Warm Southern Breeze

"… there is no such thing as nothing."

Repugnicunts Want to RUIN the U.S. Economy

Posted by Warm Southern Breeze on Thursday, February 2, 2023

repugnant — incompatible, inconsistent, hostile, distasteful, contradictory, abhorrent, obnoxious, odious; originates directly from the Latin term repugnantem (nominative case repugnans), present participle of repugnare, meaning “to resist, fight back, oppose; disagree, be incompatible.”

repugnant (adj.)

early 15c., repugnaunt, “hostile, opposed; contrary, inconsistent, contradictory,” from Old French repugnant “contradictory, opposing” or directly from Latin repugnantem (nominative repugnans), present participle of repugnare “to resist, fight back, oppose; disagree, be incompatible,” from re- “back, against, in opposition” (see re-) + pugnare “to fight” (from PIE root *peuk- “to prick”).

The meaning “distasteful, objectionable” is from 1777; that of “offensive, loathsome, exciting aversion” is by 1879.

cunt (n.)

“female intercrural foramen,” or, as some 18c. writers refer to it, “the monosyllable,” Middle English cunte “female genitalia,” by early 14c. (in Hendyng’s “Proverbs” — ʒeve þi cunte to cunni[n]g, And crave affetir wedding), akin to Old Norse kunta, Old Frisian, Middle Dutch, and Middle Low German kunte, from Proto-Germanic *kunton, which is of uncertain origin. Some suggest a link with Latin cuneus “wedge” (which is of unknown origin), others to PIE root *geu- “hollow place,” still others to PIE root *gwen- “woman.”

The form is similar to Latin cunnus “female pudenda” (also, vulgarly, “a woman”), which is likewise of disputed origin, perhaps literally “gash, slit” (from PIE *sker- “to cut”) or “sheath” (Watkins, from PIE *(s)keu- “to conceal, hide”). De Vaan rejects this, however, and traces it to “a root *kut-meaning ‘bag’, ‘scrotum’, and metaphorically also ‘female pudenda,’ ” source also of Greek kysthos “vagina; buttocks; pouch, small bag” (but Beekes suspects this is a Pre-Greek word), Lithuanian kutys “(money) bag,” Old High German hodo “testicles.”

Hec vulva: a cunt. Hic cunnus: idem est. [from Londesborough Illustrated Nominale, c. 1500, in “Anglo-Saxon and Old English Vocabularies,” eds. Wright and Wülcker, vol. 1, 1884]

First known reference in English apparently is in a compound, Oxford street name Gropecuntlane cited from c. 1230 (and attested through late 14c.) in “Place-Names of Oxfordshire” (Gelling & Stenton, 1953), presumably a haunt of prostitutes. Used in medical writing c. 1400, but avoided in public speech since 15c.; considered obscene since 17c.

in Middle English also conte, counte, and sometimes queinte, queynte (for this, see Q). Chaucer used quaint and queynte in “Canterbury Tales” (late 14c.), and Andrew Marvell might be punning on quaint in “To His Coy Mistress” (1650).

“What eyleth yow to grucche thus and grone? Is it for ye wolde haue my queynte allone?” [Wife of Bath’s Tale]

Under “MONOSYLLABLE” Farmer lists 552 synonyms from English slang and literature before launching into another 5 pages of them in French, German, Italian, Spanish, and Portuguese. [A sampling: Botany Bay, chum, coffee-shop, cookie, End of the Sentimental Journey, fancy bit, Fumbler’s Hall, funniment, goatmilker, heaven, hell, Itching Jenny, jelly-bag, Low Countries, nature’s tufted treasure, penwiper, prick-skinner, seminary, tickle-toby, undeniable, wonderful lamp, and aphrodisaical tennis court, and, in a separate listing, Naggie.] Dutch cognate de kont means “a bottom, an arse,” but Dutch also has attractive poetic slang ways of expressing this part, such as liefdesgrot, literally “cave of love,” and vleesroos “rose of flesh.”

Alternative form cunny is attested from c. 1720 but is certainly much earlier and forced a change in the pronunciation of coney (q.v.), but it was good for a pun while coney was still the common word for “rabbit”: “A pox upon your Christian cockatrices! They cry, like poulterers’ wives, ‘No money, no coney.’ ” [Philip Massinger: “The Virgin-Martyr,” Act I, Scene 1, 1622]

See also: https://qz.com/1045607/the-most-offensive-curse-word-in-english-has-powerful-feminist-origins

And, given the opportunity, Repugnicunts would ruin the U.S. economy.

