MMT proponent Chris Brown for DNC national leader to face President Trump in 2020.

DennisTate · Nov 11, 2017

If America's Democratic Party would choose an MMT proponent like Mr. Chris Brown to represent them in the 2020 election, President Donald J. Trump could coopt much of Mr. Brown's platform........

and a real estate boom could begin in rural USA that would transform the economy of America and make it theoretically possible to pay off the USA national debt, (although frankly that would probably not be the way that Chris would recommend directly all that extra money).

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...emocratic-party.489935/page-2#post-1066961109
Nominations for potential leaders for the Democratic Party.

DennisTate said: ↑

I am at this moment listening to a video interview of
another man who I also believe, should be seriously considered by
all active members of the USA DNC, because this man has
amazing potential.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1729521777377245

Mr. Chris Brown
does a fantastic job of explaining monetary policy for
a non-economist such as myself.
Click to expand...

DennisTate · Nov 11, 2017

Due to what my wife has taught me since the year 2000 I personally take the prediction by
Pastor David Wilkerson very seriously........

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...-fed-policy-pay-off-usa-national-debt.489825/
Could a real estate boom plus better Fed policy pay off USA national debt?
....

"There will be a sudden rush to buy farms, ranches, and homes in the country.

Thousands will attempt to flee from cities, hoping that a return to the land and

nature will provide security. There will be a growing urge to "get away from it

all"---and much money will be invested in land and acreage in rural areas by

people who have secret dreams of raising their own food and cattle and of

becoming self-supporting. The price of open rural land will continue to soar.

Acreage within 100 miles of most major cities will skyrocket out of reach to

all but syndicates." (David Wilkerson, The Vision, page 18,19).
Click to expand...

......

I realize that I am not wording this so well but....
YES.... I do believe that it is theoretically possible to
have America's federal government operating in the black.....
as opposed to defining itself as being nearly twenty trillion dollars in debt!

America certainly leads the world in the production of English language films of
every genre.....
so America is perfectly set up to begin to INCREASE THE VALUATION that is placed
on human life......... and on LAND that preserves and improves our lives.....
because 320 million Americans, in theory, can become 320 million actors, playing the role of themselves........
and an epic reality film series can be initiated where.... at least in theory.....The American Dream at a whole new level can be
exported to the world through film production.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...on-could-bring-world-out-of-recession.406872/

Artistic Hollywood style "Armageddon" could bring world out of recession?!

DennisTate · Nov 12, 2017

Here is a good write up on MMT by Chris:

https://www.facebook.com/groups/introductiontommt/search/?query=Brown
Intro to MMT - Modern Monetary Theory

Chris Brown
December 25, 2016

If someone tells you that the government can't afford something, like say...Paying benefits to SS recipients or fund healthcare or build a bullet train from NY to LA....Be sure and ask why.

If they say the US government can't afford it, remind them how silly that is. The government can create all the money it wants and it can use those dollars to purchase whatever it wants from the US private sector.

At that point, you'll probably be told (in a scolding voice) that when the government creates money that it results in inflation.

To which, you'd point out that they said *money* was the limitation and now they've rightly identified the real limitation.

Now that we've identified the real constraint, make sure you both agree on the cause of inflation driven by demand. Simply put, inflation driven by demand happens when demand for goods and services exceeds the private sectors ability to supply them. Now in the case of a bullet train from Boston to LA, do you really believe that there isn't enough labor and raw materials in the nation to supply what's needed to build a train? Really? I mean we've funded billions, even trillions of dollars to fight 2 wars, but we don't have the resources to build a train without causing insurmountable shortages such that it will cause the value of the dollar to fall long term? What about healthcare? Does anyone really believe that the nation can't find people to step up into those jobs (if the training was freely available) without creating massive permanent labor shortages?

