The Saudi thing is probably going to have some fallout for the rest of the world. Don't matter how much oil a country produces, as long as, oil is fungible, any shock to the market is going to ripple. I'd also say, this is yet another reason, to get off fossil fuel. Saudi Arabia probably just had the perfect setup for someone to pull off a successful attack with a drone (I doubt many facilities are hardened against such attacks and Yemen is currently in mess, with Saudi Arabia having plenty of desert, so probably easy to setup a base to run drones large enough to carry payloads that would be adequate to damaged such a facility). Not only does that mitigate climate change problems, it would shore up our economy against the kinds of shocks that can be generate as a result of a fair number of oil producing countries, not exactly being stable.
Bloomberg is doing a weird "generate chart automatically" so I can't embed it, but the "changes in manufacturing jobs Jan-July 2019" is probably rather important: PA and Wisconsin are being hit particularly bad, with North Carolina not far behind.
As the coal industry dies, the work force of coal bastions is changing. This actually is going to have some big implications later, given that we have areas that used to have a dynamic where the man use to be the bread winner and the women stayed home, unless they needed to do something to make ends meet during a coal bust. I'm not going to be surprised if many of these women start demanding changes, once it fully sinks in that they are the bread winner of their family and/or they don't have to put up with their man's shit.
“Women now, they got a little taste of freedom,” Ms. Bowling said. “Men has been able to do whatever the hell they want for so long while women has had to sit in a chair and keep their legs closed and be nice and polite. Now they don’t have to.”
That's going to result in some political changes that are going to impact the economy as a whole. A fair bit of coal industry has probably benefited from toxic masculity being so engrained in those areas.
While awesome in the long term, you realize this is going to make the men double down on that shit. Their world is ending (good riddance) and they already stand to lose everything, so why not?
+4
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
While awesome in the long term, you realize this is going to make the men double down on that shit. Their world is ending (good riddance) and they already stand to lose everything, so why not?
This is assuming a lot of negative stereotypes about a very broad group of people.
This trend has been going on for awhile and has yet to manifest any major changes of the sort being suggested. Culture dies slow, especially when it's being reinforced in so many ways. The growth of the service industry in the US and of women in that workforce at lower levels has not really changed the perception, either on the ground or in political movements, of what "real work" is and who "real workers" are in these kind of situations.
There's no job that women can do that men can't. There are a very few jobs (like firefighter) that are genuinely hard for women due to strength issues, but the opposite is not true. So then what we get is men refusing jobs because they are "women's work" and getting all bitter and twisted that their female relatives are working and they are not, and turning to extremism in politics, crime and terrorism. Not good.
+6
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
I'm less concerned about men refusing "women's work" than I am these new bread winners not getting paid enough money. Generally even the higher skilled jobs these women work don't pay a well as the jobs their husbands lost.
It's worth noting that these areas had some key differences with many other areas on women entering the workforce. If you read the article before people were convinced that this is probably the last bust for coal with no boom to follow, it wasn't uncommon for the married women to only seek out work when ends needed to be met and then go back home once those ends were covered. This also played a factor in what kind of work they sought and how they went about getting it.
I'm less concerned about men refusing "women's work" than I am these new bread winners not getting paid enough money. Generally even the higher skilled jobs these women work don't pay a well as the jobs their husbands lost.
This is why I think you'll see some changes at the political level. Factory jobs use to be absolute shit in the US until we had a labor movement that made them far less shitty. I'll have to track it down but I do recall there was a something past something ago that showed that on policy matters there was a gender difference, when just looking at conservatives. I remember those policies being things that would have economic consequences. Also from that article, I very much got a vibe that there was a fair bit of deferring to the man on issues that is probably going to greatly erode. Not saying those areas suddenly become liberal bastions that push for economic policy that liberals like, but probably safe to say those areas transform into something where the GOP is forced to adopt some economic policies they currently oppose, while abandoning others they currently back.
Eh, GE Stock has been scraping low values for a while. There's so much capital the same cementing of capital won't happen like last time. There's likely a recession coming, but I doubt it will be a singular huge event vs. continual slide. I think a bigger theme may be a technology company correction on consumer stuff like WeWork and Uber where the financials are just loony.
WeWork is just pegging the crazyometer at "guano". It's a real estate company that brands itself as a tech company, and has all sorts of drama on top of that (the IPO filing has 10 pages devoted to how the CEO is a risk.)
The CEO paid himself $6million to buy the trademark of "We" (which, how the fuck) that he owned in another company he owns. A lot of the leases are also in real estate that he owns through another separate company. It's just... technically legal fraud the whole way down.
It's an onion of Insanity - just layers upon layers of WTF.
WeWork owner The We Company has postponed its initial public offering (IPO), walking away from preparations to launch it this month after a lackluster response from investors to its plans.
And it turns out that the company itself isn't just not "worth" as much as it used to "be worth", it's actually worth less than the amount of money it's taken in:
Reuters reported last week that We Company might seek a valuation in its IPO of between $10 billion and $12 billion, a dramatic discount to the $47 billion valuation it achieved in January.
...
It would have meant that We Company would be valued at less than the $12.8 billion in equity it has raised since it was founded in 2010,
0
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
This has to become the new norm, right? With so many recent IPO's clearly being cash outs for early investors I would think the market is more skeptical by now.
It shouldn't have taken long to realize WeWork is a bad real estate company pretending to be a tech company.
People still haven't figured out Zillow is a sham so it's not surprising.
I’m not up on this one. Elaborate?
Maybe someone else can better tell me what they do, but they aren't an mls and they don't list or buy houses, so I'm not really sure what they are beyond an unofficial (ie non-mls) internet housing classified.
It shouldn't have taken long to realize WeWork is a bad real estate company pretending to be a tech company.
People still haven't figured out Zillow is a sham so it's not surprising.
I’m not up on this one. Elaborate?
Maybe someone else can better tell me what they do, but they aren't an mls and they don't list or buy houses, so I'm not really sure what they are beyond an unofficial (ie non-mls) internet housing classified.
I assume their business model the selling the personal information of everyone that looks at a house to mortgage brokers.
It shouldn't have taken long to realize WeWork is a bad real estate company pretending to be a tech company.
People still haven't figured out Zillow is a sham so it's not surprising.
I’m not up on this one. Elaborate?
Maybe someone else can better tell me what they do, but they aren't an mls and they don't list or buy houses, so I'm not really sure what they are beyond an unofficial (ie non-mls) internet housing classified.
Still not seeing the scam. The MLS is pretty locked down to your average consumer and Zillow is definitely targeting a niche for folks who aren't working with a real estate agent (or a shitty one). The actual answer is just put a public facing MLS front end out there but realtors quite enjoy their stranglehold on that and they're the ones who pay for the MLS so...
It shouldn't have taken long to realize WeWork is a bad real estate company pretending to be a tech company.
People still haven't figured out Zillow is a sham so it's not surprising.
I’m not up on this one. Elaborate?
Maybe someone else can better tell me what they do, but they aren't an mls and they don't list or buy houses, so I'm not really sure what they are beyond an unofficial (ie non-mls) internet housing classified.
Still not seeing the scam. The MLS is pretty locked down to your average consumer and Zillow is definitely targeting a niche for folks who aren't working with a real estate agent (or a shitty one). The actual answer is just put a public facing MLS front end out there but realtors quite enjoy their stranglehold on that and they're the ones who pay for the MLS so...
Its not a scam, its just that what they do (provide a well curated list of historical home values, images and estimated values while allowing people to start buying them) is not quite as clever as they wanted people to believe. There's a company there, just not a multi billion dollar one, and because they decided they WERE a multibillion dollar company they don't quite know what to do.
Its as if your local sandwich shop had a billion dollar valuation as some kind of digital sandwich platform. It doesn't mean their sandwiches are now bad. But it does mean they are in trouble with their investors.
Reasons why China might agree to a deal.
-They differ from Russia, in that they aren't run by someone as short-sighted as Putin, who probably is setting things up so that things burn to the ground once he is a corpse (likely one of many reasons, not grounded in out right racism for why Trump likes Putin, but doesn't seem to get along with Xi). Make no mistake China is an awful authoritative regime, but their leadership does seem to be looking long term. Climate change is going to fuck us regardless of what nation we're in and for some things that China needs, they don't have a good alternative to the US. Brazil is a terrible option for soybeans and I doubt they are thrilled by the idea that the idiot running that country and the rich there are taking the idea of replacing the US for China's soybean needs and a mandate to burn down the amazon. Also the pig disease is pretty bad.
-As has come up a few times, they do have domestic issues and they've been using the economy to keep that shit bottled up.
-They aren't irrational or suicidal, so while the economy souring would terminate Trump's chances of re-election. It's not like China can't make use of other avenues to fuck over Trump and create a scenario where he can't secure a second term (a big one that comes to mind, is they could fuck with Russia's ability to interfere with the US elections. That sticks it to Putin, while denying Trump Russian aid and Trump and the GOP would have zero luck arguing that such a move was to the detriment of the US). Also possible given that the economy is complex and slow moving, that we're at the point where the economy is going to sour anyways and there is no point in making it maximum suckage.
Reasons why the US would agree to a deal.
-Trump is apparently concerned that the economy souring will mean he doesn't get his re-election.
Reasons why this could fall through.
-China decides they can weather things out for 14 months. I'm skeptical of this because that is a long time, but who knows.
-Trump, let's be honest Trump is a short-sighted and pretty idiot. Any number of things could lead to him withdrawing in a fit or demanding terms the Chinese can't or won't agree to. If things fall through it's more likely going to be on Trump than anyone else.
Yeah, the Chinese have probably figured out that Trump can be easily played. So I'd wager they do what they need to get a deal, while essentially giving Trump a ton of crap that he thinks is valuable and then knife him in the back later. I get fully they aren't the US's friend, but I get the impression that they'd rather not have to deal with Trump because there are so many fucking ways he can cause problems that they'd rather not deal with (not to mentioned, I really doubt they are wild about a POTUS on friendly terms with the likes of Putin, who isn't really their friend and is a psychopath that will burn the world down to sate his own fucking ego. So trouncing Trump could be viewed as a way of putting Putin in his fucking place, while also limiting the number of cards that fucker has to play against the Chinese when they hit an area of disagreement).
The issue is that Trump is a petty, short-sighted nitwit and others know how to manipulate him. So there is a real risk that they get a tentative deal and then someone goes on Fox News or texts Trump and calls him a weakling for bowing to the Chinese and then everything falls through.
It shouldn't have taken long to realize WeWork is a bad real estate company pretending to be a tech company.
People still haven't figured out Zillow is a sham so it's not surprising.
I’m not up on this one. Elaborate?
Maybe someone else can better tell me what they do, but they aren't an mls and they don't list or buy houses, so I'm not really sure what they are beyond an unofficial (ie non-mls) internet housing classified.
Still not seeing the scam. The MLS is pretty locked down to your average consumer and Zillow is definitely targeting a niche for folks who aren't working with a real estate agent (or a shitty one). The actual answer is just put a public facing MLS front end out there but realtors quite enjoy their stranglehold on that and they're the ones who pay for the MLS so...
All of Redfin listings are direct API pulls from MLS listings, btw. It's only about 4 or so hours behind MLS too, so it's pretty up to date and easy for the consumer to view MLS listings. You obviously don't get the realtor only section of the listing, but other than that it's essentially everything in the MLS sheet.
Sometimes Trump just wants some name changes and a photo op and sometimes he wants something that is literally impossible. This whole debacle has been the second. We'll see if China convinces him to go with the first.
Borrowing rates skyrocketed on Tuesday in a corner of the markets the public rarely notices but that is critical to the functioning of the global financial system.
The spike in overnight borrowing rates forced the New York Federal Reserve to come to the rescue with a special operation aimed at easing stress in financial markets.
It was the NY Fed's first such rescue operation in a decade, the last occurring in late 2008.
"It's unprecedented, at least in the post-crisis era," said Mark Cabana, rates strategist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
On Tuesday morning, the NY Fed launched what's called an "overnight repo operation," during which the central bank attempts to ease pressure in markets by purchasing Treasuries and other securities. The goal is to pump money into the system to keep borrowing costs from creeping above the Fed's target range .
The first attempt by the NY Fed was canceled because of "technical difficulties." Minutes later, the NY Fed successfully injected $53 billion into the system.
The episode demonstrates evidence of emerging strains in financial markets and raises concern that the Federal Reserve could be losing its grip on short-term rates.
"The funding markets are clearly stressed," said Guy LeBas, managing director of fixed income strategy at Janney Capital Markets. "It's going to require Fed action."
The NY Fed announced plans late Tuesday to hold another repurchase agreement operation on Wednesday that would aim to repurchase up to an additional $75 billion.
...
The rate on overnight repurchase agreements hit 5% on Monday, according to Refinitiv data. That's up from 2.29% late last week and well above the target range set in July by the Federal Reserve, which is 2% to 2.25%. The surge continued Tuesday, with the overnight rate hitting a high of 10% before the NY Fed stepped in.
...
It's unclear what exactly is causing the stress in the overnight market, or how long it will last.
"No one knows why this is happening," Jim Bianco CEO of Bianco Research, said on Twitter. "If it persists more than another day or two, it will be a problem."
...
Cabana, the Bank of America analyst, blamed the spike in overnight lending rates on the Fed badly underestimating the amount of cash needed to keep the financial system operating smoothly.
...
The catalyst for the stress, according to Cabana, was the fact that US companies withdrew vast sums of money from banks to make quarterly tax payments to the US Treasury Department. That forced banks to draw down their reserves at the Fed.
...
The rate spike may also be a symptom of the sharp increase in Treasury bonds being issued to fund the federal government. The federal deficit has spiked to $1 trillion this fiscal year because of the tax cuts and surge in government spending.
Banks typically buy Treasuries by borrowing in the overnight market. The jump in Treasury issuance caused a large increase in demand for short-term financing.
Leaving out some of the "both parties" shitbird quotes, and then there's some speculation that qualitative easing might come back.
Borrowing rates skyrocketed on Tuesday in a corner of the markets the public rarely notices but that is critical to the functioning of the global financial system.
The spike in overnight borrowing rates forced the New York Federal Reserve to come to the rescue with a special operation aimed at easing stress in financial markets.
It was the NY Fed's first such rescue operation in a decade, the last occurring in late 2008.
"It's unprecedented, at least in the post-crisis era," said Mark Cabana, rates strategist at Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
On Tuesday morning, the NY Fed launched what's called an "overnight repo operation," during which the central bank attempts to ease pressure in markets by purchasing Treasuries and other securities. The goal is to pump money into the system to keep borrowing costs from creeping above the Fed's target range .
The first attempt by the NY Fed was canceled because of "technical difficulties." Minutes later, the NY Fed successfully injected $53 billion into the system.
The episode demonstrates evidence of emerging strains in financial markets and raises concern that the Federal Reserve could be losing its grip on short-term rates.
"The funding markets are clearly stressed," said Guy LeBas, managing director of fixed income strategy at Janney Capital Markets. "It's going to require Fed action."
The NY Fed announced plans late Tuesday to hold another repurchase agreement operation on Wednesday that would aim to repurchase up to an additional $75 billion.
...
The rate on overnight repurchase agreements hit 5% on Monday, according to Refinitiv data. That's up from 2.29% late last week and well above the target range set in July by the Federal Reserve, which is 2% to 2.25%. The surge continued Tuesday, with the overnight rate hitting a high of 10% before the NY Fed stepped in.
...
It's unclear what exactly is causing the stress in the overnight market, or how long it will last.
"No one knows why this is happening," Jim Bianco CEO of Bianco Research, said on Twitter. "If it persists more than another day or two, it will be a problem."
...
Cabana, the Bank of America analyst, blamed the spike in overnight lending rates on the Fed badly underestimating the amount of cash needed to keep the financial system operating smoothly.
...
The catalyst for the stress, according to Cabana, was the fact that US companies withdrew vast sums of money from banks to make quarterly tax payments to the US Treasury Department. That forced banks to draw down their reserves at the Fed.
...
The rate spike may also be a symptom of the sharp increase in Treasury bonds being issued to fund the federal government. The federal deficit has spiked to $1 trillion this fiscal year because of the tax cuts and surge in government spending.
Banks typically buy Treasuries by borrowing in the overnight market. The jump in Treasury issuance caused a large increase in demand for short-term financing.
Leaving out some of the "both parties" shitbird quotes, and then there's some speculation that qualitative easing might come back.
At the end of the day, banks sometimes need to buy treasuries to have their ledgers even. If they need to do that, they borrow on the night market to fund it, and pledge the treasury as collateral, promising to pay back the next day. The rate is considered a risk-free short rate.
Due to misalignment of supply of treasuries and demand for them, the rate spiked, so the FED had to step in and use their balance sheet to try to even it out.
If the speculation in the article is correct, the spike in demand was because companies were making quarterly tax payments and there was a higher than expected demand, it should go away in a day or two, and things are basically normal. It could be directly related to the newly massive deficit, because there's more treasury bonds being issued, so demand would go up, etc, etc.
The latter part notes that if it DOESN'T go away, other ways to handle it would be lowering interest rates or having the FED buy back treasuries (ie, Qualitative Easing), which were things that were done when the economy was in the shitter in the recession, not when it's theoretically "good."
Basically, if the problem doesn't go away, it's a sign that things are being actively pushed to keep the economy "good," arguably for political reasons, which will fuck us worse in the long run.
e: I should put a bracket around all of this with "if I understand correctly."
It's impossible to know. If 10 years from now there was never any recession, then maybe lowering the rates staved it off. Or maybe there is a recession and these rate cuts failed to prevent it.
Maybe they should have raised the rates earlier? Or maybe if they'd done that, the recession would have come sooner?
It's all just guessing. The bad part is that it shows they have less confidence in the economy and think it needs help.
better hope this staves off recession, since if one happens we have nowhere to go.
I mean, we kinda DO have places to go, because its not like we are engaged in a nationwide infrastructure rebuilding project with 0% interest and 60% tax on incomes above $1 million imposed internationally. But, its not like Trump or the Senate would allow us to do any of those things.
Posts
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Bloomberg is doing a weird "generate chart automatically" so I can't embed it, but the "changes in manufacturing jobs Jan-July 2019" is probably rather important: PA and Wisconsin are being hit particularly bad, with North Carolina not far behind.
That's going to result in some political changes that are going to impact the economy as a whole. A fair bit of coal industry has probably benefited from toxic masculity being so engrained in those areas.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
This is assuming a lot of negative stereotypes about a very broad group of people.
This is why I think you'll see some changes at the political level. Factory jobs use to be absolute shit in the US until we had a labor movement that made them far less shitty. I'll have to track it down but I do recall there was a something past something ago that showed that on policy matters there was a gender difference, when just looking at conservatives. I remember those policies being things that would have economic consequences. Also from that article, I very much got a vibe that there was a fair bit of deferring to the man on issues that is probably going to greatly erode. Not saying those areas suddenly become liberal bastions that push for economic policy that liberals like, but probably safe to say those areas transform into something where the GOP is forced to adopt some economic policies they currently oppose, while abandoning others they currently back.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Turns out they aren't doing their IPO any more.
And it turns out that the company itself isn't just not "worth" as much as it used to "be worth", it's actually worth less than the amount of money it's taken in:
People still haven't figured out Zillow is a sham so it's not surprising.
It's called "the platform defense", and a lot of companies use it to pretend they're not actually in the industry they are.
I’m not up on this one. Elaborate?
Maybe someone else can better tell me what they do, but they aren't an mls and they don't list or buy houses, so I'm not really sure what they are beyond an unofficial (ie non-mls) internet housing classified.
I assume their business model the selling the personal information of everyone that looks at a house to mortgage brokers.
Still not seeing the scam. The MLS is pretty locked down to your average consumer and Zillow is definitely targeting a niche for folks who aren't working with a real estate agent (or a shitty one). The actual answer is just put a public facing MLS front end out there but realtors quite enjoy their stranglehold on that and they're the ones who pay for the MLS so...
Its not a scam, its just that what they do (provide a well curated list of historical home values, images and estimated values while allowing people to start buying them) is not quite as clever as they wanted people to believe. There's a company there, just not a multi billion dollar one, and because they decided they WERE a multibillion dollar company they don't quite know what to do.
Its as if your local sandwich shop had a billion dollar valuation as some kind of digital sandwich platform. It doesn't mean their sandwiches are now bad. But it does mean they are in trouble with their investors.
Reasons why China might agree to a deal.
-They differ from Russia, in that they aren't run by someone as short-sighted as Putin, who probably is setting things up so that things burn to the ground once he is a corpse (likely one of many reasons, not grounded in out right racism for why Trump likes Putin, but doesn't seem to get along with Xi). Make no mistake China is an awful authoritative regime, but their leadership does seem to be looking long term. Climate change is going to fuck us regardless of what nation we're in and for some things that China needs, they don't have a good alternative to the US. Brazil is a terrible option for soybeans and I doubt they are thrilled by the idea that the idiot running that country and the rich there are taking the idea of replacing the US for China's soybean needs and a mandate to burn down the amazon. Also the pig disease is pretty bad.
-As has come up a few times, they do have domestic issues and they've been using the economy to keep that shit bottled up.
-They aren't irrational or suicidal, so while the economy souring would terminate Trump's chances of re-election. It's not like China can't make use of other avenues to fuck over Trump and create a scenario where he can't secure a second term (a big one that comes to mind, is they could fuck with Russia's ability to interfere with the US elections. That sticks it to Putin, while denying Trump Russian aid and Trump and the GOP would have zero luck arguing that such a move was to the detriment of the US). Also possible given that the economy is complex and slow moving, that we're at the point where the economy is going to sour anyways and there is no point in making it maximum suckage.
Reasons why the US would agree to a deal.
-Trump is apparently concerned that the economy souring will mean he doesn't get his re-election.
Reasons why this could fall through.
-China decides they can weather things out for 14 months. I'm skeptical of this because that is a long time, but who knows.
-Trump, let's be honest Trump is a short-sighted and pretty idiot. Any number of things could lead to him withdrawing in a fit or demanding terms the Chinese can't or won't agree to. If things fall through it's more likely going to be on Trump than anyone else.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
Trumps gets a "deal" that changes a handful of trivial things and lets him declare victory
The issue is that Trump is a petty, short-sighted nitwit and others know how to manipulate him. So there is a real risk that they get a tentative deal and then someone goes on Fox News or texts Trump and calls him a weakling for bowing to the Chinese and then everything falls through.
battletag: Millin#1360
Nice chart to figure out how honest a news source is.
The problem is that Trump is increasingly erratic and forgetful, so he blows up any progress made in negotiations with a Twitter storm.
All of Redfin listings are direct API pulls from MLS listings, btw. It's only about 4 or so hours behind MLS too, so it's pretty up to date and easy for the consumer to view MLS listings. You obviously don't get the realtor only section of the listing, but other than that it's essentially everything in the MLS sheet.
Leaving out some of the "both parties" shitbird quotes, and then there's some speculation that qualitative easing might come back.
Can somebody explain what this means?
Due to misalignment of supply of treasuries and demand for them, the rate spiked, so the FED had to step in and use their balance sheet to try to even it out.
If the speculation in the article is correct, the spike in demand was because companies were making quarterly tax payments and there was a higher than expected demand, it should go away in a day or two, and things are basically normal. It could be directly related to the newly massive deficit, because there's more treasury bonds being issued, so demand would go up, etc, etc.
The latter part notes that if it DOESN'T go away, other ways to handle it would be lowering interest rates or having the FED buy back treasuries (ie, Qualitative Easing), which were things that were done when the economy was in the shitter in the recession, not when it's theoretically "good."
Basically, if the problem doesn't go away, it's a sign that things are being actively pushed to keep the economy "good," arguably for political reasons, which will fuck us worse in the long run.
e: I should put a bracket around all of this with "if I understand correctly."
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/18/business/economy/fed-interest-rate-cut.html
Sure sign of a strong economy.
This is a bad thing right? They're juicing the economy when we dont need to and if we hit a recession we can't just cut rates right?
I'm not an economist, but I'd say it's not a good thing from my perspective.
Maybe they should have raised the rates earlier? Or maybe if they'd done that, the recession would have come sooner?
It's all just guessing. The bad part is that it shows they have less confidence in the economy and think it needs help.
I mean, we kinda DO have places to go, because its not like we are engaged in a nationwide infrastructure rebuilding project with 0% interest and 60% tax on incomes above $1 million imposed internationally. But, its not like Trump or the Senate would allow us to do any of those things.