Bush was no prize either. The whole war in iraq and afghanistan is very expensive and gets us nowhere. Obama ran on stopping the wars, but wound up expanding them instead once he got in, plus he went whole hog on the bailouts once he got into office. THEN, he rammed through Obamacare with its healthy bailouts to the insurance companies so they would go along with the whole socialist medicine program. Trump couldnt reduce the spending even if he wanted to- the swamp wouldnt let him. He is buying support by proposing infrastructure spending which I think are bailouts for the unions.

Actually, the federal reserve is cutting back on monetary policy as I understand it. At least Trump is expanding the economy, which should drive down the debt (unfortunately, spending will rise to meet income).

It would be nice to store wealth SOMEWHERE !!! The government made the US dollar NOT a place to do that. Stocks go up slowly and fall rapidly when the people in power decide its time. Gold and Silver are sort of long term hedges against money printing, but certainly not always. Housing just goes up and down with inflation, and often down more than up. Anyway, you cant sell it if you need money right now.

Sometimes I think that its best to borrow and take advantage of inflation. Then when you get overextended, file for BK and start over. Seems like a LOT of people do just that.

"We have a major spending bubble spearheaded by Obama."
I guess it depends on what you called spearheaded. I'd say it was spearheaded by President Bush and Congress months before Obama would be elected. President Obama approved and continued it, with borrowing peaking at nearly $1 trillion. Staggering. Then borrowing fell steadily to the $400 billion range. Of course this is new borrowing, so the hole is still getting deeper fast. Next President Trump takes office and proposes going back to 1 trillion per year, even during an expansion period.

"[President Obama's] printing of money is just starting to hit now from that."
That's monetary policy, set by the Federal Reserve. President Obama approved of the loose policy. People running for office criticized it. Once Trump was elected, he changed his mind and said he approved of loose policy.

"We will see price inflation big time in the next 12 months."
That's my sense too, based on seeing how often things ship Red or are expedited, and how I hear people say they only care about schedule, not cost.

"People who have saved money will have a big surprise coming when the car they want becomes $70k instead of the $30k they expect. "
I never understand this. Who keeps a significant portion of their wealth in cash? Cash isn't made for storing value and will do a very lousy job. I always hear these stories of people putting their wealth in cash and then being surprised that it's not a wealth-storing vehicle. Also the people telling these stories are always affected by instability in the prices of things they buy but not by the stuff they're selling. They never place a crazy high bid on something because they're near capacity, and then they win the project.

You probably can't explain it to me. I want stable prices and rates too. It just seems like people who really light tight policy, always seem to fit this pattern of putting their wealth in cash and then being confused. I think it's parable, maybe, not meant to be taken seriously.

"Trump wont be able to stop government spending"
He has proposed increased it. I don't know if he would be able to reduce it. He hasn't tried or mentioned it.

We nearly had a crash in 2007-2009 when the mortgage bubble burst. We have a major spending bubble spearheaded by Obama. his printing of money is just starting to hit now from that. Price inflation was delayed thanks to being able to buy stuff from china a lot cheaper. That is about played out now. We will see price inflation big time in the next 12 months.

People who have saved money will have a big surprise coming when the car they want becomes $70k instead of the $30k they expect. We have had price inflation before, and we will have it again.

Trump wont be able to stop government spending, but he will slow down the entitlements if he can. You can see the blowback in terms of reigning in Obamacare, so the congress can stop his plans to pull back from medicaid for everyone.

He is definitely against gun control, but again, the congress can over rule that in the interest of "public safety". He didnt run on the "take the guns away"- you arent right on that.

Crazy people dont get to be billionaires like he is. They dont run big companies like the Trump organization. They dont raise kids like his. The crazy people are the liberals like Obama who apparently thought that the radicalized islamists dont exist.

People dont want change for NO REASON. Just wait until 2020 when the dems take over and really give us change- all the way to socialism and medicaid for everyone.

"I am leaning towards the try at 'better socialism" being the result of a crash. "
Probably so. I don't think a major crash if forthcoming. I think US is like the Roman Empire and heading toward being the modern city of Rome. I don't know what lies between here and there. I do not predict a climactic crash though.

"Opposing Trump for the next 3 years just means nothing will happen"
No it doesn't. He could propose tripling the deficit. He could support asset forfeiture. He could fire up the worst elements of society to get attention, which in turn could justify more statist measures. He could make light of gov't abuses of power.

