The Trump Presidency (Act V - The One Where Everybody Dies)

Status
Not open for further replies.
TellyKNeasuss said:
Trump's hotshot lawyer Michael Cohen now claims that the $130,000 paid to Stormy Daniels came from him, not from Trump or Trump's campaign. He, of course, still denies that Trump had an affair with Daniels, so I guess that we're to assume he was paying for her advice on how to repeal ObamaCare, or something like that.

http://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...he-paid-adult-film-star-130000-out-of-his-own
Click to expand...

As someone retweeted

I have watched enough Law & Order to understand that Jack McCoy would make the argument that the minute the lawyer paid the funds, he stopped being the clients lawyer and became part of a conspiracy to obstruct the truth. In this case, the truth was being held from the citizens.
 
Cain said:
Of course they have a lobby, and it's mobilizing. An article I read said 20% of all food stamp dollars are spent at Wal-Mart. The administration, however, certainly has a point when it says that the government should be able to negotiate lower prices rather than pay retail.
Click to expand...

I believe profit margins in the grocery industry are already razor-thin.

Just Googled:

“The average supermarket has a profit margin of about 1 percent, according to Stacey Vanek-Smith of National Public Radio. Some experts suggest this figure might be as high as 3 percent. Either way, supermarkets are a volume business.”
 
Last edited:
varwoche said:
Only in the age of Trump is this third page news.

I confirmed my recollection about Cohen -- he's not just another lawyer. He was Executive VP for Trump's company, glued to Trump's side for years.

Re this part -- he denied that the 130k came from the Trump company or the Trump campaign. He didn't rule out that it came from Trump personally. (Although the notion that Trump pays for anything out of his own pocket is fanciful.)
Click to expand...

There are many other means than cash payments to refund the lawyer for the 130,000 $ he has paid on behalf of Trump.

For instance by granting him free membership in one or more Trump golf clubs
 
Cain said:
Of course they have a lobby, and it's mobilizing. An article I read said 20% of all food stamp dollars are spent at Wal-Mart. The administration, however, certainly has a point when it says that the government should be able to negotiate lower prices rather than pay retail.

Milton Friedman and many others have long argued that welfare benefits should be paid in cash because "consumers know what they want better than anyone else." This can go into Aspergery territory when you get articles published in journals with titles like "The Deadweight Loss of Christmas Giving."

But there should be a way to merge the two ideas. If the government really is paying face-value, then it needs to stop. The feds should negotiate it so that $100 grocery bill only gets paid $90 (or whatever). Frankly, I'm shocked (if) this isn't already the case.

The home delivery stuff is just stupid, and underscores the point that Republicans are more interested in scolding the poor. For many, I bet it'd be "worth it" to see poor people dump asparagus in the trash because it justifies their long-standing contempt. "See! See!!"
Click to expand...

Perhaps they could make the box blaze orange or something so that the recipients' neighbors would all know that they receive assistance. That'll show 'em.
But given the incompetence of this administration, I'm actually fully willing to accept that they genuinely believe that this scheme will somehow magically save a bunch of money and prevent waste. I'd be astonished if they did any sort of honest, credible analysis to calculate the cost. Probably didn't consult with any of the outside experts who could have explained things.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
I believe profit margins in the grocery industry are already razor-thin.

Just Googled:

“The average supermarket has a profit margin of about 1 percent, according to Stacey Vanek-Smith of National Public Radio. Some experts suggest this figure might be as high as 3 percent. Either way, supermarkets are a volume business.”
Click to expand...

I think even the price-gouging Whole Foods only had something like a 4% before Amazon bought them. There's only so much savings to be had. Also, I believe the Trump proposal would only allow American-made foods, so they wouldn't just be getting the cheapest on the market.
 
The Care Package idea will go nowhere with all the ridicule it is getting all over the political spectrum.
 
Degeneve said:
There are many other means than cash payments to refund the lawyer for the 130,000 $ he has paid on behalf of Trump.

For instance by granting him free membership in one or more Trump golf clubs
Click to expand...

