WEDNESDAY: The analysts screamed and tore their hair...

WEDNESDAY, JULY 2, 2025

...when Staphanie Ruhle got it wrong: Last night, at the start of her program's second segment, MSNBC's Stephanie Ruhle decided to level with her viewers. She went on to describe the fiscal nightmare which would be created by passage of the GOP megabill.

She started the segment with a reference to the name of a regular segment:

RUHLE (7/1/25): It is time now for "Money Power Politics." And this evening, we are talking about our financial responsibility as a country.

I want a "level set" here. This has been a problem for the United States for many years. Our debt has exploded over the past two decades under the leadership of both parties. But that makes it even more important to take a hard look at what this Republican bill would do to make an already bad situation even worse.

As the New York Times puts it, this is one of the most expensive pieces of legislation in years and would put our country on a more perilous fiscal path.

Ruhle wasn't kidding around! Bringing the note of sadness in, Paul Krugman recently said that current projections describe a situation which is "unsustainable" even before the GOP bill makes future debt larger still.

Krugman has recently said it; for that reason, we believe it. Now, Ruhle was going to "level set" the situation. She was going to lay it right on the line.

At that point, sad! Moments later, she offered this thoroughly bungled statistical portrait of where matters stand:

RUHLE: These numbers are going to impact all of our lives in really important ways. So I want you to keep these three things in mind.

First, the national debt. Right now, it's a whopping $37 trillion. And this bill would add at least three trillion more over the next decade.

The analysts screamed and ran into the yard. Glumly, we slumped back into our beanbag chair.

Sad! Ruhle was right about the size of the national debt at present. But her presentation plainly gave the impression that the GOP bill would cause the debt to ruse to $40 trillion, perhaps a bit more, by the end of the next ten years.

Plainly, her presentation gave that impression. Plainly, that portrait is howlingly wrong.

Sadly, this is the actual state of current projections:

According to current projections, the debt will rise to something like $56 trillion (or more?) over the course of the next decade even if the GOP megabill doesn't pass. According to the CBO, the GOP bill would add something like an additional $3-5 trillion to that current projection:

That is, the debt will stand at something like $60 trillion over the next decade if the megabill passes. We're at $37 trillion now, but we're headed for much bigger things.

As we've noted again and again, our major journos have largely been fumbling this matter all through the past few months. Now, MSNBC's top economics / business anchor has completely misstated this matter

None of this actually matters, of course. It's much too late to expect anything like a competent national discourse, about this or anything else.

That said, the analysts screamed and tore their hair when Ruhle histrionically laid out the facts. The pictures she painted was groaningly wrong.

Again and again, in a million ways, this is the state of Blue leadership.

As an example of what we mean: Once again, here's Andrew Duehren's picture of the situation:

Senate Bill Would Add at Least $3.3 Trillion to Debt, Budget Office Says

[...]

With roughly $29 trillion in debt currently held by the public, the budget office had already expected the government to borrow another $21 trillion over the next decade, meaning the Republican bill would make an already-dire fiscal forecast worse. And the initial estimate of a cost of $3.3 trillion for the Senate bill is an undercount, because it does not include additional borrowing costs which could push the bill’s overall addition to the debt closer to $4 trillion.

For a larger excerpt, see Monday afternoon's report.

Bowing to the endless complexity which dooms all hope of understanding, Duehren is referring to debt "held by the public," a subset of overall national debt. But as you can see, total debt is projected to grow by a mammoth amount even if the GOP megabill doesn't pass.

The megabill would add a few trillion more. Pretty soon, before you know it, you're talking about real money!

107 comments:


  1. "None of this actually matters, of course. It's much too late to expect anything like a competent national discourse, about this or anything else."

    Precisely. All you and your idiot-Democrat comrades need to learn is this: Orange Man Bad.

    And you're already there, Bob: TDS already killed every brain cell of yours. So, relax and enjoy the ride.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Um, Somerby doesn’t mention Trump in this post. He’s talking about the Republican budget bill.

      Delete
    2. Is some maggot trying to pretend that Prince Orange Chickenshit knows what the fuck is in the bill? Bwahahaha!

      Delete
    3. There's no "Republican budget bill". This bill is Donald Trump's bill. Everything idiot-Democrats (including neverTrump Republicans) say is about Donald Trump, even when the name renames unmentioned. Budget, bombs, aliens, everything.

      Delete
    4. What the fuck is a Donald Trump? Is it akin to a wedgie?

      Delete
    5. Trump's disdain for Republican voters is easily the best thing about him.

      Delete
    6. CVS expects to have its TDS booster shots available by the end of the summer. Don't let your levels lag.

      Delete
    7. Corporations and the super rich are getting another HUGE tax break.
      Clap louder, Republican voters.

      Delete
    8. Bad news 8:24, there is no cure for Trump Cult Syndrome. Just have to face a slow and painful death. The really great news is while you are suffering, folks in lower castes will suffer more. It makes it all worthwhile.

      Delete
  2. On Fox News, the presenters and guests are denying this bill will produce a deficit, or that Medicaid is being cut. In other words, lies. In other words, a day ending in ‘y.’

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thanks, Bob for clarifying these figures. I have been ranting about this subject for a while here.

    The huge problem that Bob and other Dems ignore is that to avoid disaster there must be substantial, real cuts in actual spending. Yet, when Trump proposes reducing foreign aid or Medicaid, etc., the Dems generally oppose the cuts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your rants constantly flip flop, are often fact free, and when cornered, you change the subject. ie - you add nothing to the conversation.

      Delete
    2. David in Cal,
      Which Republican Congressperson's desk did you decide to shit on?

      Delete
    3. Raising taxes when you're running a deficit makes as much sense as getting a second job when your kids are going to bed hungry.

      Delete
    4. The tax code in this country has been unsustainable for decades and made worse by Bush II and Trump. Clinton raised taxes and assigned Gore the task of cutting spending. It was done thoughtfully. The dot com bubble helped as well in eliminateing the deficit, to be sure, but it is not possible to seriously discuss the national debt without addressing the revenue side, as DiC would like to. Nothing Musk did was thoughtful. Now the middle and lower economic tiers are going to be bludgeoned by the dollar depreciating and tariffs/taxes. 23 Nobel Laureate economists told you this was going to go South, before the election. Republicans would like to live in a data-free world of their ignorant fantasies.

      Delete
    5. "when Trump proposes reducing foreign aid or Medicaid, etc., the Dems generally oppose the cuts."

      Poor Trump. Wanting to cut spending but hamstrung by the all-powerful Democrats.

      Delete
    6. It is painful reading the musings of demented cult member David.

      Delete
    7. 8:22 yup and 8:31 yup

      Delete
    8. "Republicans would like to live in a data-free world of their ignorant fantasies." Like I don't know about that man. I mean give the Laffer Curve another 60 years and its bound to start trickling down on something other than ordinary peoples legs.

      Delete
    9. It must be so frustrating for Dickhead in Cal. He has worked so hard all his life to support his fascists and finally they are in power. If only he was 50 or 60 years younger so he could be roaming the city streets in a brown shirt and face mask beating the shit out of the brown people. He can only sit and watch everyone else having all the fun now.

      Delete
  4. This is called incompetence:

    "A bizarre security breach unfolded in the Oval Office when Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg unexpectedly wandered into a classified meeting about the Air Force's new F-47 fighter jets, according to insiders who talked to NBC News.

    The intrusion left high-level defense experts alarmed — and revealed the Trump administration's increasingly casual approach to national security protocols, the report stated.

    According to NBC, Zuckerberg wandered in unannounced, shocking White House staffers who leapt to remove the tech billionaire from the sensitive military briefing. The report doesn't say when the meeting happened.

    Sources described the incident as taking place in a "bizarro world" environment, with military leaders "mystified and a bit unnerved" by the apparent lack of security.

    The meeting, which involved Trump and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, among others, was punctuated by additional unusual interruptions. A young aide casually entered the room to show Trump something on a laptop, while the president's phone continuously buzzed with incoming calls.

    One meeting attendee expressed particular concern about the potential for "spillage" — a term indicating the risk of classified information being compromised.

    Zuckerberg, who has reportedly been dubbed "MAGA Mark" by some Meta staffers, was reportedly asked to wait outside after officials realized he lacked the necessary security clearance to be there. The incident highlights growing questions about the Trump administration's approach to confidential government proceedings." [Rawstory via NBC]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We’re in debt. We can’t afford the F-47.

      Delete
    2. We're in debt to billionaires, they need more of our money doncha know?

      Delete
    3. Everyone can afford to fanny-burp

      Delete
  5. "Our debt has exploded over the past two decades under the leadership of both parties."

    Both sides, clearly!

    George W. Bush inherited a balanced budget.
    Barack Obama inherited a financial crisis.
    Trump inherited a growing economy.
    Biden inherited a pandemic.
    Trump inherited a growing economy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting how the liberal communist socialist evil enemy of the people has been pushing Rs are the fiscal and military Daddy's forever. And they consistently suck at these things. I remember thinking holy crap, why is Obama smiling on that stage in Chicago after he won. Banks collapsing mid east wars raging. Considering the voters haven't given them legislative majorities for more than 2 years, the Dems do a pretty remarkable job of righting the ship. I don't think the US rights this Frump authoritarian bullstuff in my lifetime. Alligator gulag, what the ever loving fck man.

      Delete
    2. There are days when I think our democracy was doomed once the government started giving money to people. People will naturally vote for candidates who promise to give them the most money, so spending will grow and grow. Add that to the ability of the government to borrow enormous amounts and to print money - that's a recipe for disaster. There's little to restrain spending until we're totally in the soup

      Consider: The Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) limits the total base discretionary spending to $1.606 trillion for FY 2025. The entire $1.6 trillion of discretionary spending was borrowed money. In fact, we had to borrow more than this amount to help pay the interest on the national debt. Obviously this cannot continue. Yet, the Reps and Dems are doing nothing to fix the problem.

      Delete
    3. Dumbshit: our debt has exploded over the past two decades under the leadership of both parties. I hope you're not trying to imply that is false, although it wouldn't be surprising if you were.

      Delete
    4. You're probably so ignorant you think that a balanced budget means Clinton wiped out the debt, that the debt didn't go up while he was president. You do. Don't you?

      Delete
    5. Democratic socialist countries in Europe give far more to their people without going bankrupt, so no, it is not a matter of how much social welfare that is doled out nor how much money is printed. You have a remarkable lack of awareness that the tax code in this country has resulted in a widening and unsustainable wealth gap. Go read Thomas Pickety's "Capital in the 21st Century" and get back to us about that. But even within the confines of our broken system, the Republicans, as indicated above, have managed for many decades to have markedly underperformed the Democrats economically with regard to every economic parameter of any significance: job growth, unemployment, wage growth, GDP growth, stock market returns, etcetera. They suck at this economics thing, partly because they have a mindset like yours, DiC, with zero ability to reflect on their failings. They gave Arthur Laffer a medal of honor during the last Trump regime, they are that fucking lost. The corruption in our politics that results from lobby money and massively bloated military spending that Musk had zero interest in addressing don't help any. Like favoring coal over promoting sustainable energy, the Republicans have a broken mindset that results in bills like the one being voted on, once again shoveling money up to the 1% and screwing the middle and lower classes, all the while pontificating like you, that we haven't been doing enough of this. You love the welfare mother in a Cadillac myth that Reagan promoted because it makes you feel good about yourself, and gives your kind license to suggest that Medicare fraud, for example, is perpetrated by recipients rather than providers and insurers. Rick Scott's career being a prime example. Your ilk has been ruining this country for decades and when the decline in the dollar as well as the tariffs summon inflation in a month or so you will act lost, like it's someone else's fault.

      Delete
    6. There are no "democratic socialist" countries in Europe, you moron. What they are is called "neoliberal"; all of them. Which is what the Democrat party is also, incidentally.

      Delete
    7. Also, countries don't give anything to "their people". What a quintessentially fascist construct. Yes, you must be a Democrat.

      Delete
    8. A lot of what you're saying is true but you're forgetting about “both sides”. Democratic party policies have contributed bigly to inequality and deregulation. The corn pone hick Bill Clinton passed NAFTA and Glass Steagal while his hag, nepo-wife watched on. It's beyond dispute Democrats support larger military budgets, one of many bipartisan issues where both sides support capital over labor. Democratic party politicians are drunk on corruption and lobbying money and accept massive contributions from finance, big Tech etc. And Democrats resist progressive reforms across the board for decades, doing nothing about wealth taxes or single-payer healthcare. Both sides is the way this here game is played. You can say these things about Republicans and they are totally accurate. You can say that Republicans are worse than Democrats but the real question is by how much and are they meaningfully better? The answer is no and that's the game. The Democratic party is equally complicit in the game and any idea that they're not is a fantasy that’s been sold to supporters. It’s a well planned, diversionary tactic. It's like a rapist calling out a murderer. That's the game they play on us. Don’t fall for it.


      https://www.reddit.com/r/Political_Revolution/comments/8aapig/venn_diagram_for_the_mainstream_parties/

      Delete
    9. 3:20,
      You pointing out that both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are the same reminds me of George Carlin's joke about the "undisputed heavyweight champion of the world."
      "If it's undisputed, what the fuck are they fighting about?"

      Delete
    10. "It's like a rapist calling out a murderer."
      More like a rapist calling out his Presidential opponent as "old".

      Delete
    11. Junior Bush explained that it would be wrong to have a budget surplus because that would mean we were taking too much tax payer money. Junior Bush was the dumbest fucking president prior to Orange Chickenshit.

      Delete
    12. I don't disagree with a lot of what you say at 3:45. But the idea that both parties are equally complicit in economic terms is not correct historically. Democrats do not push Reaganomics and would not have extended the tax cuts, for example. Both parties suck, on more than the other in terms of fiscal management.

      Delete
    13. There is no difference between the Democratic Party, that the Right says is letting illegal immigrants vote in our elections, and the Republican Party, who say they don't want illegal immigrants voting in our elections.
      Per 3:45 AM, both parties want illegal immigrants voting in our elections.
      Who knew?

      Delete
    14. Who knew that what Mike Johnson describes as "America's bill" would poll under water by a 2:1 margin?

      Delete
    15. "There are no "democratic socialist" countries in Europe, you moron. What they are is called "neoliberal"; all of them. Which is what the Democrat party is also, incidentally."
      The healthcare they provide is the "tell".

      Delete
    16. Yeah, right, moron, "they provide". Go to the UK, try their NHS, their so-called "healthcare". And in Canada, their best "healthcare" procedure is now assisted suicide.

      Delete
    17. Democrats do not push Reaganomics? Not in their words. But they do in their deeds. That's how this here game is played. The Democrats deregulated the financial industry while getting people to believe they don't push Reaganomics. The game is the game. Always.

      Delete
    18. There's only one party in the United States. The party of business. There are two factions within it that have slightly different approaches and corporate loyalties. C'est tout.

      Delete
    19. To a retarded Democrat "Reaganomics" is a swear word, but in reality it was a successful recovery after Carter's economic disaster. In fact, hugely successful compared to Obamanomics.

      Delete
    20. Successful for business and capital..

      Delete
    21. Successful for America. For example, the unemployment rate dropped by 3 points in the first year of Reaganomics, while it actually grew during the equivalent period of Obamanomics, the most sluggish recovery in history.

      Delete
    22. It is very important for Boris here to make sure we understand that the royal fucking the republicans have just handed us is the democrats fault. Fuck you, Boris.

      Delete
    23. Your xenophobia is noted, idiot-Democrat. No surprise there.

      Delete
    24. 9:36. That is funny. Reaganomics was rejected as a failure by one of its architects, Bruce Bartlett, after the 2008 recession. The one that Obama had to dig us out of, as usual.

      Delete
    25. Whatever someone named Bruce Bartlett allegedly said after 2008 about the economic policies of the 1980s, that has to be the truth, the final word. End of story.

      Delete
    26. 11:21, that's a real HOWLER, I mean Laffer.

      Delete
    27. Bruce Bartlett was Reagan's coffee boy.
      Like Goebbels to Hitler.

      Delete
    28. 9:44 let me pull data points out of the air with no context to not prove my point. Inflation was 13.5% under Reagan and 1.4% under Obama. Deal with it loser.

      Delete
    29. Mao is dead long live Mao.

      Delete
    30. Building a gulag in the Everglades to show off how cruel we are is not a fascist Democratic concept. That kind of is one of the key elements of fascist scumbaggery. But I am not one to point fingers at the scumbag fascists responsable for it

      Delete
    31. Why didn't they self-deport when asked nicely? Big, big mistake.

      Delete
  6. And, I might add, it was at this exact time that a rare and peculiar fanny burp was hereby produced.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good economic news
    “Employers in the United States added 147,000 workers to their payrolls in June, the Department of Labor said Thursday, and the unemployment rate declined to 4.1 percent, defying predictions of labor market sluggishness following the implementation of President Trump’s tariffs.

    Economists had been expecting 110,000 jobs and an unemployment rate ticking up to 4.3 percent.
    The April jobs report was revised up by 11,000, from a gain of 147,000 to 158,000. May was revised up by 5,000 to 144,000. Combined, the revisions added 16,000 jobs to the April and May reports.
    Wage gains continued in June. Average hourly earnings rose by 0.2 percent in the month and are up 3.7 percent from a year ago, well above the rate of inflation.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Give me a reason to believe that the US department of labor under The Liar Donald Trump isn’t lying about the jobs numbers.

      Delete
    2. OK @10:09. The entire government is filled with Dems who oppose Trump. Presumably that's true of the DOL. There's no mechanism whereby Trump and the Secy of Labor can manipulate this report without civil service people knowing about and publicizing the misdeed.

      BTW the DOL underestimated the job gains in the two prior months.

      Delete
    3. A job report being revised up is a sure sign the place is still controlled by Autopen's faithfuls, rather than Trump faithfuls.

      Otherwise they would've reported huge leaps forward every month, quietly revised down after a few months. The Autopen-style.

      Delete
    4. Are Dems happy about the good economic news? This is where the sh*t hits the fan on the policy of RESISTANCE. Dems don't want Trump's policies to succeed. But, if things succeed for Trump, that means they succeed for the people of the country. Dems have painted them selves into a corner where they're hoping things go badly for the country.

      Delete
    5. DiC, you seem to be saying that if republicans were working at the department of labor, the jobs report probably couldn’t be trusted. Is that a problem for our democracy? On the other side, you are saying that the Democrats who work there ARE trustworthy.

      Delete
    6. The head of that department is a trump supporter. He could order the report changed by a handful of his lackeys. Any whistleblower within the agency would be publicly attacked and/or fired and/or prosecuted, just as you attack the report by insiders claiming that the Iran bombing wasn’t as successful as it was depicted, with calls for the firing of anyone reporting this. See how this works?

      Delete
    7. “ Are Dems happy about the good economic news? ”

      You didn’t prove it was true. Besides, you were asked repeatedly if Reps were happy about the good economic news when Biden was president. You never were.

      Delete
    8. Dems don't want 180 tariff proposals in 180 days with no achievements/plan. Dems don't want our neighbors who have been working with us for decades ripped from their families, thrown in foreign gulags, all without legal process. Dems don't want us to abandoned Ukraine colluding with Putin for him to take back all former Soviet states. Dems don't want rich people getting another huge Republican tax break while ordinary people and our commons suffer. Basically Dems want to know what the fuck is making people so angry about brown folks that allows them to be so dense about everything.

      Delete
    9. Added about half the jobs needed to keep up with population growth. yea.

      Delete
    10. We already know from Reagan, Shrub, and Tump that Republican economic policies since Laffer have been a disaster. How are we supposed to believe the exact same stupid will work this time? It ain't wishing for, it's knowing the results of sticking to failed economic policy. Shit David, Laffer has been Republican policy for 45 years and all it has done is transferred more wealth to the 1% than anytime in history, And bankrupted the nation. Yea, give me more of the winning you loser.

      Delete
  8. @10:28 I did not say anything at all about what would happen if Reps were working at the DOL.

    I do think the people at the DOL are basically honest and trustworthy. I do not always agree with their chosen methodology, but I have every confidence that they are properly following their methodology.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You said that I ought to believe the report because Democrats work at the department of labor. That implies that I could be skeptical if republicans worked there.

      By the way, I sincerely doubt you have any idea of the political persuasion of the employees there.

      Delete
    2. So these Labor department employees are not lazy leeches, the way government workers have been characterized by Trump and his administration??

      Delete
    3. Well we do know for a fact that Republicans admire convicted felons who are constantly trying to score a cheap buck off their cult following. There is no denying the simple fact that Republicans are Democracy hating racial bigots who take a daily shit on the constitution. Sorry, but those are simple facts, to state it simply, for your fact free simple mind.

      Delete
    4. “The federal agency has already lost about 20% of its workforce, according to employees”

      Mass resignations at labor department threaten workers in US and overseas, warn staff – as more cuts loom

      https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/may/03/mass-resignations-at-labor-department-threaten-workers-in-us-and-overseas-warn-staff-as-more-cuts-loom

      Delete
    5. "according to employees"? Funny.

      Anywho. Getting rid of most of them altogether, and cutting 80% of whatever's left would be better.

      Delete
    6. "Mass resignations at labor department ...as more cuts loom." Thanks for sharing the good news, @10:55.

      Delete
    7. By your implication, DiC, this makes the department less trustworthy. It also endangers the stats.

      Delete
    8. Throwing people out of their jobs isn't funny until the Republican Party cuts our Social Security. And trying to cut our Social Security is only funny, because the Republicans won't take away our guns before they try it.

      Delete
    9. And all those Labor department employees who were laid off, fired or quit are no longer contributing to Social Security! Win win!!

      Delete
    10. Are you implying they are so stupid and lazy that getting a private sector job is out of the question?