He's done those things. It wasn't a secret. He ran on being able to incite people in the gov't break the law. He ran on "we've gotta take the guns away" or words that effect. He probably said the opposite at other times because he admits he says whatever gets a reaction from his redneck crowds.

When I say it like this, I sound like his political opponents. But I don't think he's the problem at all. That's just become part of the job. People want change. So we elect the craziest person running, and government spending, borrowing, and intrusiveness carries on growing.

I am leaning towards the try at 'better socialism" being the result of a crash. Not enough intellectual revolution has taken place unfortunately.

Trump is definitely NOT more socialist than Obama or Hillary. I have no idea where you get that thought from. I do think that the country is basically socialist, and thats why a lot of people hate him so much. If the media hates him, that means to me that he is LESS socialist.

I do think that given the socialist leanings of most of the politicians, Trump cant make any substantive large changes in the direction of freedom. At least he got elected, which is more than we got with Ron Paul- who was soundly rejected when he ran.

Hillary would have run the country down with much more regulation and taxation. Maybe you are thinking that the faster the collapse, the quicker things can be made better. I can actually understand that, although I think no matter what, its going to take 50 years of misery for the collapse to be final, and that would mean I have to endure a lot of misery.

Opposing Trump for the next 3 years just means nothing will happen until some socialist gets into office in 3 years and the country takes a really sharp turn to socialism.

I think you minimize the harm that government can do in the short term. Look at Obamacare to see how destructive it can be.

Watch snippets of Deconstructing the Second Amendment on CNN, http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/10/politic..., for example. Listen to leaders on the left when they are on the news, ore even most media. They all want to end the 2nd Amendment.

Could be, I don't know. If it was, it slipped past me. Wasn't following Shatner all that closely.

Irrationality is not interesting to me. At best it's just a distraction from an objectivist viewpoint. At worst, it's the effort of a agent provocateur. In either case, it's a waste of time to discuss anything with someone who has no rational process of thinking having learned nothing after being exposed to rational argument here for more than 4 years. Four years of hearing rational arguments and still voted for Hitlery. Hopeless.

"I think that an intellectual revolution is needed to make a sustainable change."
All of this makes sense. Such a revolution might be more likely as it becomes more obvious there is a problem, e.g. like Venezuela. I also agree with the part that it could lead to a try at "better" socialism.

I think President Trump is more socialist than Clinton or Obama, but we're just splitting hairs. I don't think it's overwhelmingly different. They'll tolerate increasing spending and borrowing as much as the markets will tolerate. They'll support gov't spending and intrusiveness. I think Trump is more naked about it, depending on which comments you go by, and that could be good. I don't actually think he means any of it; he's just as a master at having an intuitive sense for what will get attention.

"I would have closed my business"
Everyone's free to do that, but I categorically disagree, unless you're involved in lobbying or something directly affected. What you do has a million times more impact than what politicians do. I think we have an absolute attention-seeking clown as a president, and I have taken almost no business decisions based on. I think it's a lot of hot air that won't affect me. I think I can do more to oppose President Trump just by being responsible in things I have direct influence over. I have no thought that going to political fund raisers makes any difference beyond meeting people out here actually taking action and making things happen.

"You DO NOT just spend money you do not have legal authority to"
I have not followed the news related to this, but I absolutely do not believe a few evil people are at the core of it. The institutions don't enforce the law. The people accept the notion of gov't intruding and spending large amounts of money. You're saying there are some bad people who believe in it. If that's true, what do we do about it? Bad people will come along from time to time. It doesn't ring remotely true though. The bad people theory is just the self-serving lies of politicians because the bad people causing it all their opponents. I do not believe it for a second.

We have most politicians living and working (NOT causing on their own) a system where the gov't intrudes in people's lives and is nearly a third of the economy. They all say the problem is their opponents. They all agree to reject anyone who says if the gov't weren't so large we would not be having battles over how to actions of that third of the economy. Is that because their all evil people? No, not at all. They got their job by being good at the current system. It's asking a lot to ask them to be absolute top players in the current system and then overthrow it.

"I would think that even voting for Hillary would be the same as saying you would live with her policies and actions."
To win an election, a presidential candidate has to at least kind-of sort-of appeal to half the people. The results in candidates that most people do not find ideal but can live with. It also leads to promises of increasing gov't spending.