Even now, in the opening days of the 118th Congress, there’s talk among Repugnicunts of eliminating the Federal Income Tax, along with all other forms of Federal tax, and replace it with a 30% Value Added Tax.

If you think inflation is a bugbear now, just add 30% to it, and see what it’s like. Repugnicunts are such morons.

The reason why, is because that’s what they want to do:


Not repair, not rebuild, not reinforce, not improve efficiency… but TEAR IT DOWN — and hope for the best, then sell off to the highest corporate bidder the skeletal remains.

For example, NOT A SINGLE REPUGNICUNT in the House or Senate voted for Pandemic Economic Relief.

Had the American people not had that money, our economy would have melted down, and suffered a depression even worse than the Great Depression.

But, it didn’t.

In fact, it didn’t even have a recession.

Not even.

So, when the Repugnicunts cry and whine about national debt, not only are they TOTALLY missing the boat, they’re missing the BIG PICTURE.

And here’s the odd thing about it:

They want to cut spending, but don’t want to pay for it — they do NOT want PayGo, or pay-as-you-go. And if they had their way, they’d let America default on its “loans.”

But, there’s an even BIGGER picture that few, if any, ever talk about, and certainly, most probably don’t even understand it. This entry will try to correct that.

“…the U.S. government’s ability to borrow.”

U.S. To Max Out On Debt Soon, Setting Up Political Fight

WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal government is on track to max out on its $31.4 trillion borrowing authority as soon as this month, starting the clock on an expected standoff between President Joe Biden and the new House Republican majority that will test both parties’ ability to navigate a divided Washington, with the fragile global economy at stake.

Once the government bumps up against the cap — it could happen any time in the next few weeks or longer — the Treasury Department will be unable to issue new debt without congressional action. The department plans to deploy what are known as “extraordinary measures” to keep the government operating. But once those measures run out, probably mid-summer, the government could be at risk of defaulting unless lawmakers and the president agree to lift the limit on the U.S. government’s ability to borrow.

The expected showdown over the debt limit would be a stark display of the new reality for Biden and his fellow Democrats, who enjoyed one-party control of Washington for the past two years. It would presage the challenges to come in achieving even the modest ambitions that Democrats are bringing to the task of legislating in a divided Capitol.

The White House has insisted that it won’t allow the nation’s credit to be held captive to the demands of newly empowered GOP lawmakers. But the concessions made by new House Speaker Kevin McCarthy in his arduous path to securing the job raise questions about whether he has the ability to cut any kind of deal to resolve a standoff.

Let’s get JUST ONE THING straight:

The government’s so-called “ability to ‘borrow’” means ONLY ONE THING:
The issuance of Treasury notes, i.e., which are, in essence, SAVINGS BONDS. 
But let’s introduce another factor into this lopsided “equation.”
We don’t an equation just yet, because to have an equation, at least TWO numbers must exist, their relationship to each other must be established, and a function — multiply, divide, add, subtract, IN THAT ORDER — must be performed.
And our first “number” is M1.
No, M1 is NOT a military tank, nor rifle, nor some other type of weaponry or accoutrements, but is the abbreviation for the Money Supply. In other words, it’s the answer to the question “How much money is CIRCULATING?”
“Circulating Money” is exactly what you think it is:
The amount of money that is in people’s hands — including businesses’ — that can be used for ANY purpose (buy, sell, trade, etc.). Remember, a loan is actually a purchase of money by the lender, because the interest charged is paid by the borrower, which is income to the lender — paid out over time, of course.
More specifically, FRED (St. Louis Federal Reserve Economic Data) writes that “M1 consists of (1) currency outside the U.S. Treasury, Federal Reserve Banks, and the vaults of depository institutions; (2) demand deposits at commercial banks (excluding those amounts held by depository institutions, the U.S. government, and foreign banks and official institutions) less cash items in the process of collection and Federal Reserve float; and (3) other liquid deposits, consisting of OCDs [Other Checkable Deposits, which are checking, savings, and money market accounts] and savings deposits (including money market deposit accounts).” 
So far, we have ONE “number,” M1, and NO RELATIONSHIP.
Now, let’s find another “number,” and establish a relationship with them.
Since we’re discussing economic data, it would seem reasonable to ask “How much is the U.S. economy ‘worth,’ i.e., what’s the TOTAL VALUE of ALL GOODS & SERVICES PRODUCED (in the period of a year)?
The TOTAL VALUE of ALL GOODS & SERVICES PRODUCED is called Gross Domestic Product, and is abbreviated as GDP.
For the answers to those questions — How much is M1, and how much is GDP? — we turn to the St. Louis Federal Reserve’s Economic Data, FRED.
Each vertical gray line represents a period of recession. The width of the gray line indicates its duration in time. Wider lines are periods of longer duration, than are narrow lines, which are of shorter duration.

