Paid time off for me, no paid time off for you.

[Ray From Cleveland]

I live in the KC metro and even the gas stations start out pay at between 10 & 11.

ANYONE working for minimum wage is an idiot and has no one to blame but themselves.

A quick search notes that an average 1 bedroom apt rents for $742 a month. So considering taxes working for $10 an hour, two weeks pay won't even cover rent.

Which illustrates the real problem. Younger people today feel no need to work over 40 hours a week.

Lol....because gas stations regularly offer overtime.

Then work a different job on the weekends. When I was younger, if I didn't work six days a week, I always had another job.

No you didn't.

Oh yes I did, and back then, it was not uncommon for other people as well. At one point, I was working three jobs seven days a week.

Of course back then, we didn't blow money on recreational products like we do today. We had one house phone, one family car, McDonald's was not a weekly part of your diet, it was a huge treat. We had a color television and an 8-track player and stereo. You got three channels on your television, and all summer they only played reruns.

My father laughs today when he tells us he's paying more for his monthly cell phone bill than he did the mortgage on the house we grew up in. And yes, during the construction season, my father worked night and day, and usually Saturday and Sunday.

 

[Andylusion]

For most people, taxes are not optional. Business and investment are. When you invest, you understand you can make some money, make a lot of money, and lose money too. Neither is guaranteed. If you don't want to take that risk, then you simply go to work every morning and hope to make enough to retire on.

Some people want more. Some people dream of working for themselves, retiring early, and yes, perhaps become very wealthy, but that takes risk. The larger the risk, the likely larger payout if you succeed.

Going to work is not a risk. Your job was created by others who took that risk so you could have that job. I took a risk by being invested in that market, and it's failing lately. Not a problem because I have faith in the system, and it will recover once again. I took a risk by land investment, and it's pretty stable right now. It doesn't mean it can't fail, but again, that's what investments are all about.

We just had a coal miner that went to work the other day and was killed. Screw your "no risk".

Tell his family that. I imagine you'll find yourself picking your teeth off the ground.

We are talking about investments, and you went from investments, to work place accidents.

No, I was taking about the needs of employers being met before the needs of shareholders being met.

Well shareholders are the owners of the company. If their needs are not met, then as owner of the company, they can replace the management.

Again... this is like you renting your property to me, and then me trying to dictate that you shouldn't be paid as much for rent, because my needs should trump your needs as owner.

Well that's ridiculous, and you would never accept that logic, if you owned the property. And you are lying if you claim otherwise.

We will most likely be providing huge socialist bail outs to these "owners" again. Odd that so many find that acceptable but get all upset when others want to do the same with those not able to access affordable health care. Really ironic right now also.

Dude, who are you talking about finding this acceptable? The only people who supported the bailouts were the socialist left-wingers. The entire freakin Tea Party was a right-wing opposition to the bailouts. The conservative caucus in the House, produced an entire plan for avoiding government bailouts. Ben Shapiro just this week, openly said he opposed any plan by Trump for bailing out anyone.

You seem to be implying that someone, or anyone, in the right-wing conservative ideology, openly supports bailing out companies. If anyone thinks that, you all are full of crap.

It's left-wingers who think the sun rises and sets at the command of almighty government, who believe we need bureaucrat idiots fixing the economy by flushing tax dollars down the drain.

Not us. Not the right-wing. Sorry. *IF* that is what you were implying with that post, then you are ignorant and wrong.

 

[Andylusion]

by bitching people are not doing things YOUR way and shoving strawmen on me to argue against?

hardly.

If we were doing my thing the markets would collapse. I would make them live up to their "capitalistic standards" and if they did that they would collapse.

What are you smoking? How would you change anything, so that the markets would collapse by living up to capitalist standards? How?

It wouldn't get "bailed out". There is no bailing out in capitalism.

Sure, I agree with that.

That wouldn't cause the markets to collapse.

Lehman Brothers was not bailed out. Life went on. Estonia didn't bail out there banks in the past, and life went on.
Iceland didn't bail out their banks either. Life went on.

I'm all for the complete and total elimination of all bailouts entirely. The markets will not collapse. In fact, what we saw in both Estonia and Iceland, is that the markets do even better under a pure capitalist system.

And the reason is pretty clear. Badly performing parts of the economy, die off, and are replaced with productive actors. Naturally the economy will do better with less bad performers, and more good performers.

This is why we need to drastically reduce the size and scope of government. Government inherently causes only damage. The bailouts are not a benefit to the market, or the economy. Only a hindrance.

With Trump getting ready to do it again. There is a huge benefit to the country, world and economy for affordable health care though.

Sure, I believe in affordable health care.

The difference is, socialized health care is neither a benefit, nor affordable. How many Canadians have died on waiting lists, after spending their entire lives paying a massive tax-price tag for their care?

Why are so many traveling to pay for care, after spending their entire lives paying for care they never got?

Yes, I'm all for affordable health care. Let's deregulated, de-socialize, and allow the free market to lower the price, and improve the quality of care. I'm all for it.

 

[Andylusion]

How can a person prepare for an emergency when they are paid 7.25 an hour?

Be realistic here.

I live in the KC metro and even the gas stations start out pay at between 10 & 11.

ANYONE working for minimum wage is an idiot and has no one to blame but themselves.

A quick search notes that an average 1 bedroom apt rents for $742 a month. So considering taxes working for $10 an hour, two weeks pay won't even cover rent.

This is not a difficult concept....

If you are trying to live on your own....... then you don't work at a gas station. You get a job that pays more.

Anyone can get a job that pays more. Anyone can. ANYONE. Get a second job. I worked 3 jobs when I was younger.

No you didn't.

Um... yes I did? When I was going to college, I worked in the food court after my last class. So I had class from 8 AM until noon. Then at 1 PM after I had lunch, I worked in the food court until 9 PM. Then I went to a grocery store, and worked from 10 PM until 3 AM or 4 AM, whenever I finished stocking shelves.
Then on Saturday I worked open to close, 14 hours at a store.

Now admittedly it sucked. Working 3 jobs really sucked. But I had some bills to pay off, and I did it. I owned responsibility, and didn't blame other people, or cry to government, or come on a forum and complain about capitalism.

I paid off my bills, and eventually quit the two other jobs.

 

[Andylusion]

I have missed MANY DAYS of work in my lifetime. Neither the government or my customers paid me anyhow.

Responsible people prepare for emergencies.

How can a person prepare for an emergency when they are paid 7.25 an hour?

Be realistic here.

Along with sick leave, the minimum wage should be raised. It has not been increased since the bush boy years.

Did you ever think that if people were paid a living wage they would be able to prepare for an emergency and wouldn't need any public assistance?

A "living wage" WOULD be public assistance if the job isn't worth that much, because if the employer loses money on it, the job disappears, unless the taxpayer makes up the difference.

The taxpayer does make up the difference in the many public assistance programs. They are corporate socialism.

Again... if the job isn't worth the cost of the benefits, then the job will cease to exist.

How much will the taxpayer make up the difference, if there is no job at all?

Dumb argument. If you chose to give out benefit from government, that's on you, not the corporations.

Whether you give out benefits or not, it's not the corporations duty to do anything.

They are a business. If they can't make money providing jobs, then they don't provide jobs.

We, the people who create jobs, are not obligated to you. We didn't invest our money, for your benefit. If I can't reap a return on my investment, then I'll just blow the money on my own desires, and provide zero jobs.

And the irony is, you yourself would never invest and create jobs if it didn't benefit you to do so. So your entire argument is utter hypocrisy.

Wal-Mart loves food stamps. No one is creating the trillions the Fed simply throws at the markets.

Again, you don't know what you are talking about. The Fed isn't "throwing" trillions at the markets.

Crap, dude, even the toddler could figure that out. If the Fed was really throwing trillions of dollars at the market, then the marketing couldn't possibly be dropping like it has. Use some logic.

Beyond that, you don't know jack about Walmart. Even that article was full of crap. I read the entire thing, and they just made it up.

They looked at the estimate number of people at the company that earned a low wage. Guessed that they must be single. Guessed that they must be living alone. And assumed they were taking food stamps.

First single guy in high school, who is living at home, isn't getting food stamps.

Boom... there went the entire basis of the article. Blown to bits by one example.

I knew a girl who worked at Walmart. Not only was she not collecting food stamps, but she was using Walmart's tuition reimbursement program, and now has a degree in civil engineering.