Before the election I knew Johnson wouldn't win. (I know. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy.) I knew Trump was a clown, but I was afraid he might win by some fluke, which actually happened. To simplify the two mainstream party candidates down to one line, Trump was reality-show huckster clown. Clinton was the hardcore politician an expert at gov't and the status quo.

The only candidate on the ballot who talked about actually reducing the cost and intrusiveness of government was Gary Johnson.

CG, I would think that even voting for Hillary would be the same as saying you would live with her policies and actions. Given the long history of corruption and just plain self centered greed, I find it really odd you could do that, when all she would do is make you give more every quarter for "her" greatness. It goes back to the tribute paid to Rome or Greece to leave them alone. I do not endorse either party at this point because they are both the same, Trump was just someone who seemed to break the chain for a brief period. He HAS forced them to basically start going nuts, making their manipulation of media and people crystal clear. I would think as a business person you just would want to limit your costs incurred by the government, and limit the regulations they force on you. Your leaning to democrat would seem to be just the opposite.

I don't know, CG is one of the most interesting people to discuss something with, simply because he is about 90 degrees out from the rest of the universe. I have never met someone who goes to fundraisers, contributes, and endorses someone, and yet says they are not a supporter or care how her politics and efforts that seem opposite of Ayn Rand's are not even important. CG, he is an odd duck.Not that it is bad r anything, just really different. I really try not to condemn anyone their positions, unless it is really something that will impact me. I just get really concerned when they start trying to either force me to approve or participate in their schemes or make me pay for them. Then it gets nasty.

I have never seen any effort by anyone to have a convention, until the last 2 years, and all the examples they use relate to the abuse of power by the feds, the corrupt politicians, Hillary, Obama, and it has drawn a lot of conservative politicians that quit because of that stuff. So, unless it is a real evil, subverted plan from the left, I think it is not being ran by them. They just couldn't call Hillary Beast "corrupt" without melting or bursting into flames...they do that a lot ( call the Beast corrupt...and other things...)

Big city liberals vs everyone else.
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...

Is he a Hitlery denier?

"CG, youre not a Hillary person? Really?"
I mean I voted for her, but I don't get any benefit from her career. If they found out Trump cheated, and Clinton won (this will not happen), it wouldn't affect me. The same is true if turned out she cheated (also won't happen), and every policy she ever supported were discredited. Either way I get no direct impact on my life, and I still have an intrusive federal gov't that wants to increase spending beyond baseline projections. I see people get majorly fired up about it, but I don't get it. Either way I send the same quarterlies in to a gov't that uses the money often in ways that make long-term problems worse.

The left has been calling for a constitutional convention for years to get rid of the 2nd amendment. Given a crack in the plaster, they will try to bring down the wall. Look what they have done for a year on the "Russian Investigation." Anyhow, we shall see, and we have no control.

The psychological effects of collectivism are pretty much ignores, but they are there in terms of slowing of innovation and economic growth.

There is a range of effort I can put out during the day working- depending on how I view the atmosphere around me. If my work is going to be taken away, there is a real question why I would work and not just have a good time on the beach...

Wasn't the movie " Go Ask Alice"? 1973, William Shatner.

Except that is all theater for the peasants. Even Clinton was a show trial.

I would disagree, the main issue most people involved in is: The budget and term limits. There has been little discussion else wise, and if you want a COS, the last thing you will think of is "How can I restrict freedom".

They can do whatever they can persuade the Convention to propose, it is up tot he states to vote and approve the measures. If you have such input, then get involved and become a delegate.

How can you not believe in any of that and vote for her? Her and Obama DID do all that, and more. Let's not add the unconstitutional EO he somehow did to give 8 billion a years away to fund Obama Care, when he could NOT get it appropriated, which Jeff Sessions just killed, and then Trump put the stake in. Obama should be brought back and impeached just for the hell of it, he is as big a criminal as Hillary. You DO NOT just spend money you do not have legal authority to, no matter what. The insanity of Liberals and Democrats is geting so bad the Democrat AGs are suing to say "you cannot stop illegally giving us money that is not appropriated" That is absolutely off the frigging wall insane. Politics above all else, Agenda over people, that is their motto.

CG, youre not a Hillary person? Really?

"I voted for Hillary, went to her fundraiser, put a sign in my yard, and urged people not to vote for Stein. I know Stein voters who were shocked that there weren't enough people like me voting for Hillary to win WI. I vowed not to comment for a while, but it sort of speaks for itself. "

Look up a few comments........