The reality is that we have 20 million people (source BLS) who are under/unemployed with a net 145k new workers entering the job force each month (Source WSJ). The labor is there. The private sectors productive capacity is at 75%, which is 5% lower than the 40-year average, 10% lower than the 40-year high and 17% lower than the 75-year high (1940's). (Source The Fed - Industrial Production and Capacity Utilization - G.17)

The reality is that we fear inflation more than we fear unemployment and wasting potential productivity.

[Edited for clarity]
Click to expand...

DennisTate · Nov 12, 2017

This is a great explanation for taxes:

Chris Brown
March 16, 2016

So I'm trying to create something to get some of my friends interested in how the economy works. Most of these people are hopelessly trapped in the Matrix. This writing is the "red pill". The problem is, as most of you know, is that for every explanation you offer, there is some other idea that supports it. So when talking to those who really have no idea, you are forced to leave things out. Below I've left out how the government currently finances it's debt via bond sales. God only knows the confusion that would sew. Hopefully, what I've written is interesting enough that my friends will stick around and I can circle back with a full explanation later. I'm really trying to start something the complete layman can understand, though I admit, the "red pill" is going to be hard to swallow and some may reject my ideas.

I'm fortunate in that most of these people are real-life friends that I'm going to present this too...

Anyone see any glaring flaws or have any ideas on how I might improve it? (Yes John, I know, create a blog...lol)

Thanks
____________________________________

I want you to imagine that a newly created country has been set up in a remote area, we’ll call it “Newville”. About 50,000 people live in Newville. The area is remote, but it has all the things people need to make a life and living for themselves.

People come together and elect a government, create a Constitution and establish laws, courts and a police force. As it so happens, the laws are very similar to those here in the US.

There are lots of things to build, people need food, shelter, energy, clothes. The city needs infrastructure, water roads ect…

Problem is, the new government has no money, but already there are lots of things to be paid for….

Today, you’ve been placed in charge of the creation of new money and the collection of taxes. The only stipulation is that you can only collect tax dollars created by the Newville government (of which you are the treasurer so you create money) and every single dollar you create, you have to mark down as a “debt” in a leger.

So if you create a dollar, Newville “owes” $1. So for every positive $1, there is a -$1 liability.

On the very first day you realize you’re going to need lots of money to get the economy started, but you can’t tax it because the only thing you can tax, dollars, don’t exist yet because you haven’t created any.

So you head to your highly secure office that has the government’s printing press. You print up $100,000 and you deposit it in the Newville Central bank into the Newville government’s account. Now the Newville Congress has money to spend on the projects it votes on. At the same time, you announce that Newville is $100,000 in debt.

The citizens in Newville stop and consider the fact that you are simply creating money with a printer. They start to ask why they should accept the paper you’ve printed dollars on as money. You remind them that you have the power to impose taxes on everyone. Shortly after you announce that everyone will be expected to pay some level of tax. You have the authority of the government, backed by the courts and enforced by the police and other authorities. Now you have created demand for the currency you've created by imposing taxes. Everyone needs the money you create in order to meet their legal obligation to pay taxes. When you collect taxes you use them to mark down the “debt” in your leger. When you need more money, you simply create it.

The President of Newville announces that he will spend money provisioned to him by the Newville Congress to build roads, buildings, schools, police stations, hospitals, water and sewer, bridges and lots of other things.

Once the dollars start to circulate, people start creating other jobs to do for one another, not just the government.
-----------------------------------------

I’ve tried to create something that is a very simple but reasonable copy of how the US government works.

For example;

The treasury (that’s you in this example) creates the money and deposits it in Newvillie’s Central Bank. (The US Central Bank is the Federal Reserve (the Fed). It is the government’s bank and it is a bank for other banks. For now, I’m not going to go into a lot of detail on the Fed.)

The Congress makes the laws and creates the budget and designates where money will be spent.

The President is responsible to carry out the spending given to him.

The government creates money out of thin air and it creates a debt equal to the creation of that money.

Everyone that earns money must pay some of that money to the government in taxes.

______________________________________

Getting back to my hypothetical, let’s think about what’s happening here and how this hypothetical parallels the US government.

The single most important lesson I can share with any of you is the hardest one to accept. It is the fact that in the case of Newville and the US government, when it collects taxes, that money isn’t used to pay for things like we've been lead to believe. Taxes simply offset debt.

“What??” You say, as you second guess agreeing to read any of this…..

Yes, let’s see if I can explain.

The government creates money, why would it need to collect its own money, money it can create in order to spend more?

Now in this hypothetical, you create the money and you keep track of it in a leger. At last count you had created $100,000 so that means that the government of Newville is in debt $100,000.

Now you are the Treasurer and you represent government. When you spend it, you are spending it into the “non-government” sector, in this case everyday people.

So for every $1 the government goes into debt, the non-government gains a $1. Another way to say non-government is the “private sector”. Government is the “public sector”, but for now I’ll just use non-/government.

If that is true, then for every $1 the government taxes the non-government loses $1

If the government’s debt is paid with taxes, if you paid off the entire debt you would have to literally take away ALL the dollars held by the non-government sector. This is true in Newville and it’s true in the US.

The single most important thing you can understand here is:

When the government creates debt, the non-government sector increases its assets. Translation - When the government creates debt, everyone else gains money. This is because when the government spends money, most of that money is earned by everyday people, the non-government sector.

So when the government decreases debt it does so by decreasing the assets of the non-government (again, that’s you and me). Translation – The government decreases debt by collecting dollars. The only way the government collects dollars in though taxes. To pay down debt the government must take away your money via higher taxes.

For this reason, all US dollars are just coupons to pay taxes!!! That’s it. We think of those coupons as money and we use them, exchange them buy things with them and sell things for them. We also save them in savings accounts and investments. At the end of the day, all dollars exist because the government hasn’t taxed them back yet. The US debt, just like the Newville debt, is just a record of all the dollars created in the economy.

Now this has been very long, and if you’ve read this far, I thank you and hope that it’s helped.

There are lots of other things to cover, like inflation, interest on the debt, the Federal Reserve, the trade deficit, securities (bonds), and anything else you want to know I’ll do my best to answer." (Chris Brown)
Click to expand...

wgabrie · Nov 15, 2017

Dennis, I don't support MMT. There is something wrong with its arguments but I don't have the wherewithal to identify it with my conscious mind, but there's something in the back of my head that's screaming that there's something wrong about this.

DennisTate · Nov 17, 2017

wgabrie said: ↑

Dennis, I don't support MMT. There is something wrong with its arguments but I don't have the wherewithal to identify it with my conscious mind, but there's something in the back of my head that's screaming that there's something wrong about this.
Click to expand...

MMT is a theory that can be profoundly offensive to any of us.......
because the implications are astonishing........... I do have a problem with MMT myself......
it is too complicated.

It is easier to just come right out and admit that monetary policy.....
at the highest levels..... is something like a cruel joke on the ignorant masses?!

Here is a quotation from my 2008 campaign:

http://bankingsystemsflaws.blogspot.ca

You would be astonished how many of our political leaders do not understand the tremendous benefits of historical Canadian monetary policy.
Click to expand...

.....
http://www.michaeljournal.org/appenB.htm

"Why was a much larger national debt shrugged off in 1945, while today's much smaller debt (as a percentage of GDP) is being used as an excuse to let the economy stagnate?"

"The answer can be found at the Bank of Canada. During the war, and for 30 years afterward, the government could borrow what it needed at low rates of interest, because the government's own bank produced up to half of all the new money. That forced the private banks to keep their interest rates low, too.

"Since the mid-1970s, however, the Bank of Canada, with government consent, has been creating less and less of the new money, while letting the private banks create more and more. Today «our» bank creates a mere 2% of each year's new money supply, while allowing the private banks to gouge the government — and of course you and me, as well — with outrageously high interest rates. And it is these extortionate interest charges that are the principal cause of the rapid escalation of the national debt. If the federal government were paying interest at the average levels that prevailed from the 1930s to the mid-1970s, it would now be running an operating surplus of about $13 billion!"

..... "Clearly the current problem of the Canadian government's deficit is not its absolute size, or its size relative to the GDP, but the insane way it is being financed. A return to the policies of the World War II era, when the Bank of Canada produced almost one-half of the new money at near-zero interest, would do wonders for the economy, while greatly shrinking the deficit... The first order of business for a post-Mulroney- era government must be to regain effective control of the Bank of Canada and make it the primary source of money creation.

"It is ludicrous for the government to put billions of dollars into circulation by borrowing from the private banks, when it can create the extra money it needs, virtually free. "(by Harold Chorney, John Hotson, and Mario Seccareccia) .
Click to expand...

One of the implications of MMT is that we Canadians.....
are in a position to pay off the national debt of the USA over the next three decades......
because the national debt of the USA is something of a cruel joke anyway?!

I would like to add another couple of paragraphs from that same article by the three economists:

Also raised by this policy, of course, is the income of the money-lenders, which explains why they subscribe so fervently to the perverse doctrine that high interest rates are somehow anti-inflationary. Certainly the world's bankers and other money-lenders have gained much from the nonsensical notion that, while giving workers a big raise is inflationary, giving money-lenders a big raise is not.

“Many economists rail against «wage push», and it's true that wages have risen by 2,700% over the past 50 years. But in the same period government tax revenue went up by 3,400%, and net interest by 26,000%! Yet, most of the economic textbooks that deplore rising wages don't even mention the tax and interest pushes. And it is not because they are complex ideas — rather, they are simple and obvious — but because it would be so embarrassing for economists to admit they've made a boner of such magnitude: that their theory of monetary policy violates basic principles of scientific logic."
Click to expand...

wgabrie · Nov 17, 2017

Dennis in your post #3, the link of the text "March 16, 2016" there is a Facebook page, and on the discussion for that page I saw a message asking if anyone felt like commenting on an article.

Here is the linked to article:
AMI’s Evaluation of “Modern Monetary Theory” (MMT)
http://www.monetary.org/mmtevaluation

It's a critique of MMT.

DennisTate · Dec 16, 2017

wgabrie said: ↑

Dennis in your post #3, the link of the text "March 16, 2016" there is a Facebook page, and on the discussion for that page I saw a message asking if anyone felt like commenting on an article.

Here is the linked to article:
AMI’s Evaluation of “Modern Monetary Theory” (MMT)
http://www.monetary.org/mmtevaluation

It's a critique of MMT.
Click to expand...

I so thank you for the link to that article Wgabrie......
I am reading it right now.....
I really do need to look more closely at the other side to MMT.

For the record.... I got an interesting reply over in another discussion like this in another forum and I am now advocating that Oprah.... campaign for President and choose Mr. Chris Brown as her V.P. candidate.

USA Presidential elections are a media spectacle anyway... so why not attempt to turn the 2020 election into a media frenzy where 90% or more of Americans will benefit... no matter which way they vote.

I believe that a lack of understanding of history and economics is at the heart and core of our economic woes.

Highly unethical companies that come up with the dangerous technology like terminator seeds are also turning entire nations against food products produced in the USA. My impression is that sales people for those companies are willing to risk destroying USA agriculture just to make more commissions and bonuses over the next few years before they retire.

Something that Mr. Chris Brown does a great job of is explaining his variation of MMT in such a way that his ideas can be understood by both the political left and right.

http://www.monetary.org/mmtevaluation

AMI’s Evaluation of “Modern Monetary Theory” (MMT)

by AMI Research, with Steven Walsh; and assistance by Stephen Zarlenga

Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) is a theory developed by a group of economists over the past 25 years or so. In the current crisis it has been receiving some wider attention from the economic community and politicians looking for a new direction.

The American Monetary Institute (AMI) is sometimes asked about MMT and whether it fits in with monetary reform. We assess anything to do with monetary matters carefully.

At the outset AMI enjoys a good, cordial relationship with some of the leading MMT economists, and we certainly wish to build on this relationship. But one thing we can’t compromise on is facts. MMT, like much of modern economic thinking, builds upon some erroneous assumptions and a definition of money that is faulty and works to the extreme detriment of the 99%. In addition MMT has its own specific problems between its claims and the facts which have bearing on the validity of MMT.

Economists too often get the facts wrong

MMT shows a lack of respect for empirical facts. This is a problem with economists’ theories in general, and we find that MMT is no exception. As the monetary historian Alexander del Mar observed over a century ago (and it still holds true today):

“As a rule, political economists … do not take the trouble to study the history of money; it is much easier to imagine it and to deduce the principles of this imaginary knowledge.”1

To their credit, MMT economists like Professor L. Randall Wray admit to using imaginary history, for example:

“This … summation of the ‘origins’ of money, much of it relying on speculation” is used in “a stylized, hypothetical example of the way in which an economy can be monetized.”2

But by using this imaginary method, important historical facts get missed. For instance, in an overview of the Continental currency of the Revolutionary War, Professor Wray jumps to the MMT theory-fitting conclusion that “Without a sufficient tax liability, the notes depreciated quickly.”3

No mention is made of the massive counterfeiting done by the British. This played the main part in the ultimate depreciation of the currency, as Benjamin Franklin tells us in an article he wrote in 1786, reflecting on his first-hand experience of that time:

“Paper money was in those times our universal currency. But, it being the instrument with which we combated our enemies, they resolved to deprive us of its use by depreciating it; and the most effectual means they could contrive was to counterfeit it. The artists they employed performed so well, that immense quantities of these counterfeits, which issued from the British government in New York, were circulated among the inhabitants of all the States, before the fraud was detected. This operated considerably in depreciating the whole mass, first, by the vast additional quantity, and next by the uncertainty in distinguishing the true from the false; and the depreciation was a loss to all and the ruin of many. It is true our enemies gained a vast deal of our property by the operation; but it did not go into the hands of our particular creditors; so their demands still subsisted, and we were still abused for not paying our debts!”4

For its part, the Continental Congress maintained an excellent record: $200 million notes were authorized, and about $200 million were put in circulation at any one time (and about $48 million damaged notes were replaced).5

This example highlights the poor methodology which is at the root of MMT’s problems: it’s extremely bad practice of selectively taking pieces of history out of context and then using them as a prop to give their pre-conceived ideas the appearance of legitimacy, when they are in fact baseless.

Not that MMT is alone in doing this, the mainstream high school textbook, Economics: Principals in Action (published by Pearson, 2007, p. 24 written by Arthur O’Sullivan and Steven M. Sheffrin, perpetuates this same misunderstanding of the American Revolution. What is happening here is that these stories put in people’s minds that government is incapable of handling monetary affairs, specifically, the supply of money. History shows that ancient governments, the American colonies and the United States government were quite capable of running their monetary systems in a healthy and fairer way than today’s system.

.........
Click to expand...

DennisTate · Jan 25, 2018

wgabrie said: ↑

Dennis, I don't support MMT. There is something wrong with its arguments but I don't have the wherewithal to identify it with my conscious mind, but there's something in the back of my head that's screaming that there's something wrong about this.
Click to expand...

I have to admit that I personally prefer the idea
of using reality and semi- reality science fiction films as the metaphorical gold........
set up situations that existed in the past that are relevant to what is happening today........
and use PENNIES..... as props..... to buy and sell real estate.......
that become in a sense a stage..... on which the films are set?!

Pennies from the 1920, '30's up to 1939 could serve as props.... in a film.....
postulating a different ending to the M. S. St. Louis saga.

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...ified-theory-of-modern-world-problems.458440/

CanSo Dollars... could finance a Unified Theory of Modern World Problems?!

DennisTate · Jan 25, 2018

wgabrie said: ↑

Dennis in your post #3, the link of the text "March 16, 2016" there is a Facebook page, and on the discussion for that page I saw a message asking if anyone felt like commenting on an article.

Here is the linked to article:
AMI’s Evaluation of “Modern Monetary Theory” (MMT)
http://www.monetary.org/mmtevaluation

It's a critique of MMT.
Click to expand...

I only got this far and I know that the author of that article is either terribly intellectually dishonest........
or they have an awfully strange view of what 99% means.

Personally.... by 99%... I think that the author really means one percent......
but I could be biased.

At the outset AMI enjoys a good, cordial relationship with some of the leading MMT economists, and we certainly wish to build on this relationship. But one thing we can’t compromise on is facts. MMT, like much of modern economic thinking, builds upon some erroneous assumptions and a definition of money that is faulty and works to the extreme detriment of the 99%. In addition MMT has its own specific problems between its claims and the facts which have bearing on the validity of MMT.

Economists too often get the facts wrong

MMT shows a lack of respect for empirical facts. This is a problem with economists’ theories in general, and we find that MMT is no exception. As the monetary historian Alexander del Mar observed over a century ago (and it still holds true today):

“As a rule, political economists … do not take the trouble to study the history of money; it is much easier to imagine it and to deduce the principles of this imaginary knowledge.”1
Click to expand...

Please notice post #26 for further explanation.....

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...chers-nova-scotia-liberal-party.486137/page-2

Subject: Government Update on Teachers (Nova Scotia Liberal Party)

......
http://www.michaeljournal.org/artic...ce-our-country-debt-free-say-three-economists

Many economists rail against «wage push», and it's true that wages have risen by 2,700% over the past 50 years. But in the same period government tax revenue went up by 3,400%, and net interest by 26,000%! Yet, most of the economic textbooks that deplore rising wages don't even mention the tax and interest pushes. And it is not because they are complex ideas rather, they are simple and obvious but because it would be so embarrassing for economists to admit they've made a boner of such magnitude: that their theory of monetary policy violates basic principles of scientific logic.

The creation of money

One of the most pervasive myths about the government deficit is that governments which spend more than they receive in revenue must borrow the difference, thus increasing the public debt.

In fact, a government can choose to create the needed additional money instead of borrowing it from the banks, the public, or foreigners.

Business and the conservatives in politics and the media are horrified by the suggestion that the government exercise its right to create more money. They claim it would precipitate another ruinous bout of inflation.

But money creation is money creation whether by a private bank or the Bank of Canada. And a government in debt only to the government's own bank is not really in debt at all. If it wants to go through the rigamarole of having the Treasury «borrow» from the central bank and later pay interest, that is a minor matter of bookkeeping. As long as the central bank's profits are returned to the Treasury, the results are much the same as if the Treasury had created the money itself.

There is no reason why the growth of Canada's money supply (averaging about $22 billion annually in recent years) could not be more substantially created by the Bank of Canada. If that policy had been followed, the federal government would not have been obliged to add to its debts to pay interest on old debts. Instead, the Bank of Canada has produced barely 2% of the money added in recent years, while the chartered banks added the rest as they made loans to households, businesses, and all levels of government. At the very least, the Bank of Canada and the chartered banks should share the privilege of creating money on a 50-50 basis.

Those who dismiss such a proposal as «inflationary» should be required to explain why it would be more inflationary for the government's bank to create $11 billion and the private banks $11 billion, rather than the present practice of having the government's bank create $0.7 billion and the private banks $21.3 billion!

Clearly the current problem of the Canadian government's deficit is not its absolute size, or its size relative to the GDP, but the insane way it is being financed. A return to the policies of the World War II era, when the Bank of Canada produced almost one-half of the new money at near-zero interest, would do wonders for the economy, while greatly shrinking the deficit... The first order of business for a post-Mulroney-era government must be to regain effective control of the Bank of Canada and make it the primary source of money creation.

.....(by Harold Chorney, John Hotson, and Mario Seccareccia, 1995)

Click to expand...

DennisTate · Oct 25, 2018

Considering the seriousness of the situation........
Americans desperately need somebody like Mr. Chris Brown who is capable of explaining
the complexity of all this to both Democrats as well as Republicans.

P. M. Netanyahu, President Trump has a 4.3 trillion dollar problem....

DennisTate said: ↑

and you Sir.... have the technology that I believe is the answer to his dilemma with all those Petro - dollars that are out there in the hands of companies, individuals and nations that are not exactly friendly with the USA.

Yesterday, I found confirmation for the number of 4.3 trillion that I gave to M. P. Bill Casey on February 4, 2018:

In my opinion..... Jim Rickards is a genius.... and it is amazing that he knew about this way back in 2014!

https://pro.moneymappress.com/p/MMR...1525314934-571105120.1525314934&h=true&h=true

FORGET IRAN, IRAQ, UKRAINE
THIS IS WHERE WWIII STARTS...

P. M. Netanyahu..... your Sorek technology lays the stage for the answer to how to divert all those USA Petro- dollars in a manner that can be win - win - win - win - win - win for 99.9% of humanity, (theoretically mega- rich arms dealers who are selling non- USA made munitions might eventually lose revenue over the long term)?!

M. P. Bill Casey... President Trump has a 4.3 trillion dollar problem....

Click to expand...

DennisTate · Nov 9, 2018

wgabrie said: ↑

Dennis, I don't support MMT. There is something wrong with its arguments but I don't have the wherewithal to identify it with my conscious mind, but there's something in the back of my head that's screaming that there's something wrong about this.
Click to expand...

In my opinion..... Oprah for President and Chris Brown somewhere high up in her team..... could be the key to bringing the Democratic Party and the G.O.P. out of the mentality of Wrap Up Smear vs Wrap up Smear........... vs Wrap Up Smear...... that both sides are to some degree guilty of..........

http://www.politicalforum.com/index...for-the-2020-election.545241/#post-1069862902

Do you feel a sense of finality for the 2020 election?

Is everything you believe in at stake in the 2020 election?

*
Yes
2 vote(s)
33.3%

No
4 vote(s)
66.7%

Other (explain in comment)
0 vote(s)
0.0%

Change Your Vote

DennisTate said: ↑

This is a very interesting question..........
Click to expand...

DennisTate said: ↑

i went with Yes but I am tempted to change my vote because i do feel that a massive Spiritual Awakening is about to take place in America and I am hoping that the leadership of both political parties will by 2020 be sick and tired of Wrap Up Smear vs Wrap Up Smear........ I am hoping that the Democrats will choose Oprah.........
and I have nominated the brilliant Chris Brown to assist her as V. P. or surely some other place can be created for him..... because he explains complex ideas in Economics to everybody all across the political spectrum:

V. P. candidates to serve along with Oprah?

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=1729521777377245

I would dearly love to be wrong......
but I am worried that Soros plus leaders in China, Iran, Europe and to some degree Russia.... might just go all out to devalue the USA dollar..... and they could plunge Wall Street into a similar mentality that prevailed in 1929?!

Personally.... I think that Bibi may hold the key to preventing a disaster......

P. M. Netanyahu, President Trump has a 4.3 trillion dollar problem....
Click to expand...

I have to admit though that I feel that the Dems are resorting to desperate measures lately because I believe that they fear that several of their leaders could well do jail time.......... and that would be pretty bad publicity for the whole party.

Log in or Sign up

MMT proponent Chris Brown for DNC national leader to face President Trump in 2020.

Would you like to see Mr. Chris Brown enter the DNC leadership race?

Yes....

No....

I am not sure yet but I will research his ideas further.

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

MMT proponent Chris Brown for DNC national leader to face President Trump in 2020.

Would you like to see Mr. Chris Brown enter the DNC leadership race?

Yes....

No....

I am not sure yet but I will research his ideas further.

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

wgabrie Well-Known Member Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

DennisTate Well-Known Member Past Donor

Share This Page

Useful Searches