You people are just full of crap.

 

[Andylusion]

You are speaking incoherently.

What do you mean the markets are 'stealing from them'? How does a stock, steal from you? As long as the company keeps paying dividends, then you are not losing anything.

Additionally, negative interest rates, just means you should be even more in favor of companies paying dividends to shareholders, and encouraging more people to invest in stocks.

That's the whole point but you know that. I have no desire to chase your feigned ignorance.

Well I proved you wrong. So, you are the one in ignorance. You claimed interest rates were negative.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

 

[iceberg]

That's the whole point but you know that. I have no desire to chase your feigned ignorance.

Well I proved you wrong. So, you are the one in ignorance. You claimed interest rates were negative.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

he keeps wanting life to be his utopia and gets lost in the reality in his way.

 

[Andylusion]

Lehman Brothers was not bailed out. Life went on.

For you. Lots of people lost their retirement funds. You are a republican to the core, my friend.

First, dumb response. Really dumb. We were talking about the context of a nation, and suddenly you switched to, an individual. Sorry, but a single person losing their retirement, does not wipe out the economy of a nation.

And if that is what you really care about, then you should support bailing out everyone on the planet for everything. Because every company that fails is going to hurt someone.

You can't have it both ways. You can't never bailout the rich, and at the same time never have someone harmed. You guys flip flop on your own views so much, it's a wonder you people are even able to make a single coherent post without contradicting yourself.

Lots of people lost their retirement funds? Name one.

Lots lost their funds right? You should have a list of all the people who lost all their retirement. Show me the list.

Of course you can't, because I highly doubt anyone did. I don't know of a single 401K program anywhere, where you just buy single stocks. My company certainly doesn't offer a single-stock 401K. None of the previous dozen companies I worked for had such a program.

If you were investing outside of a 401K, then there isn't an investment advisor on the planet, that doesn't say "Diversify" a hundred times a day. If you were stupid enough to only invest in the single stocks of one company, then you could actually lose everything. But doing that would make you an idiot, and that's the price you pay for being stupid.

Diversify. You should never invest everything you have into one single investment. Back up 100 years, and even rural farmers knew this. That's why they had phrases like "don't put all your eggs in one basket".

You know what this thread is to me?....

Years ago, I was talking with a guy at work about Jerry Springer. I couldn't understand why anyone would watch that crap. This guy said the reason he watched is because his own life was messed up, but watching Jerry Springer, and seeing how screwed up other people were, made him feel better about himself.

I've never considered myself to be smart at all. But me reading this thread with people like you and pknopp, and others spewing the endless insanity.... I feel so much better about myself. I should start teaching economics at a university, compared to what I see here.

 

[pknopp]

A quick search notes that an average 1 bedroom apt rents for $742 a month. So considering taxes working for $10 an hour, two weeks pay won't even cover rent.

Which illustrates the real problem. Younger people today feel no need to work over 40 hours a week.

Lol....because gas stations regularly offer overtime.

Then work a different job on the weekends. When I was younger, if I didn't work six days a week, I always had another job.

No you didn't.

Oh yes I did, and back then, it was not uncommon for other people as well. At one point, I was working three jobs seven days a week.

Of course back then, we didn't blow money on recreational products like we do today. We had one house phone, one family car, McDonald's was not a weekly part of your diet, it was a huge treat. We had a color television and an 8-track player and stereo. You got three channels on your television, and all summer they only played reruns.

My father laughs today when he tells us he's paying more for his monthly cell phone bill than he did the mortgage on the house we grew up in. And yes, during the construction season, my father worked night and day, and usually Saturday and Sunday.

He's paying more for his cell phone because shareholders demand ever increasing returns. Despite cell carriers making money left and right, ask the guy at the mall trying to sell these services what he is making.

 

[pknopp]

We just had a coal miner that went to work the other day and was killed. Screw your "no risk".

Tell his family that. I imagine you'll find yourself picking your teeth off the ground.

We are talking about investments, and you went from investments, to work place accidents.

No, I was taking about the needs of employers being met before the needs of shareholders being met.

Well shareholders are the owners of the company. If their needs are not met, then as owner of the company, they can replace the management.

Again... this is like you renting your property to me, and then me trying to dictate that you shouldn't be paid as much for rent, because my needs should trump your needs as owner.

Well that's ridiculous, and you would never accept that logic, if you owned the property. And you are lying if you claim otherwise.

We will most likely be providing huge socialist bail outs to these "owners" again. Odd that so many find that acceptable but get all upset when others want to do the same with those not able to access affordable health care. Really ironic right now also.

Dude, who are you talking about finding this acceptable? The only people who supported the bailouts were the socialist left-wingers. The entire freakin Tea Party was a right-wing opposition to the bailouts. The conservative caucus in the House, produced an entire plan for avoiding government bailouts. Ben Shapiro just this week, openly said he opposed any plan by Trump for bailing out anyone.

You seem to be implying that someone, or anyone, in the right-wing conservative ideology, openly supports bailing out companies. If anyone thinks that, you all are full of crap.

It's left-wingers who think the sun rises and sets at the command of almighty government, who believe we need bureaucrat idiots fixing the economy by flushing tax dollars down the drain.

Not us. Not the right-wing. Sorry. *IF* that is what you were implying with that post, then you are ignorant and wrong.

Oddly nothing has changed........look at the numbers coming in. Trump 97% Weld 3%.

Your complaints ring hollow.

 

[pknopp]

If we were doing my thing the markets would collapse. I would make them live up to their "capitalistic standards" and if they did that they would collapse.

What are you smoking? How would you change anything, so that the markets would collapse by living up to capitalist standards? How?

It wouldn't get "bailed out". There is no bailing out in capitalism.

Sure, I agree with that.

That wouldn't cause the markets to collapse.

Lehman Brothers was not bailed out. Life went on. Estonia didn't bail out there banks in the past, and life went on.
Iceland didn't bail out their banks either. Life went on.

I'm all for the complete and total elimination of all bailouts entirely. The markets will not collapse. In fact, what we saw in both Estonia and Iceland, is that the markets do even better under a pure capitalist system.

And the reason is pretty clear. Badly performing parts of the economy, die off, and are replaced with productive actors. Naturally the economy will do better with less bad performers, and more good performers.

This is why we need to drastically reduce the size and scope of government. Government inherently causes only damage. The bailouts are not a benefit to the market, or the economy. Only a hindrance.

With Trump getting ready to do it again. There is a huge benefit to the country, world and economy for affordable health care though.

Sure, I believe in affordable health care.

The difference is, socialized health care is neither a benefit, nor affordable. How many Canadians have died on waiting lists, after spending their entire lives paying a massive tax-price tag for their care?

Why are so many traveling to pay for care, after spending their entire lives paying for care they never got?

Yes, I'm all for affordable health care. Let's deregulated, de-socialize, and allow the free market to lower the price, and improve the quality of care. I'm all for it.

Like they have done with insulin and the epi-pen?

Free market solutions like that?

 

[pknopp]

How can a person prepare for an emergency when they are paid 7.25 an hour?

Be realistic here.

Along with sick leave, the minimum wage should be raised. It has not been increased since the bush boy years.

Did you ever think that if people were paid a living wage they would be able to prepare for an emergency and wouldn't need any public assistance?

A "living wage" WOULD be public assistance if the job isn't worth that much, because if the employer loses money on it, the job disappears, unless the taxpayer makes up the difference.

The taxpayer does make up the difference in the many public assistance programs. They are corporate socialism.

Again... if the job isn't worth the cost of the benefits, then the job will cease to exist.

How much will the taxpayer make up the difference, if there is no job at all?

Dumb argument. If you chose to give out benefit from government, that's on you, not the corporations.

Whether you give out benefits or not, it's not the corporations duty to do anything.

They are a business. If they can't make money providing jobs, then they don't provide jobs.

We, the people who create jobs, are not obligated to you. We didn't invest our money, for your benefit. If I can't reap a return on my investment, then I'll just blow the money on my own desires, and provide zero jobs.

And the irony is, you yourself would never invest and create jobs if it didn't benefit you to do so. So your entire argument is utter hypocrisy.

Wal-Mart loves food stamps. No one is creating the trillions the Fed simply throws at the markets.

Again, you don't know what you are talking about. The Fed isn't "throwing" trillions at the markets.