This graph shows M1’s relationship to GDP for as long as the two measurements have been made, which is 1966. GDP goes back further, to Q1 1947, but M1 began being measured in May 1959.

But we need to know a little more current figure for both — M1 & GDP — so let’s look at the past now-going-on 23 years.

Here is M1 and GDP from Q1 2000 to Q3 2022.

In the chart showing M1 & GDP from July 2017 to July 2022, we see something very unusual, which is that M1 spiked (the red line), almost instantly, from around 4000 to about 16,000 and did so in the period of time from March 30, 2020 (4776.7 billion) to May 4, 2020 (15,944.7 billion) — a period of 36 calendar days.

That was when the COVID-19 pandemic was first getting started. And that was BEFORE businesses where shutting down, meaning that the economy could have started to show signs of beginning to tank, but DID NOT. There was a nominal decrease in GDP, but there was NO recession.

That’s because the recession was ALREADY OVER, and lasted from February 3, 2020 to March 30, 2020 — a period of 57 calendar days.
But, on March 19, 2020, then-POTUS TRUMP said, “Nobody knew there would be a pandemic or epidemic of this proportion,” even though — a mere 58 calendar days earlier — on January 22, 2020, he had said to CNBC Squawk Box host Joe Kernen, while at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, that “…we have it totally under control. It’s one person coming in from China, and we have it under control. It’s—going to be just fine.”
March 20, 2020 – The WHO reported 149 new, and 1284 cumulative deaths, with 1046 new, and 18,407 cumulative COVID-19 cases in Iran.
20 – The WHO reported 18 new, and 76 cumulative deaths, with 409 new, and 2460 cumulative COVID-19 cases in the Netherlands.
21 – The Department of Defense confirmed on the 22nd that the first COVID-19 related death occurred 21 March, who was a Crystal City, Virginia-based contractor who worked at the Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
21 – Chinese seafood merchant Wei Guixian, a 57-year old female, considered “Patient Zero” of the novel coronavirus COVID-19 pandemic, had recovered and had been released from hospital.
In essence, that influx of money INTO THE PEOPLE’S HANDS (including businesses) SAVED our national economy from tanking — LITERALLY. There has been NO recession, NO depression, EVEN THOUGH it had declined slightly just as the COVID pandemic was getting started.
In Q1 2020, GDP was 21,538.032, on Q2 2o2o it was 19,636.731, and on Q3 2020 it had bounced back to its previous level at 21,362.482, and has CONTINUED TO CLIMB — DESPITE the pandemic.
That’s worth repeating:
Even though the COVID pandemic was increasingly raging, and the worst part had not yet been reached, employees were being furloughed, and increasingly, businesses were temporarily closing, American enterprise and GDP CONTINUED CLIMBING at the same level as it was before the pandemic started. 
Why do you think that was the case?
Because of M1.
Because the Democrats, in their wisdom, saw the proverbial handwriting on the wall, and injected money into the hands of the American people (the economy) to PREVENT a major economic disaster from happening.
This also is worth noting: 

Not a single Republican in the House or Senate voted for the $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package.

They would have let the economy melt down.
Immediately, we can see that there’s a greater distance between M1 and GDP which has steadily increased, especially since around 1970, or thereabouts.
In Q1 1947, GDP was 243.164.
GDP doubled (approximately) in Q4 1958 to 499.555, a period of 11 years.
The GDP doubled again from Q4 1958 to Q2 1969 to 1009.202, a period of 11 years. 
GDP doubled again in Q2 1977, to 2055.909, a period of 8 years. 
GDP doubled again in Q2 1984, to 4009.601, a period of 7 years.
It doubled again in Q2 1996, to 8032.840, a period of 12 years.
In Q1 2012 it doubled again, to 16,068.824, a period of 16 years.

Presently, GDP has not yet doubled, but is very close, with a value in Q3 2022 of 25,723.941 measured in billions of dollars. At 32,000+ it would be considered to have doubled from Q1 2012, and if so, it would be a period approximating at least 11+ years to date.

