Ok? I donât think that PayPal (or any other checkout processor) makes you save your details. But when I pay with PayPal, thatâs why I do.
I genuinely canât tell if yâall know what âlolâ means or not.
ETA: FWIW, I donât use Google pay, Apple pay, tap to pay, etc. PayPal is my only shortcut processor and not what I use regularly.
I do, BUT the way things are going currently, for some people it might become
Leaping Off LedgeâŚ
I do know what it means, itâs just⌠Iâm such a chump⌠
(lol 
)
Nice way to bring it back to the economy 
âŚandddd Sellers should be paying attention for Q42025 and Q12026:
CBO projected that real GDP will be lower in the fourth quarter of 2025 than it would have been otherwise.
âDepending on its length, the government shutdown will reduce annualized real GDP growth in that quarter by 1.0 to 2.0 percentage points. After the shutdown, real GDP will be temporarily higher than it would have been otherwise,â CBO said.
âAlthough most of the decline in real GDP will be recovered eventually, CBO estimates that between $7 billion and $14 billion (in 2025 dollars) will not be.â
Yes, the impact will be temporary and negative AND NOT EQUALLY FELT.
Like every thing about the economy, there will be winners and losers. Like the millionaires created during the great depression.
Even if I come out ahead, this was not necessary. I was not starving under the previous admin. Thereâs no need to create more billionaires at the expense of creating more poverty. We donât need another Great Depression. That was a tragedy.
Agree. We look like as strategic as a toddler bouncing a ball around a room, no care or concern for what might be damaged.
Only history will tell whether it was necessary and the winners write the history. No matter how many academics may try to write a version which survives.
- this is isnât LOTR
constant reversion to hyperbolic abstractions and emphasis on oversimplification without establishing fundamental criteria on what makes good or bad policy is a non-sequitur
This is economic policy. Economics is opinion and opinion cannot be proved to be good or bad before all of the facts are known,
Economists are frequently wrong because there are always unforeseen negative consequences, or consequences which were not foreseen by Keynesians.
Only fools believe the opinions of economists before they see the effects of implementing them.
We have still not seen all of the effects of zero interest rates and âquantitative easingâ.
The FED balance sheet overhangs all of the current debate.
Especially when logical fallacies are strung together in series, to discredit any form of coherent analysis or even conversation, and to deny even the most basic of economic principles. It would be impressive in the form of intellectual evaluation, if it was not so blatantly biased and devoid of conversation.
Honest intellectual discourse is not simply piles of denial strung together. It is listening, acknowledging the assertion made, and if disagreed, a counter assertion with examples is provided.
And because one can never know all the unforeseen variablesâŚ
âŚthen how do we discuss them? My repeated suggestion was to establish some base criteria before use loaded adjectives to describe everything in manichean terms. It wonât be a 100% accurate. It is more akin to associative studies I would imagine.
Belief is a misnomer left to religions - we should evaluate what they say and why though yes?
This has been my invitation to you a few times.
It was a fundamental belief of economists of most schools that negative interest rates were impossible to occur.
But not that long ago Germany and some other EU countries experienced negative interest rates.
It is like the incomplete quote you posted about Double-blind. controlled scientific studies. You left out the requirement they be reproducable. There are usually additional caveats associated with âeconomic truthsâ.
Before the Covid debates on âwhat does the science sayâ there was widespread concern in the scientific community because of the increase in non-reproducible studies. Some major scientific journal recalled a well among average number of published articles.
Came the Covid controversies, and the discussion ended, and the definition of the gold standard was truncated. Economics has never had a gold standard since that of our currency was repealed.
Where was that exactly? I have not posted in this thread for days and my mouse battery is dying.
Much harder to move the goal posts, when others get to check the concrete first.
I would have to dig DEEP into my archives to find the newsletter I wrote for my customers back in the early '80âs showing when the US actually had negative interest rates for a very brief period of time.
You would have to go through the records of Treasury Bill/Note prices from the 1930âs which is where I found it.
They were not all strung together to make it easy to find, but there were auctions where the bid price was actually ABOVE PAR. That meant people paid more than $1000 to get back $1000 in a certain period of time.
People never remember those âoutliersâ that put nearly all ârulesâ to a test that fails when examined historically. Thatâs why people build on flood plains, donât do construction to withstand earthquakes, etc.
George Santayana rules!
And most economists ignore them because if they did not, they would have nothing to say.
I have no clue which thread you posted it on, but you did, Your posts all show a common theme no matter what the tread is about.
So do mine for that matter.
Interesting conversation about Chinese import fraud via Non-Resident importer loopholes.
10% shift from American companies importing goods to China because there is no punishment for lying to CBP when you are a Chinese company.
Head to the 7:00 minute mark for the details on this.
Did no one ever watch Ferris Buehlerâs Day Off? Ben Stein explained tariffs way back then.