Forget "in kind"

Considering the guy was on salary as a VP, $130k could just be massaged into the annual $1M bonus.
 
Fast Eddie B said:
“The average supermarket has a profit margin of about 1 percent, according to Stacey Vanek-Smith of National Public Radio. Some experts suggest this figure might be as high as 3 percent. Either way, supermarkets are a volume business.”
Click to expand...

1% being the most common margin on an item in a supermarket is what I was always taught. At least when I worked in a grocery store, that was the corporate line as to why it was so important to be fast cashiers, and not let anything slip by.
 
dudalb said:
The Care Package idea will go nowhere with all the ridicule it is getting all over the political spectrum.
Click to expand...

Food stamps do have an efficiency problem, though, in that they are highly fungible versus this otherwise stupid food package proposal.

One of the efficiency hits with food stamps (and a reason grocery retailers are so fond of them) is that many smaller grocers launder it for cash, the going rate being about 50%.

To elaborate with an example:
Customer comes in with $200 in food stamps, collects $100 of food.
Pays for $100 of food with $200 in food stamps.
Walks out of the grocery store with $100 in food, and $50 in cash.
Retailer forwards the stamps for reimbursement, receives $200 cash, netting a 50%+ margin.

Question: why would a customer be willing to take the $50 hit in value? Answer: because they often don't get other entitlements that they need to cover other expenses, such as electricity, gas. They are willing to reduce their calorie consumption in exchange for other vital amenities. Many communities have food banks making up the difference.
 
blutoski said:
Food stamps do have an efficiency problem, though, in that they are highly fungible versus this otherwise stupid food package proposal.

One of the efficiency hits with food stamps (and a reason grocery retailers are so fond of them) is that many smaller grocers launder it for cash, the going rate being about 50%.

To elaborate with an example:
Customer comes in with $200 in food stamps, collects $100 of food.
Pays for $100 of food with $200 in food stamps.
Walks out of the grocery store with $100 in food, and $50 in cash.
Retailer forwards the stamps for reimbursement, receives $200 cash, netting a 50%+ margin.

Question: why would a customer be willing to take the $50 hit in value? Answer: because they often don't get other entitlements that they need to cover other expenses, such as electricity, gas. They are willing to reduce their calorie consumption in exchange for other vital amenities. Many communities have food banks making up the difference.
Click to expand...

The fraud issue is a fair point. The Trump proposal is a lousy solution to it, but it does seem like the type of enforcement issue where a better, more rational Republican might have some useful ideas.
 
Civet said:
The fraud issue is a fair point. The Trump proposal is a lousy solution to it, but it does seem like the type of enforcement issue where a better, more rational Republican might have some useful ideas.
Click to expand...

I agree that it's a complete joke of a solution. If for no other reason than it's government micromanaging at its worst. "Here's your fruit salad. What? I don't understand... what is this 'diabetic' of which you speak? Eat your syrup soaked fruit cup and be grateful."


I think a better way to do an end run around food stamp fraud is to restore utilities support in the entitlement systems, and generally speaking, improve access. Most of these people are eligible, but the states have been given the freedom to bar access through strategically applied bureaucracy.
 
Cain said:
Of course they have a lobby, and it's mobilizing. An article I read said 20% of all food stamp dollars are spent at Wal-Mart. The administration, however, certainly has a point when it says that the government should be able to negotiate lower prices rather than pay retail.

Milton Friedman and many others have long argued that welfare benefits should be paid in cash because "consumers know what they want better than anyone else." This can go into Aspergery territory when you get articles published in journals with titles like "The Deadweight Loss of Christmas Giving."

But there should be a way to merge the two ideas. If the government really is paying face-value, then it needs to stop. The feds should negotiate it so that $100 grocery bill only gets paid $90 (or whatever). Frankly, I'm shocked (if) this isn't already the case.

The home delivery stuff is just stupid, and underscores the point that Republicans are more interested in scolding the poor. For many, I bet it'd be "worth it" to see poor people dump asparagus in the trash because it justifies their long-standing contempt. "See! See!!"
Click to expand...

I was thinking about this in terms of state aid. States should have programs like that, and they can use it to reimburse companies headquartered in the state at full value, but will only reimburse those companies headquartered out of state at a lower level (or make it a premium for state companies).

For example, Illinois could easily say that they would give Bobeck's (I think that is a local chain) $1.05 for every $1 in exchange, but will only give $0.95 to out of state companies like WalMart. Why should Illinois subsidize Little Rock?

But this would be for state aid
 
pgwenthold said:
I was thinking about this in terms of state aid. States should have programs like that, and they can use it to reimburse companies headquartered in the state at full value, but will only reimburse those companies headquartered out of state at a lower level (or make it a premium for state companies).

For example, Illinois could easily say that they would give Bobeck's (I think that is a local chain) $1.05 for every $1 in exchange, but will only give $0.95 to out of state companies like WalMart. Why should Illinois subsidize Little Rock?

But this would be for state aid
Click to expand...

My impression of the various 'restructuring' proposals that have been floated is that this administration and congress favour everything being state aid. The states are mostly pushing for block transfers. Cash without strings attached, they pinkie swear to use it on the entitlement programs originally managed by the feds.

States like this, because it's not "use it or lose it" - they get their share of transfer based on population regardless of how many citizens use or need it. And they can control use by building obstacles to enrollment. Popular strategies are to neglect to build offices in communities where there is need, for example, and to nevertheless mandate personal renewal of application every week. We're also seeing a revival of work requirements.

The wet dream for states is to have full block transfers off the federal taxpayer's teat, and zero enrollment, so they can cut state taxes due to this annual boost to revenue.

Kathryn J. Edin and‎ H. Luke Shaefer cover this danger pretty thoroughly, with specific examples, in their book $2 A Day.
 
Captain: The Orange Menace has thrown me off my game.


I do like the idea of stigmatizing the poor with a "blaze orange" box. I regret not imagining something so delightfully cruel.

Fast Eddie B said:
I believe profit margins in the grocery industry are already razor-thin.

Just Googled:

“The average supermarket has a profit margin of about 1 percent, according to Stacey Vanek-Smith of National Public Radio. Some experts suggest this figure might be as high as 3 percent. Either way, supermarkets are a volume business.”
Click to expand...

The grocery business is notorious for its slim profit margins, but there's a lot more to it: leases, perishables, labor, advertising, and a bunch of things I haven't considered. Every week grocers trumpet discounts and publish coupons, so a discount for a bulk buyer should not break the bank.

blutoski said:
Question: why would a customer be willing to take the $50 hit in value? Answer: because they often don't get other entitlements that they need to cover other expenses, such as electricity, gas. They are willing to reduce their calorie consumption in exchange for other vital amenities. Many communities have food banks making up the difference.
Click to expand...

This is part of the reason why Friedman argued recipients should just get cash rather than in-kind aid. Of course, a lot of taxpayers would have no problem with someone spending money on utilities, but they would definitely have a problem if it were spent on drugs. Which is probably why we have vouchers for food and housing. Regardless, any kind of system will have some measure of fraud and abuse. That's just a natural part of doing business.
 
Last edited:
Civet said:
Perhaps they could make the box blaze orange or something so that the recipients' neighbors would all know that they receive assistance. That'll show 'em.
But given the incompetence of this administration, I'm actually fully willing to accept that they genuinely believe that this scheme will somehow magically save a bunch of money and prevent waste. I'd be astonished if they did any sort of honest, credible analysis to calculate the cost. Probably didn't consult with any of the outside experts who could have explained things.
Click to expand...

Have someone deliver it in person, and when the recipient (or their kid, that works too) opens the door to sign for it, have them yell, "YOU SUCK! GET A JOB, LOSER! HARD-WORKING PEOPLE ARE SUPPORTING YOUR PARASITIC ASS! WHERE YA GOING? YOU FORGOT YOUR CAN OF YOU-SUCK-IOS!"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom