ADVERTISEMENT

The hidden impact to Joe Biden’s inflation

TheGunner

All-American
Gold Member
Aug 30, 2001
12,403
12,030
113
…Americans will soon wake up to the fact that the interest on our national debt is costing taxpayers a frightening percentage of our national income and wealth.

 
…Americans will soon wake up to the fact that the interest on our national debt is costing taxpayers a frightening percentage of our national income and wealth.

Only the fiscally responsible people care about this. These people are shrinking fast as time goes on. Politicians and people receiving benefits more than they contribute don’t care.
 
A $25T house looks affordable at 1% interest ($250B/yr)….a $30T house at 5% interest is ($1.5T) or roughly 5X more expensive in interest payments and $1T more a year out of the budget.

All due to Joe Biden and his inflation. Missing the forecast of “transient” inflation will have a lasting impact on this administration.

Americans are going to quickly realize the cost of being energy dependent.
 
Last edited:
Just so its clear, inflation was going to happen regardless of who is/was president from either party. A world wide pandemic with huge supply and demand issues is not a "president" issue. Cause vs. correlation...
Not true. - Actions like closing the Keystone Pipeline and printing and printing and printing etc. cash are policy issues that are soley on Biden.
 
Deflect? You are talking inflation, go back and read.
Lol I’m not the one who brought up the PiPeLiNe. Which, of course, you were wrong about anyway. Then when called out you went to yet another tired and worn out trope. Do you even have a point?
 
Lol I’m not the one who brought up the PiPeLiNe. Which, of course, you were wrong about anyway. Then when called out you went to yet another tired and worn out trope. Do you even have a point?
Know before you go.

The Keystone Pipeline already exists. What doesn’t exist fully yet is its proposed expansion, the Keystone XL Pipeline. The existing Keystone runs from oil sand fields in Alberta, Canada into the U.S., ending in Cushing, Oklahoma.

The 1,700 new miles of pipeline would offer two sections of expansion. First, a southern leg would connect Cushing, Oklahoma, where there is a current bottleneck of oil, with the Gulf Coast of Texas, where oil refineries abound. That leg went into operation in January 2014. Second, the pipeline would include a new section from Alberta to Kansas. It would pass through Bakken Shale region of eastern Montana and western North Dakota. Here, it will pass through a region where oil extraction is currently booming and take on some of this crude for transport.

The southern leg of the Keystone XL ties into the existing Keystone pipeline that already runs to Canada, bringing up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day to refineries in Texas. At peak capacity, the pipeline will deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day. While the pipeline is initially carried U.S. light crude, it is expected to carry more heavy Canadian oil harvested from tar sands over the next year.
 
Only the fiscally responsible people care about this. These people are shrinking fast as time goes on. Politicians and people receiving benefits more than they contribute don’t care.
whether I agree or disagree with your politics is subordinate to two facts. 1. My masters degree in economics tells me you are quite wrong about the economics and 2. GBI is no place to have this exchange, please keep this site free of your hateful politics or you will ruin






gbi for all of us.
 
whether I agree or disagree with your politics is subordinate to two facts. 1. My masters degree in economics tells me you are quite wrong about the economics and 2. GBI is no place to have this exchange, please keep this site free of your hateful politics or you will ruin






gbi for all of us.
Many economists agree it was tied to stimulus.


While many nations spent heavily to protect their economies from coronavirus fallout — in some places enough to push up demand, and potentially inflation — the United States approved about $5 trillion in spending in 2020 and 2021. That outstripped the response in other major economies as a share of the nation’s output, according to data compiled by the International Monetary Fund.

Many economists supported protecting workers and businesses early in the pandemic, but some took issue with the size of the $1.9 trillion package last March under the Biden administration. They argued that sending households another round of stimulus, including $1,400 checks, further fueled demand when the economy was already healing.

 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03
Know before you go.

The Keystone Pipeline already exists. What doesn’t exist fully yet is its proposed expansion, the Keystone XL Pipeline. The existing Keystone runs from oil sand fields in Alberta, Canada into the U.S., ending in Cushing, Oklahoma.

The 1,700 new miles of pipeline would offer two sections of expansion. First, a southern leg would connect Cushing, Oklahoma, where there is a current bottleneck of oil, with the Gulf Coast of Texas, where oil refineries abound. That leg went into operation in January 2014. Second, the pipeline would include a new section from Alberta to Kansas. It would pass through Bakken Shale region of eastern Montana and western North Dakota. Here, it will pass through a region where oil extraction is currently booming and take on some of this crude for transport.

The southern leg of the Keystone XL ties into the existing Keystone pipeline that already runs to Canada, bringing up to 700,000 barrels of oil a day to refineries in Texas. At peak capacity, the pipeline will deliver 830,000 barrels of oil per day. While the pipeline is initially carried U.S. light crude, it is expected to carry more heavy Canadian oil harvested from tar sands over the next year.
Ahhh yes, the nonexistent pipeline that was going to fix everything. The nonexistent pipeline that, even though the former president approved, never got built. Please, do tell how something that wasn’t built and wouldn’t even be done until what, several years from now anyway, was going to do squat for now. You have zero argument here because all you have is a hypothetical fed to you politicians who are in bed with the BPs and Exxons of the world. Now go fill up your gas guzzler, bitch about the cost to do so, and be mad that your solution of “‘pump more oil!” isn’t happening as fast as you’d like because you choose to remain ignorant to all of the other factors involved.
 
  • Like
Reactions: indy35
Just so its clear, inflation was going to happen regardless of who is/was president from either party. A world wide pandemic with huge supply and demand issues is not a "president" issue. Cause vs. correlation...
However, Biden's FAILED Energy Policies have been the sole reason for fuel prices going up (was already happening before Russia and we only import 3% os US oil from Russia) and that affects EVERYTHING !!!
 
Just so its clear, inflation was going to happen regardless of who is/was president from either party. A world wide pandemic with huge supply and demand issues is not a "president" issue. Cause vs. correlation...

This is partly true.

However, the inflation is was worsened due to government spending by the crooks in both parties, but particularly the Dems in Congress. Not to mention the money supply under both Presidents.
To not know that shows a lack of understanding.
 
Last edited:
Its like groundhog day.

I say what energy policies and you say green energy and Keystone.......and away we go.
Biden ran on the platform of reducing of fossil fuel usage. And now oil companies have essentially refused to ramp production back up. And why would they? Why invest in capacity when the plan is to reduce consumer usage? It would be counter productive. So we live with the prices we have...
 
Lol I’m not the one who brought up the PiPeLiNe. Which, of course, you were wrong about anyway. Then when called out you went to yet another tired and worn out trope. Do you even have a point?
You seem to have a lot of knowledge about the pipeline
 
  • Haha
Reactions: SKYDOG
Biden ran on the platform of reducing of fossil fuel usage. And now oil companies have essentially refused to ramp production back up. And why would they? Why invest in capacity when the plan is to reduce consumer usage? It would be counter productive. So we live with the prices we have...
That's the first reasonable point made in this whole discussion. There is at least a correlation in your point.

I don't know that an increase in capacity is needed at this point.......that existing captivity is maxed out. I would be happy to see some info on that.

And considering Biden has done very little to reduce fossil fuel consumption.........to the chagrin of the environmentalists......... other than throwing out some future mandates, I'm not sure oil companies are taking drastic measures right now to plan for it. Again if captivity is maxed out and additional infrastructure is needed, it's reasonable to assume they would not want to make the investment.

The oil companies have seen the move to green coming for a long time.........and have been planning for it........because they had/have no idea who is going to be elected. I don't think they woke up on November 5th and realized they better change their ways because Biden got elected.

It's amazing to me that for all the rights obsession with masks and vaccines as a result of the pandemic..........none of you seem to want to acknowledge or accept the impact of the pandemic on supply and demand.......and the resulting effect on price. Blows me away. Like it never happened.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Crayfish57
whether I agree or disagree with your politics is subordinate to two facts. 1. My masters degree in economics tells me you are quite wrong about the economics and 2. GBI is no place to have this exchange, please keep this site free of your hateful politics or you will ruin






gbi for all of us.
You must be new to this board……
 
That's the first reasonable point made in this whole discussion. There is at least a correlation in your point.

I don't know that an increase in capacity is needed at this point.......that existing captivity is maxed out. I would be happy to see some info on that.

And considering Biden has done very little to reduce fossil fuel consumption.........to the chagrin of the environmentalists......... other than throwing out some future mandates, I'm not sure oil companies are taking drastic measures right now to plan for it. Again if captivity is maxed out and additional infrastructure is needed, it's reasonable to assume they would not want to make the investment.

The oil companies have seen the move to green coming for a long time.........and have been planning for it........because they had/have no idea who is going to be elected. I don't think they woke up on November 5th and realized they better change their ways because Biden got elected.

It's amazing to me that for all the rights obsession with masks and vaccines as a result of the pandemic..........none of you seem to want to acknowledge or accept the impact of the pandemic on supply and demand.......and the resulting effect on price. Blows me away. Like it never happened.
"Not only are oil companies plowing money into low-carbon businesses, the climate crisis has created vast uncertainty about the future demand for fossil fuels. Appetite for gasoline is surging right now as the economy reopens from Covid. But the rise of electric vehicles will change the outlook significantly in the years to come. Many expect oil demand to eventually peak, though there remains great debate over precisely when that will happen.
At the same time, governments around the world are setting ambitious targets for cutting emissions. Biden has set a goal of cutting carbon emissions by as much as 52% by 2030, rolled out new methane regulations and returned the United States to the Paris climate agreement.
The oil industry has pointed to how this regulatory uncertainty is depressing its ability to invest in future projects."

 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03
"Not only are oil companies plowing money into low-carbon businesses, the climate crisis has created vast uncertainty about the future demand for fossil fuels. Appetite for gasoline is surging right now as the economy reopens from Covid. But the rise of electric vehicles will change the outlook significantly in the years to come. Many expect oil demand to eventually peak, though there remains great debate over precisely when that will happen.
At the same time, governments around the world are setting ambitious targets for cutting emissions. Biden has set a goal of cutting carbon emissions by as much as 52% by 2030, rolled out new methane regulations and returned the United States to the Paris climate agreement.
The oil industry has pointed to how this regulatory uncertainty is depressing its ability to invest in future projects."

Why invest in a refinery when we have to cut carbon emissions?
 
  • Like
Reactions: purduepat1969
whether I agree or disagree with your politics is subordinate to two facts. 1. My masters degree in economics tells me you are quite wrong about the economics and 2. GBI is no place to have this exchange, please keep this site free of your hateful politics or you will ruin






gbi for all of us.
Well you obviously disagree with his politics or you wouldn't bothe rposting for your whole 48th time. Perhaps you have heard of the other boards for sports you can peruse and not be offended by?
 
  • Like
Reactions: SKYDOG
He’s a smooth talker who didn’t answer the question and said nothing. Typical politician that will get re-elected.
I think Ossoff is very vulnerable as a D in GA. He can’t answer the question because his party’s platform has no answers except to increase taxes and spend more.

They don’t really care about inflation, especially if they can jam their climate change policies down the electorates’ throats. Who cares if gas and heating fuels are going through the roof? We’ll just force people to electrify faster. Doesn’t matter if people can’t afford EVs, solar panels, fast chargers, etc. They’re just chattel in our grand social engineering experiments.
 
Just so its clear, inflation was going to happen regardless of who is/was president from either party. A world wide pandemic with huge supply and demand issues is not a "president" issue. Cause vs. correlation...
Nah, but paying people to stay home last summer when there were 10MM job openings and a vaccine…THATS A PRESDENTIAL THINGY. Which, in turn, caused a labor shortage, continued to assist in choking supply lines and contributed to INFLATION. (But hey, Joe reduced carbon emissions AND helped raise wages so yay Democrats)

Ohhh and this inflation thingy is just transitory (until it isn’t transitory).

Next up….Democrats…Let’s cancel student debt!!! More spending and fuel to the inflation fire. (how do you ask? Inflation is due to too many dollars chasing too few goods. Cancelling debt let’s Democrats freely spend more of their money…thus adding to inflation solely through Democrat spending).

Let’s go Brandon!
 
Last edited:
Just so its clear, inflation was going to happen regardless of who is/was president from either party. A world wide pandemic with huge supply and demand issues is not a "president" issue. Cause vs. correlation...
In real time a very prominent Democrat economist from the Obama and Clinton years, said Bidens stimulus package last year, was the worst fiscal policy in 40 years. Biden's first order of business when he got to office, idiotic energy policies. Spends a year trying to pass trillions in additional spending. Now is proposing even more spending with buying out all the student loans.

Yes you are right there was going to be inflation after pandemic. You didn't need the president ignoring that fact, and acting like it didn't exist. His policies make zero sense in an inflationary environment. In fact they are the exact opposite of what you should do in an inflationary environment.
 
Inflation Joe strikes again.

I read one of the comments on here that I actually kind of like. The suggestion was that if you earn less than $100K per year, you can use your student load debt as a deduction on your income taxes. Maybe you allow $10K or $20K of deductions per year. It wouldn't be loan forgiveness, but it would help those who got in over their heads.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Boilermaker03
Inflation Joe strikes again.

Waiting for @BuilderBob who says student loan forgiveness isn’t going to help Democrat Elites.

That’s exactly who a big chunk will benefit…people like AOC and the other 56 Congresspeople who have college debt.

I’d rather they just gave themselves a raise.

It’s laughable watching Elizabeth Warren panning for the Democrat Elite. (“We have to help these people out”)🤦‍♂️
 
Waiting for @BuilderBob who says student loan forgiveness isn’t going to help Democrat Elites.

That’s exactly who a big chunk will benefit…people like AOC and the other 56 Congresspeople who have college debt.

I’d rather they just gave themselves a raise.

It’s laughable watching Elizabeth Warren panning for the Democrat Elite. (“We have to help these people out”)🤦‍♂️
Wait all you freaking want. You're lying again. I never said that. I said "Elites and AOC and lattes. They're all that way. Repeat for effect."

Which simply means that Trumpers regularly refer to all Dems that way to make themselves feel like regular people and portray the Dems as rich snobs and progressives.......which the base loves.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Crayfish57
Wait all you freaking want. You're lying again. I never said that. I said "Elites and AOC and lattes. They're all that way. Repeat for effect."

Which simply means that Trumpers regularly refer to all Dems that way to make themselves feel like regular people and portray the Dems as rich snobs and progressives.......which the base loves.
So you aren’t for student loan forgiveness?
 
So you aren’t for student loan forgiveness?
No. Have said so here. You just assume I am because you know I'm really a dem pretending to be independent?
It's just wrong. The article talks about programs that extend the loans or adjusts rates......and errors that have been made that need to be corrected. I'm for any and all programs that make it easier for people to pay back their loans.

But they have to pay it back. Just a fundamental matter of right and wrong........and fairness. A losing issue for the Dems that Joe Sixpack will not forget.
 
No. Have said so here. You just assume I am because you know I'm really a dem pretending to be independent?
My mistake. Will you be concerned if the Democrats push Biden for forgiveness which provides a bailout for half of the people making payments with a salary >$86k? Sounds to me like this is a white collar bailout.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BuilderBob6
Just so its clear, inflation was going to happen regardless of who is/was president from either party. A world wide pandemic with huge supply and demand issues is not a "president" issue. Cause vs. correlation...
Just to be clear when you knew all of that, why did democrats decide to make inflation worse than it otherwise would've been?

 
Interesting math by circle back

So, after inflation was started by Democrats, they finally figured out that their war on fossil fuels will, indeed, cause inflation…and that number is 61%…if you believe that number…

But the narrative continues…this was all caused by Putin…and if it all wasn’t his fault, it was the greedy energy companies fault too.


What Biden ignores is that the moratorium on repaying student loans is exacerbating the “unprecedented economic disruption.” Inflation represents too much money chasing too few goods; consumer demand is high, and supply is low, thanks to pandemic disruptions, supply-chain issues, etc. One of the reasons consumer demand is so high is because no one has had to make a student-loan payment in two years!

 
Last edited:
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT