Bidenomics, the damage done, and the need for meaningful amends

How coinkydental. Lash signed in a new account to help out new account Harry B.

Hey, guess what?

What are your qualifications?

For those who haven't caught on to this character's antics, he's referring to the article he copied, pasted, and posted without citing the author.

This is a great example of how leftism is rooted in deep seeded bitterness, resentment, and envy.

Thank you for providing an example.

It's "deep seated". Immigrants (and poseurs) often make mistakes like that.

Thank you for providing an example.

I at least follow the news and research my answers? I haven't been dead for over 2,000 years? I haven't created a sock account?

What about the highest stock market value ever? Below 4% unemployment? How about falling inflation? what about reductions in the Trump caused national debt? How about the highest sale of automobiles ever? What about the largest military than the next seven or eight nations put together? How about the bright side of undocumented immigration, it all wants to come here and not other places?

You're all whacky opinions and no facts. What are YOUR qualifications?

We noticed. All we had to do was copy to a search engine to find the original sources. Hint to plagiarists: at least rewrite your theft.

Reduction?

National Debt in Billions
-----------------------------
2020 $26,945
2021 $28,428
2022 $30,928
2023 $33,167

Trump’s Final Numbers

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/10/trumps-final-numbers/

Statistical indicators of President Trump's four years in office.

By Eugene Kiely, Brooks Jackson, Brea Jones, D'Angelo Gore, Lori Robertson and Robert Farley

Posted on October 8, 2021

Summary

The statistics for the entirety of Donald Trump’s time in office are nearly all compiled. As we did for his predecessor four years ago, we present a final look at the numbers.

The economy lost 2.9 million jobs. The unemployment rate increased by 1.6 percentage points to 6.3%.
Paychecks grew faster than inflation. Average weekly earnings for all workers were up 8.7% after inflation.
After-tax corporate profits went up, and the stock market set new records. The S&P 500 index rose 67.8%.
The international trade deficit Trump promised to reduce went up. The U.S. trade deficit in goods and services in 2020 was the highest since 2008 and increased 40.5% from 2016.
The number of people lacking health insurance rose by 3 million.
The federal debt held by the public went up, from $14.4 trillion to $21.6 trillion.
Home prices rose 27.5%, and the homeownership rate increased 2.1 percentage points to 65.8%.
Illegal immigration increased. Apprehensions at the Southwest border rose 14.7% last year compared with 2016.
Coal production declined 26.5%, and coal-mining jobs dropped by 16.7%. Carbon emissions from energy consumption dropped 11.5%.
Handgun production rose 12.5% last year compared with 2016, setting a new record.
The murder rate last year rose to the highest level since 1997.
Trump filled one-third of the Supreme Court, nearly 30% of the appellate court seats and a quarter of District Court seats.

Sorry, no escaping a losing argument with a subject change. You claimed that Biden reduced the national debt and you were wrong.

Reading comprehension is a skill you need work on, bucko.

The self-appointed grammar arbiters strike again! Your misguided attempt at linguistic superiority is truly a spectacle. Allow me to elucidate, albeit with the greatest reluctance, that the debate between "deep seated" and "deep seeded" transcends mere orthographic nitpicking and ventures into the realm of regional dialectical variances, an area clearly unfamiliar to your evidently limited purview.

In the vast and intricate tapestry of the English language, phrases evolve and adapt, much like the flora and fauna of diverse ecosystems. "Deep seated" may indeed be the standard form recognized by the pedantic populace, yet "deep seeded" has emerged as a vernacular variant, deeply rooted (pun intended) in specific linguistic communities. This phenomenon is emblematic of the language's dynamic nature, a concept seemingly lost on those who cling desperately to prescriptive norms with the tenacity of a shipwrecked sailor grasping at flotsam.

Your assertion, dripping with unearned condescension, betrays a lamentable ignorance of linguistic diversity. Perhaps it would behoove you to broaden your intellectual horizons beyond the narrow confines of your prescriptive dogma. In the meantime, your disparagement of immigrants and those you deem "poseurs" does little more than underscore your own deficiencies in both empathy and erudition.

While "deep seated" may indeed be the preferred form among the grammar elite, the existence and usage of "deep seeded" as a regional variant is both legitimate and reflective of the rich, multifaceted nature of the English language. I trust this clarification, verbose though it may be, will enlighten you, though I harbor no illusions regarding the likelihood of such an outcome.

bobsal u1553115 has been proven utterly wrong. They need to admit that they are wrong and fully accept it. They need to embrace their wrongness.

No, it doesn't reflect that at all. It reflects the common human trait of confusing English homophones when heard but not fully understood. And typical of AI-generated responses, this particular example reflects a lack of insight as seeds planted deeply below the surface don't sprout – which means they don't root either, making your "pun" meaningless.

As you adjust to the ways of our country you'll be more likely to understand the meanings of these idioms and be less likely to make such errors. You need to admit that you are wrong and fully accept it.

The pedantry patrol has arrived! Your steadfast insistence on "deep-seated" is almost endearing in its quaintness. However, your narrow view on this matter betrays a lamentable lack of cultural awareness. You see, the usage of "deep seeded" as a regional dialect in the South is a testament to the vibrant and ever-evolving nature of language, which, clearly, you are unfamiliar with.

In the rich tapestry of Southern dialects, "deep seeded" is not merely a homophonic mishap, but rather a legitimate linguistic variation that has flourished within its cultural context. This delightful variant reflects the ingenuity and adaptability of regional speech patterns, a phenomenon that, to the untrained or uncultured ear, might indeed sound like an error. However, those of us with a broader understanding of linguistic diversity recognize it as a charming and authentic expression of regional identity.

Your condescending attempt to educate me on the "correct" term only highlights your own provincialism. It's amusing, really, how you cling to prescriptive norms with the fervor of a grammarian stuck in the 19th century. While Google may confirm the prevalence of "deep-seated," it does not negate the legitimacy of "deep seeded" in certain vernaculars. Language, dear critic, is not a monolith but a living, breathing entity that evolves and adapts across different regions and communities.

As for your literal interpretation of the metaphor, it’s almost precious in its simplicity. The beauty of idiomatic expressions lies in their figurative nature, something that evidently eludes you. Seeds, whether deep or shallow, symbolize ideas and sentiments that take root and grow, irrespective of your overly literal botanical analogy.

In conclusion, the next time you encounter a regional variation, instead of hastily dismissing it as an error, perhaps take a moment to appreciate the cultural richness it represents. Embrace the diversity of our linguistic landscape, and you might just find your world expanding beyond the rigid confines of your self-imposed grammatical fortress.

Why can't you just admit that you're wrong?

You were proven wrong by Brandon.

Accept your wrongness and own it.