      Delete
    11. Depending upon a person’s age and specific skill set, it can be a long process to find a new job. Meanwhile, their SS contributions are 0 while they are looking, whereas before, they were contributing.

      Delete
  9. Holy shit. 147,000 jobs added in June, surpassing the expected 110,000.

    The unemployment rate dropped to 4.1%, surpassing expectations of a rise to 4.3%.

    Even Democrats will get tired of winning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. DiC already breathlessly reported this. But thanks for playing.

      Delete
  10. “ RESISTANCE”

    Yes, DiC. Apparently you believe that a positive jobs report in June means that Democrats ought to give up caring about people being kicked off Medicaid and the cruel deportations of people who did nothing wrong, and now the idea being floated of deporting naturalized citizens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, I believe illegal immigrants should not get Medicaid. Unlike Medicare, Medicaid is charity. Suppose some people sneak into your residence. Are you morally obligated to let them live there, AND also pay for their medical care? I don't think so.

      Also, if that is your practice, more and more people will sneak into your residence in order to get free medical care.

      Delete
    2. They illegally entered our country and affected our census and therefore our voting rights.

      That's going to change.

      Delete
    3. DiC, I’m talking about US citizens, 12 million of them, who will lose their health insurance because of cuts to Medicaid. Quit being deliberately obtuse.

      Delete
    4. Trump is toying with deporting Musk.

      Delete
    5. @11:32 - that is not a fact. It's just speculation by Dems.

      Delete
    6. Not speculation.
      An exaggeration. Like there being an entire Republican voter who doesn't love white supremacy.

      Delete
    7. DiC, your playbook is always resort to partisanship.

      “Recent changes to President Trump’s tax and spending bill would cut roughly $1.1 trillion in health care spending over the next decade, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. It also found the bill would result in 11.8 million people losing health insurance by 2034 with the majority of those cuts hitting Medicaid.”

      https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/show/who-would-be-affected-by-health-care-cuts-in-senate-version-of-trumps-budget-bill

      Delete
    8. JD Vance speaks for all David in Cal's, when he says the economy doesn't matter. What matters is getting the funding for gulags run by Trump's brownshirts.

      Which also isn't speculation, it's under-exaggerating.

      Delete
    9. Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect...
      ...There is nothing more or else to it, and there never has been, in any place or time. 
      Frank Wilhoit

      David in Cal is as Conservative as they come.

      Delete
    10. "It also found the bill would result in 11.8 million people losing health insurance by 2034 with the majority of those cuts hitting Medicaid."

      So, it reduces health care spending, and illegals will lose Medicaid.

      So, what's the bad news?

      Delete
    11. It is US citizens losing health care,12:43. But your right wing propaganda is useful for all to see .

      Delete
    12. Your pbs.org quote doesn't mention any US citizens, Soros-bot. It's your own invention.

      Delete
    13. US citizens don't matter to Republicans, so there is nothing in the bill that will help them.
      That's the kind of contempt for US citizens everyone voted for.

      Delete
  11. Experts IN SHAMBLES over today's job's report, CNN is shocked

    "147K jobs! Well ahead of expectations! ... we were expecting a slowdown, we did not get that!"

    “Every single time we expect it to run out of steam, it just keeps going and going!"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The NYTimes sneaked an editorial into their news coverage by adding the word "yet".
      Employers added 147,000 jobs in June, and the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.1 percent, suggesting that tariffs, interest rates and other headwinds are not yet causing employers to pull back significantly.

      Delete
    2. They have not yet beaten their wives.

      Delete
    3. Considering the massive (according to Democrats) layoffs of the federal employees (20%, is it?), that's a UGE job increase.

      Delete
    4. Within the jobs report

      🟢 830k new jobs for native-born
      🔴 348K jobs lost for foreign-born

      🟢 437k gain of new full-time jobs
      🔴 367k loss of old part-time jobs

      Delete
    5. Oh no, more employment on the horizon. That's going to hurt Wall Street, where we have our 401K's invested.

      Delete
    6. The only things we can be sure about in the future are death, and that we will never see a Republican voter who isn't a bigot.
      Trump's big bill is helping everyone learn this truth.

      Delete
    7. What tariffs? The moron can't even negotiate with himself.

      Delete
    8. Let's see divide by 1 and multiply by 2 and invert. Still the Biden economy. Give the felon time. He kills everything he touches.

      Delete
    9. Trump’s job numbers are fake.

      Delete
    10. Come now. Next you'll be saying the 2020 election wasn't stolen.

      Delete