Biden accomplishments

Then why isn't gasoline $5 a gallon right now?

Some of the inflation is corporate profit taking, but only because excessive spending is permitting it.

Example: Heinz can charge you $5 a bottle for ketchup, because of massive government spending, everyone has money in their wallet and will shrug their shoulders and pay that $5. But if the Fed stops printing money, Joe Sixpack no longer has that thick wallet and he buys generic ketchup.

Heinz then has a business decision. Keep the price at $5 and lose half their customers, or lower the price to $4.


As we are seeing more layoffs and higher inflation from rents to insurance premiums, McDonald's has been noticing that their customers are buying less per trip. Skipping fries, picking a single burger instead of a double cheeseburger.

Another successful Biden money laundering scheme

FredHayek wrote: Then why isn't gasoline $5 a gallon right now?

Some of the inflation is corporate profit taking, but only because excessive spending is permitting it.

Example: Heinz can charge you $5 a bottle for ketchup, because of massive government spending, everyone has money in their wallet and will shrug their shoulders and pay that $5. But if the Fed stops printing money, Joe Sixpack no longer has that thick wallet and he buys generic ketchup.

Heinz then has a business decision. Keep the price at $5 and lose half their customers, or lower the price to $4.


As we are seeing more layoffs and higher inflation from rents to insurance premiums, McDonald's has been noticing that their customers are buying less per trip. Skipping fries, picking a single burger instead of a double cheeseburger.

What choice do consumers have concerning high prices? We have to pay $5 for the ketchup or go without. Most will shrug and pay. The fact that 53% of inflationary prices are corporate greed should alarm you, since you are a consumer that's paying those prices.

FredHayek wrote: Another successful Biden money laundering scheme

Well..... yes and no.

There's actually two cancer charities. Read the article below.

cancerletter.com/news-analysis/20201116_1/

Let’s untangle this knot:

The Beau Biden Cancer Moonshot is a government program resulting from an unprecedented bipartisan effort to double the rate of progress in cancer research. In 2016, then Vice President Biden’s leadership and steadfast congressional support for biomedical research culminated in the Moonshot legislation, which authorized $1.8 billion over seven years for cancer research (The Cancer Letter, Dec. 16, 2016).

The Biden Cancer Initiative, the object of coverage here, was a short-lived cancer nonprofit that was launched in New York on June 26, 2017, in the afterglow of the Beau Biden Cancer Moonshot of 2016 (The Cancer Letter, June 30, 2017). The organization ran for two years, suspending operations during the Biden presidential run.

The New York Post is factually correct on one point: The Biden Cancer Initiative funded no research. That’s because, again, it was never intended to.

Perhaps check your sources prior to making unsubstantiated claims?

koobookie wrote:

FredHayek wrote: Another successful Biden money laundering scheme

Well..... yes and no.

There's actually two cancer charities. Read the article below.

cancerletter.com/news-analysis/20201116_1/

Let’s untangle this knot:

The Beau Biden Cancer Moonshot is a government program resulting from an unprecedented bipartisan effort to double the rate of progress in cancer research. In 2016, then Vice President Biden’s leadership and steadfast congressional support for biomedical research culminated in the Moonshot legislation, which authorized $1.8 billion over seven years for cancer research (The Cancer Letter, Dec. 16, 2016).

The Biden Cancer Initiative, the object of coverage here, was a short-lived cancer nonprofit that was launched in New York on June 26, 2017, in the afterglow of the Beau Biden Cancer Moonshot of 2016 (The Cancer Letter, June 30, 2017). The organization ran for two years, suspending operations during the Biden presidential run.

The New York Post is factually correct on one point: The Biden Cancer Initiative funded no research. That’s because, again, it was never intended to.

Perhaps check your sources prior to making unsubstantiated claims?

That's all 99% of the R's posts are on this page. If they actually complied with this request, you would never hear anything from them....

One is a charity that went away without funding any cancer research.
The other is a taxpayer funded government program.

Why have a cancer charity that never gave money to research? I guess it is a good thing it dissolved so that cancer funds could go to charities that actually fund research. President Biden can't even run a charity correctly.

Fraud? 12 of the 14 job numbers for the month get adjusted down. Can't trust this administration to get the actual data.

But they still have their media minions trumpet the inaccurate numbers.

koobookie wrote:

FredHayek wrote: What choice do consumers have concerning high prices? We have to pay $5 for the ketchup or go without. Most will shrug and pay. The fact that 53% of inflationary prices are corporate greed should alarm you, since you are a consumer that's paying those prices.

I disagree with your statement that you have to pay $5 for ketchup or go without. You can try a different, cheaper brand. You can use less ketchup. Make different dishes that don't need ketchup. There are always alternatives in a healthy capitalist economy. At least five different brands at my local King Soopers.

FredHayek wrote: One is a charity that went away without funding any cancer research.
The other is a taxpayer funded government program.

Why have a cancer charity that never gave money to research? I guess it is a good thing it dissolved so that cancer funds could go to charities that actually fund research. President Biden can't even run a charity correctly.

Read the article that I posted. Shouldn't take you too long. That will explain. The other option is to keep believing and posting misinformation.

FredHayek wrote:

Fraud? 12 of the 14 job numbers for the month get adjusted down. Can't trust this administration to get the actual data.

But they still have their media minions trumpet the inaccurate numbers.

Gosh, it almost sounds like the adjustments have made the jobs gains go NEGATIVE. What? That's not true? The numbers were adjusted just a few percentage points?

So what, Fred. So what. Jobs numbers have been adjusted for decades.


Oh, and can you please start posting links to your data and informational graphics? Please? I'd like to check up on their veracity myself without having to scour the internet to find your graphic.