So, what we see, is that, over a period of 76 years (approximately) GDP has doubled, on average, approximately every 10.83 years (rounding up to 11), excluding the current period from 2012 to 2022 (last measurement). In other words, GDP has doubled at least 6 times since Q1 1947, when it first began being measured. Based upon the average length of time in which GDP has doubled, we could anticipate that the approximate date GDP would be doubled again, from Q1 2012, as being sometime this year, in 2023.
Let’s now turn our attention to the Federal deficit, which is the amount of money outstanding that exceeds its present intake, and intake is from taxes and fees. But before we do that, let’s draw a parallel, use an analogy to help understand. People borrow money from a lender to purchase s0-called “big ticket” items like automobiles and houses. Autom0biles are considered diminishing assets because their value declines over time, whereas with real estate (houses), that is rarely the case, and rather, real estate increases in value. But few people have enough cash on hand to make an outright purchase of either item, so they borrow to do so. The cost of borrowing is the interest charged by the lender, which to the lender is profit, whereas to the buyer, it’s an extra expense, i.e., cost. The total price paid for any item purchased using borrowed money is always higher than the agreed-upon price, i.e., the sale price, because the cost of borrowing money must be included into the total price. 
With the Federal government, taxes are levied on a numerous variety of goods, primarily, not all of which come from the Federal government. For example, the FET, Federal Excise Tax, is added to the price of automobile tires, Federal taxes are levied upon automobile fuels, taxes are levied upon imported goods and materials, taxes are levied upon income personally and upon business — in the case of business, taxes are typically levied upon profit, and in the case of a material good sold that when sold has increased in value from the time it was purchased, which is called a Capital Gains tax.
The material good can be any thing of value, ranging from stocks & bonds, to real estate, and more. Whatever has increased in value from the time it was originally purchased, to the time it was sold (a capital gain), is subject to a Capital Gains tax — if over a certain dollar amount.
Lottery winnings are taxed at a higher rate than ordinary typical income, and the Inheritance Tax, wrongly so-called a “death tax,” are also subject t0 a different tax rate from typical, or regular income. In both cases, the person winning, or inheriting, did nothing to earn it, which is why they both have a different rate. The reduction in the Inheritance Tax is also sometimes called the “Paris Hilton Tax Cuts,” because Inheritance Taxes are typically only paid by the wealthy and well-do-to, anyway. People like you and I aren’t “Trust Fund Babies,” and don’t have tens of millions stashed away that get shifted over to us when Big Daddy Warbucks dies. But to be fair, if the Paris Hilton Tax Cuts are made, so should the Lottery Winnings Tax rate be cut. Fair is fair. But that’ll never happen. 
So now, let’s examine the relationship between GDP, M1, and Total Public Debt. 
Federal Debt: Total Public Debt (GFDEBTN)
When the Federal government spends more money than it receives in revenue, it runs a budget deficit. Again, consider the real estate purchase example to illustrate. Like GDP, it increases in value over time, but the total cost is most often not paid up front, and is financed, i.e., paid out over time, for which privilege a fee is charged, which is interest. Unless a purchaser pays down the principle, which is the amount borrowed, IN ADDITION TO the interest paid (which is typically the first portion of the money repaid, because interest is charged on the outstanding balance), the price paid every month will be the same. But if money is put toward the principle, the payments will quickly be lowered because of that. And in the Federal government’s case, the GDP is the asset that increases in value over time.
A greater economic output will yield a greater revenue input. And so, when the Federal government “borrows” money, they’re borrowing against the anticipated future value of the asset, the Gross Domestic Product. And because in the Federal government’s case, when they “borrow” money, they issue a bond. And while there is a principle amount borrowed, which is the selling price of the bond, the total cost of “borrowing” is the total repayment value of the bond. In other words, a $100  bond could be purchased for $25, $50, or $75, depending upon the amount of time until the bond “matures,” which is when it becomes fully payable, i.e., the TOTAL value would be $100.
There are markets comprised exclusively of government bond trading, in which purchasers of bonds are auction them off in order to make a profit upon them, in addition to the interest paid by the government (the “borrower”). The purchaser of such bonds, when sold by one non-governmental entity to another, is between them, exclusively, while the total value of the bond, its “maturity” value, is always paid by the government. A bond, even if not mature, can be resold to the Federal government, which in turn, re-sells that same bond into the market. 
Here’s what the Government Accountability Office (formerly Government Accounting Office) writes about Federal debt, and bonds: 
