That Counted As a 'Debate'?
The Market Ticker - Commentary on The Capital Markets
Login or register to improve your experience
Main Navigation
Sarah's Resources You Should See
Full-Text Search & Archives
Leverage, the book
Legal Disclaimer

The content on this site is provided without any warranty, express or implied. All opinions expressed on this site are those of the author and may contain errors or omissions. For investment, legal or other professional advice specific to your situation contact a licensed professional in your jurisdiction.

NO MATERIAL HERE CONSTITUTES "INVESTMENT ADVICE" NOR IS IT A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY FINANCIAL INSTRUMENT, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO STOCKS, OPTIONS, BONDS OR FUTURES.

Actions you undertake as a consequence of any analysis, opinion or advertisement on this site are your sole responsibility; author(s) may have positions in securities or firms mentioned and have no duty to disclose same.

The Market Ticker content may be sent unmodified to lawmakers via print or electronic means or excerpted online for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given and the original article source is linked to. Please contact Karl Denninger for reprint permission in other media, to republish full articles, or for any commercial use (which includes any site where advertising is displayed.)

Submissions or tips on matters of economic or political interest may be sent "over the transom" to The Editor at any time. To be considered for publication your submission must be complete (NOT a "pitch"; those get you blocked as a spammer), include full and correct contact information and be related to an economic or political matter of the day. All submissions become the property of The Market Ticker.

Considering sending spam? Read this first.

2024-09-11 07:00 by Karl Denninger
in Politics , 607 references Ignore this thread
That Counted As a 'Debate'?
[Comments enabled]
Category thumbnail

Good Lord we're screwed.

Who lost?  The American people.

Harris didn't answer anything.  She took questions and then immediately pivoted to going after Trump, throwing chum in the water.  Trump, for his part, hit the hook in the chum and thus negated his capacity to point out actual policy -- and that she had evaded and didn't answer the question.

The moderators were wildly biased and failed to enforce the rules, specifically related to any sort of containment of the two of them going back and forth and the alleged muting of the mics.

None of what Harris proposed she had a way to pay for.  Zero.  $25,000 for a house sounds nice, but it will simply make the price of houses go up -- by $25,000.  The problem isn't down payments its that prices are too high.  You can't wish supply into existence which means dealing with demand is the only option.  How do you deal with demand?  Well I can tell you what you don't do: Put 10,000 new people you fly into the United States into a town of 60,000 all of whom have $1,000 a month government checks and will live 10 to an apartment, which is what's happening in Ohio and elsewhere!  All that does is force the existing residents out because they can't afford that escalation in cost -- and thus makes the problem worse.

Did Trump key up on this?  No, and if he had he could have mopped the floor with Harris since that is explicitly her position that these Haitians are "good" and in fact she supported bringing 100,000 of them in directly, in her own words.  Leave the cat situation alone because you don't have to go there -- you can win on pure economics and its irrefutable.

Trump was right about foreign policy; nobody attacked anyone when he was President.  When Biden and Harris came into office both the Ukraine and Israeli conflicts occurred.  These are facts and may I remind you that Reagan, for all of his flaws, did get "caught" on an open mic during a mic check saying "I've just signed legislation to eliminate the USSR; the bombing starts in 10 minutes."  No, it wasn't policy but if you think the Kremlin didn't know about that within 30 seconds you're not very smart and like it or not there is real value in Foreign Policy with having the other guys out there who have designs on things you don't want to happen wondering if you might be just crazy enough to push the button.  There's an art to that; you never want them to be convinced you're nuts because then they have to shoot but at the same time the last thing you want is for them to believe you'll send money, guns, ammunition and planes in drips and drabs to someone fighting but under no circumstances will you personally blow them up.

That, by the way, is why we have two wars going on right now that we're funding and arming.  Both sides of both conflicts are utterly convinced we will not come and blow anyone up -- while at the same time we keep demonstrating that perhaps we can't  even if we changed our mind to the degree we've put forward through bravado for oh so long (and not without cause, until the last 20 or so years.)  May I remind you that we can't even manage to build a pier that will withstand utterly common weather conditions to offload supplies anymore -- and we proved it at Gaza.

There was much more but this was more than enough.

We had two unserious people on stage and a pair of "moderators" who weren't.

I could spend an hour or more on a 20 page analysis but honestly its not worth the digital ink to do so.

Go to responses (registration required to post)
 



 
No Comments Yet.....
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 1 of 125  First123456789Last
Login Register Top Blog Top Blog Topics FAQ
Page 1 of 125  First123456789Last