Crap, dude, even the toddler could figure that out. If the Fed was really throwing trillions of dollars at the market, then the marketing couldn't possibly be dropping like it has. Use some logic.

Beyond that, you don't know jack about Walmart. Even that article was full of crap. I read the entire thing, and they just made it up.

They looked at the estimate number of people at the company that earned a low wage. Guessed that they must be single. Guessed that they must be living alone. And assumed they were taking food stamps.

First single guy in high school, who is living at home, isn't getting food stamps.

Boom... there went the entire basis of the article. Blown to bits by one example.

I knew a girl who worked at Walmart. Not only was she not collecting food stamps, but she was using Walmart's tuition reimbursement program, and now has a degree in civil engineering.

You people are just full of crap.

Go to Wal Mart and look for these single guys. They are not the ones working there and the markets are NOT working.

 

[pknopp]

That's the whole point but you know that. I have no desire to chase your feigned ignorance.

Well I proved you wrong. So, you are the one in ignorance. You claimed interest rates were negative.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

No. They want 12% returns in the market. Wealthy people don't keep their money in savings.

 

[pknopp]

Well I proved you wrong. So, you are the one in ignorance. You claimed interest rates were negative.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

he keeps wanting life to be his utopia and gets lost in the reality in his way.

Not supporting the idea of stealing from seniors to boost the markets is still a long ways from any utopia.

 

[hadit]

Well I proved you wrong. So, you are the one in ignorance. You claimed interest rates were negative.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

No. They want 12% returns in the market. Wealthy people don't keep their money in savings.

IOW, they put their money to work.

 

[iceberg]

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

he keeps wanting life to be his utopia and gets lost in the reality in his way.

Not supporting the idea of stealing from seniors to boost the markets is still a long ways from any utopia.

Name the people doing that.

 

[pknopp]

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty. I never said rates are negative. I said the markets want negative rates. Trump called for negative rates.

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

No. They want 12% returns in the market. Wealthy people don't keep their money in savings.

IOW, they put their money to work.

How's that working for them right now? Do you understand that this is why retired people are reluctant to?

So why should they have their money stolen to boost the markets they aren't interested in?

 

[pknopp]

Why would the market want negative rates? Rich people want a return on their savings too.

I wish I didn't have to deal with so much dishonesty too.

I don't care "what trump called for". Have you learned nothing all these years? Trump says all kinds of stuff. Pay less attention to what he says, and more to what he does.

The irony is, a bunch of people on here still claim that the Federal Reserve is a private bank, and if that's true, why does it matter what Trump says anyway?

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

he keeps wanting life to be his utopia and gets lost in the reality in his way.

Not supporting the idea of stealing from seniors to boost the markets is still a long ways from any utopia.

Name the people doing that.

Trump.

Trump has ramped up calls for negative interest rates. Here's what they are and why they matter. | Markets Insider

Wall Street.

Voices: Is Pimco right that negative yields make sense?

They say it will be good for people to have their money taken from them.

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

GOP LAWMAKER WHO VOTED AGAINST PAID SICK LEAVE IN FLORIDA TAKES PAID LEAVE FROM CONGRESS

Gaetz Voted Against Florida Paid Sick Leave. He’s Using It in Congress.

As the article notes, he isn't even sick but he is still going to take time off, all paid for by the taxpayers.

A perfect distillation of conservative philosophy...

 

[iceberg]

Want to bet it happens? There is only one way to go from zero. Money was intended to be "FREE"?

Yes or no.... do wealthy people want interest on their deposits? Yes or no dude. Answer that, or shut up. You are speaking stupid non-stop.

he keeps wanting life to be his utopia and gets lost in the reality in his way.

Not supporting the idea of stealing from seniors to boost the markets is still a long ways from any utopia.

Name the people doing that.

Trump.

Trump has ramped up calls for negative interest rates. Here's what they are and why they matter. | Markets Insider

Wall Street.

Voices: Is Pimco right that negative yields make sense?

They say it will be good for people to have their money taken from them.

he's trying to fix an overall economy. you are worried about a few who MAY be impacted by this and 9gnoring the people who are.

you seem to pride yourself on strawmaning up a helpless victim so you can prance around and shout for their defense.