“To cover budget deficits and finance government activities—including interest payments—the Department of the Treasury must borrow money from the public by issuing Treasury securities to investors.Federal debt is the total amount of money that the federal government owes, either to its investors (debt held by the public) or to itself (intragovernmental debt). Intragovernmental debt is owed by Treasury to other parts of the federal government. At the end of FY 2021, total Federal debt was $28.4 trillion — 78% of which was debt held by the public, and 22% of which was intragovernmental debt.”
So, a tax cut is considered a reduction in revenue (income), and there’ve been plenty of tax cuts on the very wealthy, and when a reduction in revenue (income) is made, it is an expense, and must be paid for in some way, because it simply cannot be “written off,” like a business write-off, because there is no “write-off” for the government, and if a “write-off” did occur, it would be considered a default on a debt. And THAT is a VERY bad thing to have happen. And yet, that is exactly what the R political party wants to do — they want to reduce income, even though future earnings will increase — but the increase in those earnings is made at the same rate, which is to say, that the level of taxes assessed and collected OUGHT to be the same rate, but when a tax cut occurs, it must be off-set with a reduction in spending. But a reduction in spending is very difficult to do with a growing family, and our nation continues growing, as do its needs.
Have you, or anyone ever told their kids to eat less, or take less medicine? Ever told a 12-year old to wear the 6-year old’s shoes or clothing?
No, in all cases, no. So it is absurd to imagine that our government would ever get smaller as the nation gets larger. It is an absurdity to imagine that an inverse relationship between the two measures exists, for it does not, nor will it ever. People don’t wear the same size clothes they did when they were 21, 31, or even 51 years of age, so why would we expect that a 247-year old nation’s government would be smaller than when it began? 
Finally, in the third-from-last chart, we see, in order, from top-to-bottom, GDP, Federal Debt, M1, and M1V, which is M1 Velocity, which is a measurement of how much much, in a certain period of time, is being circulated, or more accurately, the level of difference between a previous measurement when compared to a current measurement. Here’s what the FRED writes about M1V:
“The velocity of money is the frequency at which one unit of currency is used to purchase domestically- produced goods and services within a given time period. In other words, it is the number of times one dollar is spent to buy goods and services per unit of time. If the velocity of money is increasing, then more transactions are occurring between individuals in an economy. The frequency of currency exchange can be used to determine the velocity of a given component of the money supply, providing some insight into whether consumers and businesses are saving or spending their money.” 
And I would note here, that the M1V is a measurement that is difficult to compare to the three other measurements, and when shown, in this instance, is a measure of change, as I wrote, which is an annual continuously compounded rate of change. There is a chart of M1V only, also included to illustrate how it varies, and is below the chart showing four measurements. Note that in the last thin gray line, which is a recession, the ratio of M1V just absolutely flatlined — it almost went to nothing — yet, M1 was very elevated in that same period of time. 
The final chart shows an enlarged portion (to examine more closely) of the period from January 2019 to current date Q3 2022. The M1V measurement is done quarterly, while the M1 measurement is done more frequently. And what we see, is that spending (which drives the economy, spending IS the economy) just absolutely flat-lined, it fell -72% from Q1 2020 to Q2 2020, then to -76.9% in Q1 2021, then rose to -23% in Q2 2021, and then to -5.15% in Q3 2021, and stabilized (relatively speaking) through Q3 2022 at 5.26%. Again, that is a ratio measurement expressed as a percent (%) change from a year ago.
Truly, you just do not know, and most folks truly don’t know, how perilously close we came to total economic meltdown. And I mean total… even worse than the Great Depression in its depth. And had the Democrats not done what they did, to inject money into people’s hands (who were not earning money, anyway, due to being furloughed, or laid off, because of COVID), our national economy would have utterly collapsed. And not even one Republican voted to help the American people that way. Not. Even. One. It just goes to show how little they care about the American people, and how they pander to their big corporate interests, and feed at their slop trough of corporate PAC & lobbyist money. 
We must plan for the future, for in the next 24 hours, tomorrow will be here. And it just keeps on going from there. Good planning, wise planning, even, demands that we anticipate future needs, and set aside what it necessary for those needs, whatever it may be, whether its land, water, roads, city planning, schools, airports, etc., including cemeteries. You know why there are fences around cemeteries, don’t you? That’s because folks are dying to get in. 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: