation Schiff is mostly right (not so much on it's direct implication on gold or the dollar, esp. relative to other countries and wrt timeline). Why do you think Trump won the election? If everybody would be doing as dandy as the market in nominal terms Trump would not have had a chance at all. Reality is inflation has been raging in healthcare, housing, education/childcare, essential and local items. The printed money goes selectively into the most crony sectors.

Come on, people, don't be shy: there is still time....

Straw Man says

Come on, people, don't be shy: there is still time....

Heh ok. Volatile 2017 (as opposed to 2016), good for traders, but no downturn, more flattish, maybe slightly down. I thought 2016 would be flat to down and it was flat until it made new highs recently - thanks to the Trump effect. Market super resilient.

SubOink says

Logan, you think the 30 year bond bull market is done?

This is a very complex discussion but for now... bond rally 1.31% 10 year lows, would need a world event to bring it down under 1%

In my predictions articles I have talked about 1.60% - 3% channel and that 1.60% level is the key to everything in the bond market

As much as everyone makes a huff about this bond market sell off.. I tell people this

Lower lows and lower highs in this cycle haven't been breached yet, once we close over 2.50% and get next day follow through you got something legit, bigger sell off in 2013 and in 2015 ...

So much to talk about but to break under 1.60%

European event... 2012, Spain default fear trade $ and Brexit, both times were short lived

Thanks Logan

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/12/revealed-michigan-recount-uncovers-massive-voter-fraud-detroit-precincts/
REVEALED: Michigan Recount Uncovers Serious Voter Fraud in Detroit- VOTES COUNTED UP TO 6 TIMES

Once they started the Michigan recount in earnest, and knowing he would be exposed, the Detroit City Clerk Daniel Baxter all of a sudden started claiming that the optical scanners which read the paper ballots did not work the day of the election. Baxter blamed the discrepancies on decade-old voting machines. That is his cover story. Nothing like this was mentioned until he realized their voting fraud scheme would be detected.

Baxter’s claim is that, when trying to push the ballots through the readers, the ballots would be stuck and they’d have to push them through again thus ‘ACCIDENTALLY’ resulting in a double count. He says the poll workers sometimes ‘FORGET’ to adjust the machine count and instead let the ballot count twice.

Of course, that’s COMPLETELY BULLSHIT.

In one Detroit Precinct, a recount team was given a box of ballots with an unbroken seal where everything appeared proper and in place. The tag on the box said there were 306 ballots. The book said 306, and the ticket said 306, so that means there should be 306 paper ballots on the box. When they pulled out the ballots, there were exactly FIFTY paper ballots in a locked sealed box that again was supposed to have 306. The official canvasser approved count for this precinct was 306. For FIFTY ballots.

It looks like Detroit counts each vote more than SIX TIMES! No wonder they get such high turnout rates!

#fraud

Black democrat politicians commit fraud? Surely you jest!

Hey Logan the guy in the picture, standing next to you, I know who he is but I am old and forgot his name. He proved that the housing bubble was premeditated. And I wrote this about that: http://www.talkmarkets.com/content/us-markets/fed-premeditated-mispricing-of-risk-in-housing-oil-junk-bonds-and-other-markets?post=81636&uid=4798

Gary Anderson says

I know who he is but I am old and forgot his name.

Benjamin Bowler?

Anyone whom the House Republicans would elect would be worse.

See my other threads as to why I think Trump will be disastrous, unfortunately, now.

But I fear that if anything like electoral college revolt and election of anyone other than Trump happens, we'll have a full-on civil war (the real type).

there's also a possibility that a meteor will also hit the planet and kill everyone as well.

why not take that into consideration.

Is it the current congress or the new congress that gets to decide if Trump fails to get the 271 needed votes?

justme says

Is it the current congress or the new congress that gets to decide if Trump fails to get the 271 needed votes?

New but they're both Republican, and this effort is driven by the bipartisan Petrodollar establishments. Notice they never complain about Pence. They want to keep the Pence/Blackwell transition going, but replace the President-elect with someone who will continue GOP business as usual, including escalating wars on behalf of their MIC and Saudi sponsors and importing Sunni Islam into NATO.

Paul Ryan isn't going to elect Bernie Sanders. The GOP House would auction to the highest bidding Koch's choice, a reliable continuation of everything that voters rejected.

Democrats created this fiasco in 2010 by enacting Obamneycare instead of electoral reform, thus throwing the House and eventually the Senate to the Republicans. Following the 2000 election debacle, one might have expected "the party of the people" to enforce the 14th&15th Amendments, but no, they had become "the party of the insurance companies" (quoting Representative Dennis Kucinich, D-OH) and once they got elected the Chicago Democrats saw no need for electoral reform. Thus we continue to have paperless electronic ballots, policies that prevent voters from voting, etc. There was a chance to address those in 2009-11, but it didn't happen, and now here we are.

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/2016/12/07/strict-voter-law-approved-michigan-house/95127394/

Voter ID law approved in Michigan House

Lansing — Michigan’s Republican-led House on Wednesday night approved a strict voter identification proposal over strenuous objections from Democrats who argued the plan could disenfranchise properly registered voters.

Michigan voters without photo identification could still cast a provisional ballot under the controversial legislation, but they would have to bring an ID to their local clerk’s office within 10 days of an election in order for their vote to count.

The legislation seeks to “protect the integrity of every single Michigan citizen’s vote, because every vote is diluted if fraudulent votes are cast,” said Rep. Gary Glenn, R-Midland.

Current state law allows registered voters to cast a ballot without photo identification if they sign an affidavit affirming their identity under threat of perjury, an option 18,388 residents used in the Nov. 8 election, according to the Michigan Secretary of State.

Nearly half of those voters were in Wayne County, including 5,834 in Detroit.

“This legislation is simple: In order to have your vote count, you must prove you are who you say you are,” she said, suggesting the voters could lie on an affidavit.

The proposal will help “deter and detect fraud, however widespread it may or may not be,” Lyons continued.

It's all Jill Stein's fault!!!

curious2 says

Democrats created this fiasco in 2010 by enacting Obamneycare instead of electoral reform,

Bullshit. Citizens united decision created this fiasco. Spending by 501's went from 3% of election spending to 48% after citizen's united. Of that spending 90%+ went to support conservative/libertarian candidates.

Within weeks of the Jan 2010 citizens united decision Ed Gillespie (RNC) and Karl Rove sat down and drew out a map of every district in the country with an analysis of every congressional and state candidate. They then laid out a plan to capture as many seats a possible, especially state seats since 2011 would be a redistricting year. They called it REDMAP (REdistricting Majority Project). The koch donor network funnelled over 30 million into the Republican State Leadership Committee to fund the running of project. Not the campaign funding, just the administration. They targeted moderate republicans as well as democrats. The project was very successful, especially in the swing states like NC.

In NC the Pope family (Variety Wholesalers) poured huge amounts into the NC state races through dozens of 501's. Over 75% of the "independent" spending in NC in 2010 came from Pope family funding. Tax deductible BTW. REDMAP targeted 22 democratic held districts in NC and won 18. NC legislature went republican in both houses for the first time since 1870. Very creative redistricting followed resulting in NC going from 7/6 D to 9/4 R in congress in 2012. Many other states had similar results. http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2011/10/10/state-for-sale

Are we forgetting that this time all the big money went to Hillary who outspent Trump something like 8 to one and still lost?
I'll otherwise agree that 1)losing the electoral college vote is possible if very unlikely, 2)faithless electors in those numbers would ruin our Republic, 3)civil war II is possible in that event. It would be a straight up hijacking of our government by the elitists, more of a coup than an election.
That one faithless elector in Texas is a publicity whore asshat. I read his twitter stream. Self-aggrandizement all over the place and he's a total nobody. I hope he gets what's coming to him. I wouldn't approve of his actions if Hillary Had the Texas vote and he decided not to cast his vote for her. Rules are rules, he signed a pledge, that's a promise, and civilization itself relies on promises kept. So FUCK that guy!
I think the grand majority of Americans are with me on this one.

After thinking about this, I can now see how liberals AND neocons could justify (in their minds) mounting a serious effort towards getting the electoral college to deny Trump the 270 electoral college votes required to be elected president...

...even if it means a complete and total national crisis (and maybe some form of civil conflict).

AllTruth says

I can now see how liberals AND neocons could justify (in their minds)

if Trump picks Romney as Sec of State, that possibility fades

zzyzzx says

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/2016/12/07/strict-voter-law-approved-michigan-house/95127394/

Voter ID law approved in Michigan House

Lansing — Michigan’s Republican-led House on Wednesday night approved a strict voter identification proposal over strenuous objections from Democrats who argued the plan could disenfranchise properly registered voters.

Michigan voters without photo identification could still cast a provisional ballot under the controversial legislation, but they would have to bring an ID to their local clerk’s office within 10 days of an election in order for their vote to count.

The legislation seeks to “protect the integrity of every single Michigan citizen’s vote, because every vote is diluted if fraudulent votes are cast,” said Rep. Gary Glenn, R-Midland.

Current state law all...

Racist Michigan legislators! Why they tryin to hold the black man down?

you sir are spot on much of the time. But you wasted a post starting this one

Fucking White Male says

Voter ID law approved in Michigan House

This is outrageous! Requiring a license to drive I get, but a requiring an ID to fulfill the most powerful privilege we all have as US citizens to shape the future of this country? Preposterous!

This seems very unlikely to me. This situation is actually one of the reasons for the electoral college, so faithless electors would not present a constitutional crisis. They would just be a normal, but infrequently used part of the process as designed. This part of the process is even less understandable and predictable than the electoral college, so the level of disgust would be much higher than what we already see regarding the electoral college. There could be unrest, but I wouldn't call it a constitutional crisis.

YesYNot says

but I wouldn't call it a constitutional crisis.

IF the constitution provides for what happens if the electoral college doesn't pick a winner, then there is no consititional crisis at al

Donald Trump, Sept. 2016: "We are in a big, fat, ugly bubble.
Not anymore ;-) #USA #TrumpvsZeroHedge #TrumpvsGoldBugs #TrumpVsAntiFed
Remember the game plan, sentence structure, speech patterns and body language ;-)

Logan Mohtashami says

Not anymore

You mean Trump promising corporations lower taxes does not create a bubble. Who in the fuck is going to pay taxes in US? Only the W2s?

curious2 says

Anyone whom the House Republicans would elect would be worse.

True.

Also background on this subject...
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/06/opinion/how-would-the-electoral-college-dump-donald-trump.html?_r=0

Of course, if that happened, there would be riots on the streets. Just like at the aftermath of a legally elected Trump. Now imagine if the entire election were thrown away and some Republican candidate that wasn't the two leading candidates is placed in office instead. Complete outrage from every Trump supporter.

Now imagine everything Trump would do to oppose this and incite violent opposition. Hell, he asked the Russians to hack Hillary's email and gun owners to shoot her. You think he would take having the presidency stolen from him lightly?

tr6 says

Who in the fuck is going to pay taxes in US

I would venture you to look at the tax recites of Americans to the government and see who actually pays the most ;-)

No bubble has been created due to deficits, we shouldn't worry about this ... this is America, currency induced inflation here is a non event

This is literally the stupidest thread I've read on Pat net this year.

bob2356 says

Citizens united

Democrats outspent Republicans in 2016, including outside money, both by a wide margin. If money buys elections, then Democrats paid for a landslide. Even among Republicans, including PAC money, Donald Trump spent a fraction as much as "Jeb!" The Petrodollar candidates were supposed to be Bush v Clinton, again, but the voters weren't having it.

Gerrymandering and other Republican tactics have been going on a long time, and The New Yorker has been reporting on them since at least the W administration. They didn't stop the 2008 election.

Hey Logan, record highs every day. Are we rich yet?

Logan Mohtashami says

No bubble has been created due to deficits

Yes so 3T in unfunded Bush tax cuts per decade certainly does not create a bubble or income inequality. Yep Logan, keep up with your story.

If electors can choose whomever they please, then don't forget that electors disgruntled with the scarlet whore of Wall Street can choose Trump instead of the candidate their voters chose. And if this happens to any degree that it affects the outcome of an election, it doesn't matter what the people want at all. It only matters who is picking people to be electors. And then welcome to the USSR! Democracy will be officially dead!

2016 #American Bears live on and even back in 2001 bears were yapping about the American Collapse ... but one thing is constant since 1790.. every Anti American Great collapse snowflake marshmallow bear has been wrong about America and they will be for decades to come ... it's time to hunt these bears and their worthless ideological economic rants to extinction ... us data miners will tell you when the recession and recovery cycles will happen .. the rest are just storytellers. Markets are at all time highs, over 165 million working, 43 year lows in unemployment claims, 5.5 million job openings, 105 trillion plus in financial assets, biggest military in the world and gas prices with inflation are low... and this will continue under #PresidentTrump #stocks #economics #bonds #RealEstate #housing #Goldbugsareawful #USA

Strategist says

Yes so 3T in unfunded Bush tax cuts per decade certainly does not create a bubble or income inequality. Yep Logan, keep up with your story.

If you have any evidence that deficits created the housing bubble, I would love to see the cross correlation representation data

Could we have a redo on the election? I'm thinking we could nominate different candidates this time. Then democrats could have Bernie and the Republicans could have Rand Paul.
That would be pretty good.
It's what I wanted from the start. Instead we got manipulated polls, Brownshirt activity on the Left, MSM lying their asses off to get the queen bitch elected, and an orange madman blowing up the process by saying what everyone without cheese curds for brains is already thinking.
I blame it all on the Democrats! They fucked this one up really good.
The left is responsible for Trump and his rise to power, because they took what power they had and bullied everyone with it. Fuck them.

Heraclitusstudent says

It doesn't matter if it was designed this way. It would look like it violates the integrity of the election process.

It would look this way to ignorant people, so...Heraclitusstudent says

Riots would ensue,

Heraclitusstudent says

So it would in fact be a constitutional crisis.

Riots ensued after the election, and there was no constitutional crisis. Even if the riots were terrible, it would be a safety issue, not a constitutional issue. The constitution is clear. The rules are and were clear.