MemphisAg1 said:

---

I had to look up the quote because I didn't believe he would say something so stupid.

But, true to form, he did. Politically speaking, this is just another case of Trump putting his foot in his mouth. Beyond stupid to say 'you love inflation" when millions are struggling with it.

Any talking points about it being Biden's inflation will fall on deaf ears. Trump owns it now.

Instead of saying he loves it, he should obviously acknowledge it as a real concern but that his administration is doing X, Y, and Z to make things better. But nope, can't be disciplined enough to do that. Gottta pop off his mouth with a stupid comment like "I love inflation." Geesh.

Quote:

---

President Donald Trump on Wednesday said, "I love the inflation" after being asked if he was concerned about new consumer price index data that showed the annual inflation rate at 4.2%, a three-year high.

"No, I love it, the numbers were great," Trump said in the Oval Office, where a reporter asked him about the CPI number issued earlier in the morning.

"You know what I really love? I love the inflation. You know why?" Trump said. "Because as soon as this war is over, you know I can say it now ... you know we've been taking out millions of barrels of oil."

---

https://www.cnbc.com/2026/06/10/trump-inflation-cpi-iran-oil.html

---

Do you have basic reading comprehension skills or an understanding of the concept of "context"?

My Lord.

deddog said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

Silent For Too Long said:

---

MemphisAg1 said:

---

LegalDrugPusher said:

---

How is 4.2 higher than Biden's 9.1 inflation?

---

The 9.1 was four years ago. The OP is clear that 4.2 is the highest in the last three years.

Bidenflation is old news. It helped get Trump elected, among other things, but it's old news.

Trump owns this now. He said as much today when he said he "loves the inflation."

---

Historically 4.2% is barely a blip on the radar.

---

Check your history record again. Inflation oscillated around 2% for roughly the first 20 years of this century until Bidenflation kicked it up. A lot of people got used to that low inflation and built their lifestyle around it. It was a key driver behind interest rates staying low which spawned all kinds of economic activity.

If inflation stays at 4.2%, then you can count on mortgage rates at 7% and higher. Auto loans even more than that. Won't be good for economic activity.

Inflation is a thief that needs to be kept to a minimum, not dismissed or laughed away.

---

History stretches back much, much longer then 20 years.

A lot of people are short sited and make myopic decisions.

---

Lol, try selling that message to voters. That dog won't hunt.

Reality is what people perceive, and recent events carry much more weight than something from decades ago.

---

Cool.

If people are so brain dead they vote for Marxists because of 4.2% inflation, they will get the government they deserve.

---

Its not about voting.
I am not going to vote for a stupid democrat, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't expect more from Trump. He's going to learn the lesson that in the end it's alll about the economy, no matter what else he does.

---

Sometimes, things are more important than short term hits to inflation. His primary goal should be what's best for the long term health of the county, not merely doing things to win an election.

flown-the-coop said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

DonHenley said:

---

Trump is a complete and utter failure, and you guys still defend him no matter what.

---

He literally campaigned on lower prices and is now telling everyone that higher prices are great, and people are still defending him. Incredible

---

Eggs are lower.

And most of his supporters understand basic economics, the risk of Iran, and personal sacrifice.

His detractors lack all those and also basic common sense and objectivity.

---

ROFL eggs are lower. Thats the only correct statement in this post.


Trump won nearly 2/3rds of white voters without a college degree. So I'd argue they lack basic economics, or if they could point to Iran on a map before this war of choice. Personal sacrifice I'd say yeah cause unless you in the 10 mil plus club you guys actively vote against yourself. So I was wrong you had 2 correct statements.


I wish the 1/3 of voters would have told this admin about basic economics or why Iran was a hornet's nest that you don't get into cause EVERY WAR GAME EVER has them shutting down the strait.

So we got lower prices. Nope.

No new wars. Nope.

You realize Trump has said a deal was imminent with Iran 37 times? I'm starting to believe that the 1/3 and the 2/3s don't know what the word "imminent" means. Imminent threat imminent deal.

Vestal_Flame said:

---

The asses in the frying pan will be GOP candidates.

---

Is that such a bad thing though?
At least Trump is trying., and you know he genuinely cares about America, probably more than anyone in DC.

On the other hand, the Rs in Congress are worthless.

AuditAg said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

TxAG#2011 said:

---

DonHenley said:

---

Trump is a complete and utter failure, and you guys still defend him no matter what.

---

He literally campaigned on lower prices and is now telling everyone that higher prices are great, and people are still defending him. Incredible

---

Eggs are lower.

And most of his supporters understand basic economics, the risk of Iran, and personal sacrifice.

His detractors lack all those and also basic common sense and objectivity.

---

ROFL eggs are lower. Thats the only correct statement in this post.


Trump won nearly 2/3rds of white voters without a college degree. So I'd argue they lack basic economics, or if they could point to Iran on a map before this war of choice. Personal sacrifice I'd say yeah cause unless you in the 10 mil plus club you guys actively vote against yourself. So I was wrong you had 2 correct statements.


I wish the 1/3 of voters would have told this admin about basic economics or why Iran was a hornet's nest that you don't get into cause EVERY WAR GAME EVER has them shutting down the strait.

So we got lower prices. Nope.

No new wars. Nope.

You realize Trump has said a deal was imminent with Iran 37 times? I'm starting to believe that the 1/3 and the 2/3s don't know what the word "imminent" means. Imminent threat imminent deal.

---

So colored voters without college degrees cannot understand basic economics nor find a place to get an ID to vote. Excellent take! Also funny you think even a college educated person can point to Iran on a map.

And if you have made it to $10 million you understand a whole lot about deferred gratification and personal sacrifice.

The SoH is and has been managed by the USA for a while now. See recent ship movements and ongoing "negotiations".
You can wish for some lower gas prices and hope everyone in the world just behaves if you send them so USAID money. In the interim, the strong will work for a more secure world and stable, lower long term prices for energy.

Imminent is the appropriate term when you are comparing something around a 100 days that has been boiling up for 100 years, supercharged the last 47 years.

Yea, on further review I like my original points vs nonsense.

Anyone looking at his comments who doesn't suffer from very advanced TDS could see that Trump views the overall inflation figures as good, when the fuel/energy components (also included in airline costs) can be quickly lowered post-war, imho.

DeschutesAg said:

---

BTKAG97 said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

affordability and inflation were the top issues that got trump reelected in 2024, and since then he has done everything in his power to make the problem worse

---

Which means we should give power back to the Democrats so that can kill off anything that still lives.

Sounds like a great strategy.

---

Democrat Presidents have almost always been better than Rs at managing the U.S. economy. This has been true for decades, and it remained true even during the Biden 4-year term. Every economically educated honest person understood how the unwinding and rebound effect of the world economy after the ending of Covid pandemic was going to cause inflation. Post-Covid, pent-up demand exploded immediately while supply chains and manufacturers and raw materials industries went through the slow but steady process of ramping up production and transit of goods again.

---

You are either lying or ignorant. I won't defend Trump's spending and he will likely surpass him with second term, but Biden has the single largest deficit spend of any Presidential term in history. Four of the top 10 debt percentage increases were done under Dem Presidents led by the King of Debt - FDR.

You are also ignoring the basic fact that Congress controls the purse strings and are just as much responsible for all of our debt. Furthermore, you are ignoring Fed monetary policy which has had a heavy thumb on the economy as well.

Don't be a simpleton and casually throw aside a surface level comment like that.

You Bet said:

---

You are either lying or ignorant. I won't defend Trump's spending and he will likely surpass him with second term, but Biden has the single largest deficit spend of any Presidential term in history. Four of the top 10 debt percentage increases were done under Dem Presidents led by the King of Debt - FDR.

You are also ignoring the basic fact that Congress controls the purse strings and are just as much responsible for all of our debt. Furthermore, you are ignoring Fed monetary policy which has had a heavy thumb on the economy as well.

Don't be a simpleton and casually throw aside a surface level comment like that.

---

I think your comment is on point, not at all particular poster but concerning the Trump detractors overall.

As soon as an indicator in a Trump admin can be construed as negative, it's all hands on deck that he's the dumbest, most corrupt, completely incompetent, election denying Taco POTUS ever.

Any attempt at comedy is met with a chorus of "no waterboutisms!" again attempting to always remove context.

It's a sickness and a disease. It's both ignorance AND lying. And it's nonstop.

What all the ignorant dems simply dismiss is the removal of the most significant nuclear weapons (controlled by crazed religious fanatics) from threatening us, our children and grandchildren. Instead of punting the problem to to next administration (again) or sending the wackos another boatload of money (Obama) that only strengthen them, Trump finally summoned enough American courage to remove most of the nuclear threat and defeat them militarily. That's what I voted for…

[Stop derailing this thread. Next one is a timeout -- Staff]

deddog said:

---

Vestal_Flame said:

---

The asses in the frying pan will be GOP candidates.

---

Is that such a bad thing though?
At least Trump is trying., and you know he genuinely cares about America, probably more than anyone in DC.

On the other hand, the Rs in Congress are worthless.

---

I completely agree with you.
Trump is the only one, most of the other Rs are just terrible and looking to make a quick buck. No different from Dems. Just virtue-signaling for their own careers.

Inflation being up in multiple reports is a very bad sign for the midterms. People vote on that issue more than Iran. Trump should see what can be done there and it show up in next few reports.

CDUB98 said:

---

1939 said:

---

K2-HMFIC said:

---

Inflation is bad because of Iran and tariffs.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

---

Inflation is caused by printing too much money.

---

This. So much this.

While external factors, such as the Iran war, have a marked effect on inflation, the fundamental bottom line is too much money printing, and both parties are equally guilty.

---

Who has dominated Congress and the WH recently? Surely they've made significant cuts to spending in that time.

Bull Meachem said:

---

CDUB98 said:

---

1939 said:

---

K2-HMFIC said:

---

Inflation is bad because of Iran and tariffs.

Sometimes it really is that simple.

---

Inflation is caused by printing too much money.

---

This. So much this.

While external factors, such as the Iran war, have a marked effect on inflation, the fundamental bottom line is too much money printing, and both parties are equally guilty.

---

Who has dominated Congress and the WH recently? Surely they've made significant cuts to spending in that time.

---

Your question is irrelevant. Read again what I wrote, and evidently, more slowly this time.

It's not irrelevant. You just wish it was. One party consistently convinces, or tries to, voters that they care about spending and that it needs to be cut. It only seems to be an issue when the other party is in power but when they take office they **** the bed. The current admin gave a somewhat cursory glance at it but it was window dressing and sycophants for them just ignore it now.

I voted for the current admin but I knew that they couldn't care less about spending.

tysker said:

---

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

affordability and inflation were the top issues that got trump reelected in 2024, and since then he has done everything in his power to make the problem worse

---

Unless completely gutting the government and reducing spending by 75%, the inflation issue was always going to persist no matter who was in charge. That's because we are DEEPLY into a multi-decades regime of fiscal dominance. To unwind it is to break it, and thus, break the economy.

Now, I for one am completely on board. The only way we get back to a truly healthy and productive economy, not one borrowing from the future to prop up a failing current, is to get government and FED completely out of the way and let gravity take over no matter how hard it hurts. Then rebuild with a leaner government and less restrictions on people and businesses. Less dependence on financialization of everything, consumerism, and government, and more dependence on production of real assets.

But YOU.. you threw a fit when Trump and Elon started cutting bloated and corrupt agencies early last year.

Not to mention, you supported Biden's policies that exploded inflation while voting for Kamala who had no intention of reducing it.

So you really don't have room to talk. Which is no different than most times you hypocritically open your mouth.

---

Ya. I'm mostly of the view that it's intellectually inconsistent to be anti-DOGE, at least in principle, while also complaining about inflation.
DOGE didn't work out for a variety of reasons, but a first-order effect of the changes DOGE initially intended to implement was reducing inflation (as a function of lowering deficit spending)

---

Yes.

Which is why Trump pivoting to outgrow the debt was the worst thing he could have done and proof that he can't stomach a stock market drop on his watch. He has no intention of actually fixing the problems with the necessary solutions which is why I have personally soured on him. Kick the can is not a policy I will support.

It's not Trump that cannot stomach DOGE, it's the American public. HTH.

Did Trump and Rs in Congress really run on being "true conservatives" and eliminating ALL government spending that some desire… as "true conservatives"?

flown-the-coop said:

---

It's not Trump that cannot stomach DOGE, it's the American public. HTH.

Did Trump and Rs in Congress really run on being "true conservatives" and eliminating ALL government spending that some desire… as "true conservatives"?

---

Buddy, I'm the last person that's going to fall for an argument based on your goalkeeping. Waste your breathe elsewhere.

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

flown-the-coop said:

---

It's not Trump that cannot stomach DOGE, it's the American public. HTH.

Did Trump and Rs in Congress really run on being "true conservatives" and eliminating ALL government spending that some desire… as "true conservatives"?

---

Buddy, I'm the last person that's going to fall for an argument based on your goalkeeping. Waste your breathe elsewhere.

---

No thanks. You don't get to score goals by demanding the goalie go home. Though the tactic is not surprising.

Buddy and all.

flown-the-coop said:

---

It's not Trump that cannot stomach DOGE, it's the American public. HTH.

Did Trump and Rs in Congress really run on being "true conservatives" and eliminating ALL government spending that some desire… as "true conservatives"?

---

It's never Trump, it's always someone else. Trump was elected to cut spending and his supporters wanted and were happy with it. But he chickened out when it got difficult.

Sure. No court challenges and no needing Congress to do anything.

He didn't even try.

Did I get all that right?

And he has more than one task to focus on.

But your assessment is noted for the record. Orange Man is bad.

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

tysker said:

---

Heineken-Ashi said:

---

Old McDonald said:

---

affordability and inflation were the top issues that got trump reelected in 2024, and since then he has done everything in his power to make the problem worse

---

Unless completely gutting the government and reducing spending by 75%, the inflation issue was always going to persist no matter who was in charge. That's because we are DEEPLY into a multi-decades regime of fiscal dominance. To unwind it is to break it, and thus, break the economy.

Now, I for one am completely on board. The only way we get back to a truly healthy and productive economy, not one borrowing from the future to prop up a failing current, is to get government and FED completely out of the way and let gravity take over no matter how hard it hurts. Then rebuild with a leaner government and less restrictions on people and businesses. Less dependence on financialization of everything, consumerism, and government, and more dependence on production of real assets.

But YOU.. you threw a fit when Trump and Elon started cutting bloated and corrupt agencies early last year.

Not to mention, you supported Biden's policies that exploded inflation while voting for Kamala who had no intention of reducing it.

So you really don't have room to talk. Which is no different than most times you hypocritically open your mouth.

---

Ya. I'm mostly of the view that it's intellectually inconsistent to be anti-DOGE, at least in principle, while also complaining about inflation.
DOGE didn't work out for a variety of reasons, but a first-order effect of the changes DOGE initially intended to implement was reducing inflation (as a function of lowering deficit spending)

---

Yes.

Which is why Trump pivoting to outgrow the debt was the worst thing he could have done and proof that he can't stomach a stock market drop on his watch. He has no intention of actually fixing the problems with the necessary solutions which is why I have personally soured on him. Kick the can is not a policy I will support.

---

There is no way out, we have to cut spending and do it in a way that least impacts everything else. We cannot outspend our way out of this.

Both parties are terrible at doing this.

One is exponentially more terrible than the other. And they also love open borders, put jihadist firsts, don't care if Haitians eat your cats and dogs, want to send all dollars to con artists and then desire to cut the beens of your first born sons.

Outside of that they both spend too much.

flown-the-coop said:

---

Sure. No court challenges and no needing Congress to do anything.

He didn't even try.

Did I get all that right?

And he has more than one task to focus on.

But your assessment is noted for the record. Orange Man is bad.

---

Such a lazy ass response that you think is accurate. He's had the chance to cut spending, he hasn't done it. He hasn't. He's made it worse with his poorly planned war with Iran, which has increased spending.

So no one challenged DOGE cuts in court?

Congress has made spending cuts permanent?

And he doesn't control Congress nor the courts. If he did we would have a declared war on IraNq and massive cuts to spending.

What's lazy is saying he didn't even try.

You do you big bull.

flown-the-coop said:

---

So no one challenged DOGE cuts in court?

Congress has made spending cuts permanent?

And he doesn't control Congress nor the courts. If he did we would have a declared war on Iraq and massive cuts to spending.

What's lazy is saying he didn't even try.

You do you big bull.

---

Why Iraq? So the Big Beautiful Bill cut spending?

flown-the-coop said:

---

So no one challenged DOGE cuts in court?

Congress has made spending cuts permanent?

And he doesn't control Congress nor the courts. If he did we would have a declared war on Iraq and massive cuts to spending.

What's lazy is saying he didn't even try.

You do you big bull.

---

Why in the world would we declare war on Iraq? Is that another part of the no new wars policy?

Trump decided to address Iran so your grandkids are not turned into incinerated particles.

Assume you would have advised FDR to let the Japs have Pearl Harbor, the pacific and the west coast of the US if he had ran on "no new wars"?

Sometimes you have to act.

Also, wars happen regardless of who is POTUS. Some can be prevented with strong diplomacy, others are inevitable and you hope, you pray we have a strong man like Donald John Trump at the helm.

Thank God.

I understand that the party line for the trump cheerleading team is that IRAN was about to nuke the world. That wasn't my question. You said that he would have declared war on IRAQ. While similar in spelling they are two entirely different countries. Why would we be declaring war on Iraq?

Iran.

Though I am fine with including Iraq and Syria, Yemen, probably Oman and Egypt.

Brilliant, the straits of Hormuz are blocked so let's mess up the suez as well. With ideas this bright I am starting think you might actually be Donald trump posting under an alias.

EFR said:

---

Brilliant, the straits of Hormuz are blocked so let's mess up the suez as well. With ideas this bright I am starting think you might actually be Donald trump posting under an alias.

---

I am old and wise enough to know that not long ago the US blocked the British, French and Israeli takeover of the Suez Canal handing a massive win to Nasser in Egypt and ushering in to a great extent the decades of tension in the area.

It's way more practical for the US to control these waterways and Trump continues to formalize the process and may even get us paid for our services.