Are you replying to my original comment or another one because I have no idea what to make of this statement without the right context.

Always aquatic mystery truthers

Debt holders would have revolted if you’d wiped the debt and THEN injected stimulus. Traders would also just go back to being highly leveraged after that get out of jail free card.

That’s what I’ve been saying this whole time. The 2008 crash would have wiped everything if the Fed hadn’t intervened. You’re talking about mitigating a crash that might happen. I’m talking about mitigating a crash that was happening. We do know what would have happened if they hadn’t intervened because it happened in…

Again, I’m talking about 401ks, pension plans, and other savings/retirement vehicles. Unless you’re a trader by occupation you aren’t buying anything on margin. What you described doesn’t at all apply to those accounts. They don’t have any debt, they have equity, and letting the market crash in 2008 would have…

I wasn’t talking about debt forgiveness, I was talking about the millions of savings and retirement accounts that would have been wiped out.

To be fair, the KFCs, McDonalds, and Pizza Huts in Shanghai are sooooo much better than they are here. They also deliver.

It probably had a lot to do with their stability mandate. Think about how many 401ks, IRAs, pension funds, etc. would have been wiped out if they had let that happen. We would have been in a much deeper recession and the labor market would have been wrecked by even more people trying to go back to work with no jobs to…

The term e-sports enrages me so much and I play the damn games.

Yes but when you say manipulate it implies some kind of intent or motive aside from the goals they state at every fed meeting. It also implies that what they do is counterproductive.

Well then I am wrong and they absolutely should give them a taste of their own medicine.

I was wrong. It was an additional ten cents per day per household for all food bought outside the household to raise the minimum wage to $15.

Increased labor costs can be offset by an increase in price without negating the effects of the increase in wage because price is made up of variables aside from labor that remain fixed. It’s like how Papa John’s or Domino’s said they would have to increase the price of pizzas by ten cents or something to increase…

They should, but they don’t have the numbers like the Republicans did.

It’s very complicated, that’s true. So complicated that you can never directly correlate any single policy with any resulting changes. It’s an incomplete science, but there’s still some method to the madness. I majored in economics, and from my point of view the theory and real world examples are firmly in favor of…

Doing that would require that business owners realize that they’re shooting themselves in the foot right now, which will probably never happen. I honestly can’t see how giving more money to the lower and middle classes would suppress the economy overall when our economy depends on their spending. If you’re alluding to…

I’m not exactly sure what you mean by various alternatives. Are you talking about being paid more? What do you mean by unintended consequences?

Trump doesn’t have to deal with an obstructionist Congress. The point is that the Republicans are going to pass measures which will only make income inequality worse, and they’re going to get no resistance from the President, only encouragement.

It is, hence HamNo’s article title. The thing you’re getting flack for is that it sounded like you don’t see how this is hurting you big picture. The alternative to this isn’t that you get nothing, or lose money. The alternative is that you get paid more, and our economy as a whole finds sustainable growth.

Are we just going to ignore that the President has a limited influence in increasing private sector pay? He advocated for a raise in the minimum wage. What has Congress, the branch that actually creates laws, done about that?