Charles Talbott retweeted
SpaceX revenue this quarter alone will be substantially higher than NASA’s entire annual budget!
Charles Talbott retweeted
People with pre-existing conditions were shut out, and that was real. But the “fix” gave us coverage many families can't afford to use, with premiums that keep climbing and huge deductibles. Protecting the sick and making care affordable aren't opposites. We can do both without putting Washington in charge.
Gen Z is probably too young to remember, but the problem with pre-Obamacare health care was that women, older people, or those with medical issues were basically screwed if they didn't have insurance through a job -- they were literally denied the ability to buy insurance at all. This led to so-called "job lock" and meant that they couldn't leave a job to start a business or retire early (providing a job for a younger person). Now, anyone can buy insurance, but the costs on the exchanges for those 50+ are exorbitant. So "job lock" is coming back. Democrats need to adopt a greater sense of urgency about addressing this problem.
Charles Talbott retweeted
James Talarico insists Elon Musk, Mark Zuckerberg, and Jeff Bezos own more wealth than the ENTIRE American middle class.
The Federal Reserve says he’s OFF by a factor of 35 (see chart).
Even the bottom half of America is worth nearly three times as much.
Talarico says it’s time to start talking about taxing “not only income but also wealth.”
If Talarico wins and Abdul wins, it will just show that there are limits to what Republicans can tolerate and no limits to what Democrats can tolerate. And Vice versa.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Haley Stevens was going to do a Democratic unity rally with Abdul El-Sayed and James Clyburn where she was going to encourage her supporters, many of whom have serious reservations about El-Sayed, to vote for him.
This was very important for El-Sayed, because Stevens is popular among Jewish and black Michigan Democrats and Clyburn is an icon among black voters nationwide. El-Sayed has weakness with both of these groups and needs to shore them up going into election day.
Stevens's condition was that he make an unambiguous, unqualified condemnation of the antisemitic rhetoric his friends, supporters and surrogates have been using, including in ads run in Michigan.
El-Sayed refused to do this, and instead asked Stevens not to appear at the event. At that point, Stevens realized that he was not interested in unity with her or her supporters and that she could no longer support him for Senate.
El-Sayed is an antisemite. He is friends with antisemites Hasan Piker and Cenk Uygur. He will not condemn them. He will not condemn the awful things they say.
He has had multiple opportunities to condemn their hateful rhetoric, and he always says: "He is not part of a campaign, nobody speaks for me but me, and I'm not here to talk about that."
That's not good enough. If that is how a Republican talked about Nick Fuentes or Richard Spencer, it would be the biggest controversy in the race. The fact that so many Democrats are willing to tolerate this from Abdul El-Sayed is an indictment of the entire party.
There is no coalition that can include both the Jewish Democratic members of Temple Israel and supporters of the Hezbollah terrorist who tried to murder their preschool children. Abdul El-Sayed made a decision about who he wanted in his tent.
Haley Stevens was late to realize it, but it is admirable that she finally decided to be an upstander instead of a bystander. No Nazis in the US Senate.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Name one? How about a few?
Rockefeller lowered the cost of kerosene through efficient refining and distribution.
Ford made automobiles affordable through mass production.
Carnegie reduced steel production costs through industrial innovation.
Walton lowered retail prices through bulk purchasing and efficient logistics.
Dell made computers cheaper by eliminating retail intermediaries.
Kamprad made furniture affordable through flat-pack manufacturing and distribution.
Bezos intensified retail competition through Amazon.
Koum made international messaging practically free through WhatsApp.
Page and Brin made search, navigation, email, and translation available without direct charges.
And that's barely scratching the surface.
In fact, it would be considerably more challenging to find a billionaire who earned their fortune through voluntary trade without lowering costs, improving quality, increasing productivity, or making something more accessible.
That's how fortunes are generally made in competitive markets. You create value for others, and the more people you serve, the greater your potential reward.
You don't even have to buy from these businesses to benefit. Their competitors must improve their offerings or risk losing customers.
These clout chasers destroy their credibility daily without so much as flinching.
They enjoy the accumulated benefits of capitalist innovation while confidently demanding evidence that any of it ever happened.
The economic illiteracy would be impressive if it weren't so commonplace.
Charles Talbott retweeted
HISTORY LESSON ON YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY CARD:
Just in case some of you young whippersnappers (& some older ones) didn’t know this. It’s easy to check out, if you don’t believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican. Facts are FACTS.
Up until the 1980's, Social Security cards expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes.
Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the "NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION" message was removed.
Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. His promises are in black, with updates in brackets.
1.) That participation in the Program would be completely voluntary [No longer voluntary],
2.) That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual Incomes into the Program [Now 7.65% on the first $90,000, and 15% on the first $90,000 if you’re self-employed],
3.) That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductible from their income for tax purposes each year [No longer tax deductible],
4.) That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Program, and no other Government program [Under Johnson the money was moved to the General Fund and spent], and
5.) That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income [Under Clinton & Gore up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed].
Since many of us have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month — and then finding that we are getting taxed on 85% of the money we paid to the Federal government to ‘put away’ — you may be interested in the following:
Q: Which Political Party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and put it into the general fund so that Congress could spend it?
A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the democratically controlled House and Senate.
Q: Which Political Party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?
A: The Democratic Party.
Q: Which Political Party started taxing Social Security annuities?
A: The Democratic Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while he was Vice President of the US
AND MY FAVORITE:
Q: Which Political Party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?
A: That’s right! Jimmy Carter and the Democratic Party. Immigrants moved into this country, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments! The Democratic Party gave these payments to them, even though they never paid a dime into it!
Now, after violating the original contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and tell you that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away!
And the worst part about it is uninformed citizens believe it! If enough people receive this, maybe a seed of awareness will be planted and maybe changes will evolve. Maybe not, though. Some Democrats are awfully sure of what isn’t so — but it’s worth a try.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Omitting data to make your point only undermines it further.
The CDC reported 42,348 firearm deaths last year. Suicides accounted for 28,000 of them.
That leaves 14,383 homicides by firearm out of 341.8 million; That’s 4.2 deaths per 100,000.
Know what else has a death rate greater than 4.2/100k?
Almost everything.
Heart disease 155, cancer 140, accidents 55, stroke 40, respiratory disease 34,kidney/liver disease 13.
To claim that ‘America has a firearm problem’ based off of a single metric which includes self harm is incredibly misleading- and to call for the removal of a constitutional right based of a lie by omission even worse.
Charles Talbott retweeted
He’s in luck: The ratio of total millionaires to billionaires in America is roughly 23,600 to 1.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Warren is intentionally deceiving you, like all looters do.
She knows why the number is $184,500. It is the tax cap and the benefit cap at once. Earnings above that line are not taxed and are not counted toward your check. Cap the benefit, cap the tax. She omits the half that explains it.
The most anyone can collect at full retirement age in 2026 is $4,152 a month, no matter how large the paycheck was.
Then read her own bill. On S.770, the Chief Actuary's description states the earnings taxed above $250,000 are not credited for benefit purposes. Tax the money, pay nothing back for it.
That is a wealth transfer, not a contribution, and she knows the difference.
What she calls a fair share means the money a man earned belongs to whoever needs it more.
She and the rest of those like her should be ashamed of themselves.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Here's a couple of crazy ideas to help keeping people from being shot.
- Let your LEOs coordinate with ICE
- Honor ICE detainers, so that they can be picked up SAFELY at the jailhouse, instead of turning them lose on the streets where they put others in danger
And most importantly
- QUIT BEING A SANCTUARY FOR CRIMINALS
Charles Talbott retweeted
Pete, the word you left out is “nominal.”
Adjusted for inflation, gasoline and diesel both cost more on Labor Day 2012 under Obama. Gasoline’s all-time nominal record remains $5.0165 in June 2022, while you were Biden’s transportation secretary.
You also campaigned for an annually increasing carbon tax that would raise fossil-fuel prices to reduce emissions.
If presidents own pump prices, Obama and Biden own theirs too. You don’t get one accounting method for Democrats and another for Republicans.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Ro Khanna needs a history lesson, so let's give him one.
FDR did not build the industrial economy. It was already built. Carnegie's steel, Rockefeller's oil, Edison's grid, Ford's assembly line, all in place before he took office. He inherited that machine and spent a decade managing it.
Unemployment was 24.9% in 1933. In 1939, after six years of the New Deal, it was 17.2%.
The AAA paid farmers to destroy crops and slaughtered six million pigs while Americans went hungry. The NRA cartelized industries and fixed prices and wages until the Supreme Court struck it down 9 to 0.
In May 1939 his own Treasury Secretary told Democratic leaders privately: we have tried spending money, we are spending more than ever before, and it does not work. Just as much unemployment as when they started. And an enormous debt to boot.
That is the model you want to run again?
We need America's Next New Deal.
FDR build our economy for the industrial age.
Democrats must build the economy of the future for every American in every place, not just to enrich a few billionaires.
Smart piece by @brhodes!
Charles Talbott retweeted
This was all investigated two years ago and no wrong doing was found. Now, a Democrat judge and state attorney release (illegally) a targeted and heavily redacted grand jury report and you morons fall for it hook, line and sinker. You should be embarrassed. Now the receipts on what really happened.
Charles Talbott retweeted
Ages 87 and 88. This is why journalism is dead.
Pennsylvania reports first 2 measles deaths in the US this year, both people unvaccinated clickondetroit.com/health/20…
Charles Talbott retweeted
LMAO... California dude (@mjfree) blaming Trump for $7 gas!
Texas: $3.39
That’s not the president. That’s your Democrat governor clown! 🤣
Charles Talbott retweeted
Why are they fighting this so hard?
A uniform mail-ballot envelope. A unique USPS barcode. A list of confirmed eligible voters. That’s the entire “existential threat” nine blue states and the ACLU just sprinted to the Supreme Court over.
They lost 6-3 after hours. Letitia James called it a “painful setback.” Their lawyers called it an attempt to “seize control” of elections. The New York Times treated it like blackmail.
Pause and look at what they’re actually rejecting.
The Postal Service is not deciding who gets a ballot. States still put names on the list. The barcode simply tracks the envelope from election office to voter and back to the counting center. It only gets issued for confirmed U.S. citizens. No more mystery mail. No more “accidents.” No more unverified participation lists.
If the voter rolls are clean, this is a clerical upgrade. If the chain of custody is already airtight, the barcode is redundant paperwork. So why the emergency litigation? Why the apocalyptic language? Why risk running out of compliant envelopes weeks before the midterms rather than simply hand over the names?
Resistance this fierce is not about federalism or logistics. It is a tell. Clean lists do not generate this level of panic. Transparent tracking does not produce midnight injunctions and “seize control” rhetoric.
The Supreme Court just gave the standards temporary life. The final rule is already published. The clock is loud. Blue states now have to choose: produce the eligible-voter list or explain to their own voters why they refused the one reform that makes every ballot trackable.
When the people who run the mail-ballot system treat a barcode and a verified list like a weapon, the question answers itself.
They’re not afraid of the envelope.
They’re afraid of what the list will show.
(article below)
Charles Talbott retweeted
You did not cite a study. You commissioned an alibi, and you have run this play before.
You write the bills, your advisors write the studies, and the studies always confirm the bills.
The lead author of your new study, Alison Galvani, was an unpaid advisor to your own Senate office while it drafted the Medicare for All Act. She disclosed it herself in the 2020 version of this same paper.
In 2020 you called her work a major study from Yale, never mentioning she helped build the bill it graded. Now the sequel arrives as an unreviewed preprint whose own authors warn against relying on it.
The $1 trillion is decreed, not discovered. $377B comes from ordering drug prices down to foreign controls. $286B comes from assuming a federal monopoly runs leaner than the firms it abolishes, a claim Mises answered in Bureaucracy in 1944. Abolish market prices and you abolish economic calculation. A single payer can write any figure because no market remains to contradict it.
