Elections DOGE is formed

It really comes off as teenagers starting a "cool" new club. Give it a fun name, make some funny pictures, get a twitter handle, and start a podcast. Extremely hard to take it seriously and unless you are a moron it's pretty fucking embarrassing.

Awesome.
I'm thankful you feel that way, Poon.
Don't come off as coping whatsoever.
 
Awesome.
I'm thankful you feel that way, Poon.
Don't come off as coping whatsoever.
No explanation of how my opinion is wrong and that this is actually a good thing. I don't need to cope over a limp dick advisory board that won't do shit. It's a joke and anyone that actually believes in it is a moron.
 
It really comes off as teenagers starting a "cool" new club. Give it a fun name, make some funny pictures, get a twitter handle, and start a podcast. Extremely hard to take it seriously and unless you are a moron it's pretty fucking embarrassing.
what's embarrassing is losing the elections the way kamala and the libs did.
 
No explanation of how my opinion is wrong and that this is actually a good thing

Your opinions are always wrong, Poon.
I've explained how wrong they are in the past, and you always double-down on stupid.
 
Name one product that is the same price today, in US dollars, and readily available, than it was in the 1950s.
TVs to start. Phones.
Thank you for admitting ignorance on the subject.

Since you don't like things to be explained to you I'll just leave this graph for you to look at and figure it out for yourself.

R.358154ec5cc7057b1b585366558c3dd8
Here's a hint dude. Thay graph doesn't correlate with cost of housing
 
Your opinions are always wrong, Poon.
I've explained how wrong they are in the past, and you always double-down on stupid.
This from the guy who claimed someone else using his exact user name on a different forum was perving out on the exact same video game alien “women” he pervs out on here?
 
TVs to start. Phones.

Source?

Here's a hint dude. Thay graph doesn't correlate with cost of housing

Are you under the delusion that the cost of housing has risen ONLY due to the demand? Or are there multiple reasons, and the federal bank printing trillions of dollars every year is another of those reasons why the existing dollars lose their value?
 
This from the guy who claimed someone else using his exact user name on a different forum was perving out on the exact same video game alien “women” he pervs out on here?

Dick tuck noted, and now you're deflecting to something completely irrelevant.

You probably think if you send an email to "[email protected]" I would receive it, right?
 
Name one product that is the same price today, in US dollars, and readily available, than it was in the 1950s.

I'm not getting involved in the argument but that's a pointless comparison seeing as the average wage is also a lot higher than it was in the 50s and to get an accurate reflection you'd need to look at the price of something vs the average wage.
 
I'm not getting involved in the argument but that's a pointless comparison seeing as the average wage is also a lot higher than it was in the 50s and to get an accurate reflection you'd need to look at the price of something vs the average wage.

And why is that?

And is the average wage raising in proportion to the costs of goods? Or housing?
 
Truly hope this clown world cabinet is trolling with this one, and just giving Elon and Vivek the equivalent of an unplugged controller you give to your annoying, 4 year old cousin who insists of playing the N64.

The dumbass who suggested a "*thought* experiment" of just RANDOMLY firing 2 million government employees (thus adding them to the wellfare system) as an *interesting* way of stimulating the economy... That idiot shouldn't be anywhere near economic policy of any kind.
 
I don't know how anyone with a basic knowledge of history thinks TVs were cheaper in the 1950s.
Are you under the delusion that the cost of housing has risen ONLY due to the demand? Or are there multiple reasons, and the federal bank printing trillions of dollars every year is another of those reasons why the existing dollars lose their value?
You're floundering here. First you claimed that taxes on the wealthy led to increased costs for goods and services. Then you're saying citing the Trump and Biden era as an example, even though taxes for the wealthy heavily decreased. Then you're trying to argue that the price of housing is driven by tax rate on the wealthy. And now you want to talk about the money supply.

It's as if you are bouncing from one talking point you heard about on twitter to another, with no actual knowledge of the substance at these issues. All you can do is repeat talking points, without actually being able to assess them.
 
I'm not getting involved in the argument but that's a pointless comparison seeing as the average wage is also a lot higher than it was in the 50s and to get an accurate reflection you'd need to look at the price of something vs the average wage.
I'm assuming he at least understands purchasing power or adjusting for inflation, but uhhh. idk at this point.
 
And why is that?

And is the average wage raising in proportion to the costs of goods? Or housing?

Housing absolutely not, in terms of goods some will be cheaper, some will be more expensive.

But inflation exists everywhere and is just part of capitalism.
 
But inflation exists everywhere and is just part of capitalism.

Oh CAPITALISM is to blame for inflation.

<mirkosmile>

But inflation was quite minimal throughout the first 200 years of America's history, but then the 1970s came around, and...

R.358154ec5cc7057b1b585366558c3dd8


What happened in the 1970s, Hellowhosthat?

Housing absolutely not, in terms of goods some will be cheaper, some will be more expensive.
Name a good today that is the same price it was in the 1950s.
 
Oh CAPITALISM is to blame for inflation.

<mirkosmile>

But inflation was quite minimal throughout the first 200 years of America's history, but then the 1970s came around, and...

R.358154ec5cc7057b1b585366558c3dd8


What happened in the 1970s, Hellowhosthat?


Name a good today that is the same price it was in the 1950s.

A banana is lower.
 
A banana is lower.

Not lower.

Screenshot_20241116_021413.jpg

Though it should be noted that of the several thousand products that were readily available, banana prices have increased the least.

There's several economic reasons for that.


Even it was even or lower, an exception does not disprove the rule.
 
Not lower.

View attachment 1071608

Though it should be noted that of the several thousand products that were readily available, banana prices have increased the least.

There's several economic reasons for that.


Even it was even or lower, an exception does not disprove the rule.

It's lower compared to the average wage. Obviously nothing is lower in terms of actual price
 
Back
Top