dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 3:41 pm
Well, multiple reports say they had.
I've read both, so I genuinely don't know.
Is it really possible for a President, acting completely alone, to shred a signed treaty without (at the very least) some agreement within his administration? I have always thought there is an untold story here, and version we've been fed is way too simplistic. As, unfortunately, is the case with most things.
dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:38 pm
oh, Shekels, the agreement is a’shambles.
I’ll write more later, but with the U.S. pulling out, Iran understandably had no reason to continue to keep up their end of the bargain. (which they had been doing).
So I would guess the other countries in this agreement were window dressing.
I can see why the agreement was not all that great for the U.S.
But I just don't see that the U.S. is the only player here with Iran.
There were other countries involved.
Maybe I am looking at it as us vs them.
But why couldn't the agreement still go on without the U.S. involvement?
dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 3:41 pm
Well, multiple reports say they had.
I've read both, so I genuinely don't know.
Is it really possible for a President, acting completely alone, to shred a signed treaty without (at the very least) some agreement within his administration? I have always thought there is an untold story here, and version we've been fed is way too simplistic. As, unfortunately, is the case with most things.
Isn’t that the President’s M.O., WiseOne? He does what he wants and, when told “You can’t do that, Mr President” one too many times, then he fires that person for insubordination and replaces him or her. He’s made it clear that he doesn’t put much credence into intelligence agencies, either.
More later, when I get rid of my houseguest.
9pm EST Explosions in Iran (Isfahan) and Syria and Iraq. Not yet confirmed.
dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Oct 26, 2019 1:38 pm
oh, Shekels, the agreement is a’shambles.
I’ll write more later, but with the U.S. pulling out, Iran understandably had no reason to continue to keep up their end of the bargain. (which they had been doing).
So I would guess the other countries in this agreement were window dressing.
I can see why the agreement was not all that great for the U.S.
But I just don't see that the U.S. is the only player here with Iran.
There were other countries involved.
Maybe I am looking at it as us vs them.
But why couldn't the agreement still go on without the U.S. involvement?
While I wouldn’t discount the European players as window dressing, the U.S. is obvoiusly weighty. Trump is ultimately the one putting a stranglehold on the Iranian economy. He even threatened European countries who want to buy oil from Iran. The treaty is a piece of paper. Who knows what Trump is going to do from day to day?
9pm EST Explosions in Iran (Isfahan) and Syria and Iraq. Not yet confirmed.
The Iran stuff was classic Bolton. It will be interesting to see how things workout going forward. Also, no one should ever think international law or treaties work anything like a law or regulation at lower levels. I don’t know, but I imagine the calculus was...yeah, the Iranians may be keeping the treaty but all this other stuff they are doing needs a counter and this treaty isn’t helping in how we can respond...therefore, toss the treaty. We will tick off the Europeans, who cares. The Russians are with the Iranians in most Middle East issue, so ditto who cares. Side benefit of tossing the treaty, sends a message to the Iranians, game on.
dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 7:43 am
The only part I don’t get is
It’s not equal to holding shares of the overall stock market? (e.g. VTI)
Does that pay dividends? Can you specify individual shares when you sell? (I'm not joking; I actually don't know).
(1) yes. (Ok, I think I see your point)
(2) You can if you arrange that with the brokerage. (I admit I don’t. I switched to average share cost).
Ok. BTW, I have managed to stay in the 0% tax bracket for the last several years by balancing gains and losses between very old and more recent gold purchases, so this isn't just theoretical.
dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:35 pm
That is actually very cool. If you can live off that (even partially) and manage a 0% rate, more power to you!
I only need about a 2% withdrawal rate after Social Security, so it's not too difficult.
dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:35 pm
That is actually very cool. If you can live off that (even partially) and manage a 0% rate, more power to you!
And, I'm trying to remember. An excellent book that was recommended here regarding taxes and investing that I bought and read stated that if you could get at a 10% tax bracket or below then your capital gains rate would be zero? Remembering correctly?
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:35 pm
That is actually very cool. If you can live off that (even partially) and manage a 0% rate, more power to you!
I only need about a 2% withdrawal rate after Social Security, so it's not too difficult.
Either you live super frugally or you have a large base from which to withdraw that 2% or a combination of the two.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:35 pm
That is actually very cool. If you can live off that (even partially) and manage a 0% rate, more power to you!
And, I'm trying to remember. An excellent book that was recommended here regarding taxes and investing that I bought and read stated that if you could get at a 10% tax bracket or below then your capital gains rate would be zero? Remembering correctly?
dualstow wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:35 pm
That is actually very cool. If you can live off that (even partially) and manage a 0% rate, more power to you!
I only need about a 2% withdrawal rate after Social Security, so it's not too difficult.
Either you live super frugally or you have a large base from which to withdraw that 2% or a combination of the two.
Priceless comment from SeekingAlpha concerning "China deal on trade"
Create a problem
Lose export revenue
Blame without shame
Retract the calamity
Pretend to have standing
Solve problem you compounded
The original problem remains
Bluster and bloviation galore
Entertainer-in-Chief, go away!
China is reportedly sending men to sleep in the same beds as Uighur Muslim women while their husbands are in prison camps
"They help [the families] with their ideology, bringing new ideas," he told RFA. "They talk to them about life, during which time they develop feelings for one another." https://www.businessinsider.com/china-u ... rt-2019-11
Last week, China warned the US that criticism over the Uighurs was not "helpful" for ongoing trade talks.
With so called "help" from the Communist Party what is to Criticize?
I sometimes think.
What if Trump just walked away from a Trade deal with China, and let the chips fall where they may.
Do we really want to have a Trade deal with China?
Sure we would miss the Imports but other countries probably would pick up the slack.
As for exports, well that's a tough one.
But I guess we would see how much China wants to have a deal with the U.S.
ochotona wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2019 6:23 am
Priceless comment from SeekingAlpha concerning "China deal on trade"
Create a problem
Lose export revenue
Blame without shame
Retract the calamity
Pretend to have standing
Solve problem you compounded
The original problem remains
Bluster and bloviation galore
Entertainer-in-Chief, go away!
Just about sums up his standard "problem-solving" process!
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
How well do you think the Obama Administration dealt with Chinese trade issues and theft of American intellectual property?
Please cite specific examples and establish a comparative context.
“Groucho Marx wrote:
A stock trader asked him, "Groucho, where do you put all your money?" Groucho was said to have replied, "In Treasury bonds", and the trader said, "You can't make much money on those." Groucho said, "You can if you have enough of them!"
jhogue wrote: ↑Tue Nov 05, 2019 12:57 pm
How well do you think the Obama Administration dealt with Chinese trade issues and theft of American intellectual property?
Please cite specific examples and establish a comparative context.
I'm ignorant of what Obama did in each of the two areas. But I'm biased against anything Trump does due to his poor work ethic. A poor work ethic generally leads to suboptimal decisions and bad outcomes.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."