Starmer’s comment

Visser, I provided you some decently objective question to pose to Chat.

You're doing bakgat Saarkie, bravo.

""Oh right . . . I remember you saying oil would hit $87 and then go back down."

Back down to 80...not back down.

And then be a dear post what I said in my next post once I looked at the chart. The one where picked the trading range that had held firm for two weeks now.

The one where I said...

"Nope, I'm expecting it be volatile, kind of a perfect trading range between 80 and 110. 150 is possible but if it does go there, sell everything you own and short the living shit out of the price because I promise you that is what everybody else is gonna do."

and then also...

"The trend is obviously up and that indicates higher, but it's also parabolic and that indicates a fast dump when a dump does come. The $120ish price from 2022 is a big resistance zone. "

How'd those predictions play out?

"I'm thinking it's going all the way back down to $80."

You can spin it like a Trumpanzee but I know what that means, Plum. I think we all do.

Posted on March 9th...

""I'm thinking it's going all the way back down to $80.""

Chart on March 10th...

Sorry, mate, my call was out by $1.44...with an at a glance assessment, before looking at any charts and in a moment when the oil price was quite volatile.

Would you like to re-asses your earlier conviction?

My guess is you won't re-asses, won't revisit and there will certainly no acknowledgement of how accurate that call actually was...especially given the circumstances.

And here’s the price we paid for the Biden job creation. Probably the most expensive jobs the Federal government has ever created. Profligate spending builds debt and inflation, which in turn raises interest rates. Higher interest rates and higher debt and bingo net interest costs explode.

Over the past few years, interest costs

U.S. net interest costs on the national debt reached $970 billion in 2025, up from $882 billion in 2024

National debt Jan 2024 $ 34 trillion. National debt Jan 2025 $36.1 trillion. Increase $2.1 trillion. Best approximation of interest paid on additional debt is 4.5%. So 4.5%on 2.1 trillion is $94.5 billion.

According to your numbers interest costs went up by $88 billion. So the baked in interest cost increase Biden left Trump accounted for more than the total rise in interest costs.

You're trying to have a conversation with a plank.

Fact check: Sharkbok’s claim (interest costs)

Claim:

U.S. net interest costs were $970bn (2025) vs $882bn (2024)

Verdict: ?? Accurate

1. FY2025 net interest ? $970 billion
2. FY2024 net interest ? $881–882 billion

This implies an increase of roughly $88–89 billion, which matches the forum post.

Fact check: Mozart’s calculation (interest on new debt)

Claim logic:

1. Debt increase ? $2.1 trillion
2. Interest rate ? 4.5%
3. Implied interest ? $94.5 billion
4. Conclusion: explains most of the ~$88bn rise

Verdict: ?? Simplistic / partially misleading

1. U.S. debt did rise by ~$2 trillion+ over that period (various sources align with this order of magnitude).

?? Reasonable approximation.

1. Average interest rate on U.S. debt ? ~3.3–3.4% in 2025, not 4.5%

?? Using 4.5% overstates the implied interest cost.

Mozart’s model assumes:

“New debt × current interest rate = increase in total interest costs”

That is not how government interest works because:

1. The U.S. debt stock is a mix of old and new bonds
2. Much debt was issued at very low rates (e.g. 1–2%)
3. As bonds mature, they are refinanced at higher rates
4. Therefore, rising interest costs come from:
5. New borrowing AND
6. Repricing of existing debt

?? This “rollover effect” is a major driver of rising interest costs.

Correct interpretation of the $88bn increase

The increase from ~$882bn ? ~$970bn is driven by:

1. Larger total debt ??
2. Higher interest rates ??
3. Refinancing older low-rate debt at higher rates ??

Not just “interest on new borrowing”.

Final evaluation

Bottom line (data-driven)

1. The raw numbers quoted are accurate
2. The explanation attributing the increase mostly to prior borrowing is economically incomplete
3. The biggest driver is rate increases applied across the whole debt stock, not just new debt

Snark, stop quoting AI, you don't even understand basic fractions ..stop digging.

He used Ai further above to tell us "The blue bar represents job increases".

This is on a chart labelled "job creation".

I'm wondering what he thought we thought those blue bars were.

Personally, I thought they represent the amount of marshmallows consumed by soldier ants in the Pacific Northwest

"Not attacking you. I don't play the stock market so I couldn't really give a toss about the price of oil or silver but I'm just wondering why you keep denying this obviously bad call you made."

I'll wait for acknowledgement of my close to perfect call.

But I might wait a very long time.

Hahahaha ….really this is the stupidest Bot I have come across yet. Yes all sorts of things made for the increase in interest costs, including the roll over of debt.

The point here is while all sorts of things are going up and going down, we are examining the effects of the $2.2 trillion of increased debt. And to the very point this laughably stupid Bot is making……that is new debt. If that tranche of new debt never existed, we could eliminate the most expensive debt added in 2025.

I always give the conservative number so I used average new debt interest rate…. I should have used the highest marginal new debt interest which would have been somewhat higher.

The lower bound of the additional interest cost Biden guaranteed Trump would have to fund because of the increase in the national debt is $94.5 billion.

Europe burned the bridge...fck them.

.

One day they'll realiz what they've done...will be too late...wankers.