FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

PackFansXL said:

---

caryking said:

---

bgr3 said:

---

Brandon dropping that gun executive order BS the day before inflation numbers was not an accident...

---

Also, I would like to see a challenge to this. If a ban on ghost guns is so popular, he should be able to get it passed by the peoples representatives in congress.

Most (or actually the meat of it) of his Executive Order is unconstitutional, regardless of what Psaki says…. The president can't make a law, only enforce them faithfully.

---

This POTUS does neither well.

---

I agree! I don't want any president, including Trump, to make an EO that makes laws. If an EO is used to organize how a federal agency works, then ok; but, that cannot be in conflict with a law created by our Representatives.

Oldsouljer said:

---

Which is why Dems go berserk over those "I did that" stickers on gas pumps. It's a regular poke in the eye to Biden voters.

---

yep....i support the prices going up another 25% honestly.

I can afford it...i'm not happy about it but i can afford it. The fact that other people are struggling that voted for it....oh well

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Create more inventory, eliminate single family home zoning.

---

So everyone should live in high density housing?

---

Density and land use are two different issues.

You're talking about density, hokie is talking about land use.

ETA: One of the major development challenges nationwide is that vast swaths of cities and suburbs are in zoning classifications that don't allow attached housing types.

Relatedly, Raleigh just began allowing (or more accurately for R-6, allowing again) townhomes to be built in R-4 and R-6 zoning districts. As a result, tens of thousands of acres of land in the greater Raleigh area are now developable with attached housing types without a rezoning. This type of zoning change is a step in the right direction to help correct a grossly undersupplied market.

---

OK, but is it still not higher density housing?

---

No. Higher density housing still requires a rezoning.

Here's an example-

In Raleigh, R-4 means "4 units to an acre" density AND the City specifies housing types that can go on R-4 (land use). Until their recent zoning change, townhomes were precluded from being built on land zoned R-4.

Now, Raleigh allows townhomes (attached housing) on R-4 so on a 1-acre property you can either build 4 single family homes or four townhomes. The density (4 units to the acre) is the same either way. The modified land use provision doesn't change the allowable density on the site.

What it does do is allow for more effective density because there are many sites that may meet a minimum size threshold (in this case, being able to build 4 units on one acre of land) but due to other site characteristics (stream buffers, parcel shape, minimum lot road frontage requirements, setbacks, etc.) you can't fit four single family homes with conforming lots on them. Because townhome lots are so much smaller, developers have more site planning flexibility and may be able to fit four townhomes on the site.

Also from an affordable housing perspective, it's easier to bring townhomes to market at lower price points given their construction efficiencies. Opening up allowable multi-family land uses on previously restricted zoning classifications is a relatively low-impact way of encouraging more achievable price points in private development.

cowboypack02 said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

Which is why Dems go berserk over those "I did that" stickers on gas pumps. It's a regular poke in the eye to Biden voters.

---

yep....i support the prices going up another 25% honestly.

I can afford it...i'm not happy about it but i can afford it. The fact that other people are struggling that voted for it....oh well

---

But it's not just gas that's skyrocketing up in price over the last year or so, due to what is now approaching hyperinflation. It's EVERYTHING. Gas has almost doubled in a year, and the price of housing just went up about 20% in the last year, and now food prices are starting to explode (going up ~20% just over the last few months).

Can people afford it when their gasoline cost goes up $70/month, their rent goes up $200/month, their food bill goes up $200/month, etc? We are talking about monthly expenses going up at least $500 for essentials compared to just a couple months ago. And imagine if the inflation just keeps getting worse, which it looks like it will! If the cost of things go up another 20% in 6 more months, then you're talking about a $1,000 per month increase in essentials in a year ($12,000/year increase from a year ago!).

cowboypack02 said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

Which is why Dems go berserk over those "I did that" stickers on gas pumps. It's a regular poke in the eye to Biden voters.

---

yep....i support the prices going up another 25% honestly.

I can afford it...i'm not happy about it but i can afford it. The fact that other people are struggling that voted for it....oh well

---

Cowboy, that post should win an award!!!

I'm in the same position and really lose empathy for people voting the way they do.

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Create more inventory, eliminate single family home zoning.

---

So everyone should live in high density housing?

---

Density and land use are two different issues.

You're talking about density, hokie is talking about land use.

ETA: One of the major development challenges nationwide is that vast swaths of cities and suburbs are in zoning classifications that don't allow attached housing types.

Relatedly, Raleigh just began allowing (or more accurately for R-6, allowing again) townhomes to be built in R-4 and R-6 zoning districts. As a result, tens of thousands of acres of land in the greater Raleigh area are now developable with attached housing types without a rezoning. This type of zoning change is a step in the right direction to help correct a grossly undersupplied market.

---

OK, but is it still not higher density housing?

---

No. Higher density housing still requires a rezoning.

Here's an example-

In Raleigh, R-4 means "4 units to an acre" density AND the City specifies housing types that can go on R-4 (land use). Until their recent zoning change, townhomes were precluded from being built on land zoned R-4.

Now, Raleigh allows townhomes (attached housing) on R-4 so on a 1-acre property you can either build 4 single family homes or four townhomes. The density (4 units to the acre) is the same either way. The modified land use provision doesn't change the allowable density on the site.

What it does do is allow for more effective density because there are many sites that may meet a minimum size threshold (in this case, being able to build 4 units on one acre of land) but due to other site characteristics (stream buffers, parcel shape, minimum lot road frontage requirements, setbacks, etc.) you can't fit four single family homes with conforming lots on them. Because townhome lots are so much smaller, developers have more site planning flexibility and may be able to fit four townhomes on the site.

Also from an affordable housing perspective, it's easier to bring townhomes to market at lower price points given their construction efficiencies. Opening up allowable multi-family land uses on previously restricted zoning classifications is a relatively low-impact way of encouraging more achievable price points in private development.

---

Thank you for that clarification! I can see that being effective in certain areas. But, not sure if that's a good broad sweeping decision that I agree with. Not sure if that's what Hokie was talking about, the broad sweeping aspect of it, that is.

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Create more inventory, eliminate single family home zoning.

---

So everyone should live in high density housing?

---

Density and land use are two different issues.

You're talking about density, hokie is talking about land use.

ETA: One of the major development challenges nationwide is that vast swaths of cities and suburbs are in zoning classifications that don't allow attached housing types.

Relatedly, Raleigh just began allowing (or more accurately for R-6, allowing again) townhomes to be built in R-4 and R-6 zoning districts. As a result, tens of thousands of acres of land in the greater Raleigh area are now developable with attached housing types without a rezoning. This type of zoning change is a step in the right direction to help correct a grossly undersupplied market.

---

OK, but is it still not higher density housing?

---

No. Higher density housing still requires a rezoning.

Here's an example-

In Raleigh, R-4 means "4 units to an acre" density AND the City specifies housing types that can go on R-4 (land use). Until their recent zoning change, townhomes were precluded from being built on land zoned R-4.

Now, Raleigh allows townhomes (attached housing) on R-4 so on a 1-acre property you can either build 4 single family homes or four townhomes. The density (4 units to the acre) is the same either way. The modified land use provision doesn't change the allowable density on the site.

What it does do is allow for more effective density because there are many sites that may meet a minimum size threshold (in this case, being able to build 4 units on one acre of land) but due to other site characteristics (stream buffers, parcel shape, minimum lot road frontage requirements, setbacks, etc.) you can't fit four single family homes with conforming lots on them. Because townhome lots are so much smaller, developers have more site planning flexibility and may be able to fit four townhomes on the site.

Also from an affordable housing perspective, it's easier to bring townhomes to market at lower price points given their construction efficiencies. Opening up allowable multi-family land uses on previously restricted zoning classifications is a relatively low-impact way of encouraging more achievable price points in private development.

---

Thank you for that clarification! I can see that being effective in certain areas. But, not sure if that's a good broad sweeping decision that I agree with. Not sure if that's what Hokie was talking about, the broad sweeping aspect of it, that is.

---

it needs to be dealt on the local level. It's not a state or national thing. The question was asked what can we do about housing in Raleigh, and honestly that's part of the answer. Better use of the land currently surrounding Raleigh

cowboypack02 said:

---

Oldsouljer said:

---

Which is why Dems go berserk over those "I did that" stickers on gas pumps. It's a regular poke in the eye to Biden voters.

---

yep....i support the prices going up another 25% honestly.

I can afford it...i'm not happy about it but i can afford it. The fact that other people are struggling that voted for it....oh well

---

It's coming .........on many fronts. Fuel and food prices and shortages and illegals everywhere. How much will it take folks to wake up? The longer this goes the more pain we all get to feel. Its one side of the coin.

hokiewolf said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

hokiewolf said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Create more inventory, eliminate single family home zoning.

---

So everyone should live in high density housing?

---

Density and land use are two different issues.

You're talking about density, hokie is talking about land use.

ETA: One of the major development challenges nationwide is that vast swaths of cities and suburbs are in zoning classifications that don't allow attached housing types.

Relatedly, Raleigh just began allowing (or more accurately for R-6, allowing again) townhomes to be built in R-4 and R-6 zoning districts. As a result, tens of thousands of acres of land in the greater Raleigh area are now developable with attached housing types without a rezoning. This type of zoning change is a step in the right direction to help correct a grossly undersupplied market.

---

OK, but is it still not higher density housing?

---

No. Higher density housing still requires a rezoning.

Here's an example-

In Raleigh, R-4 means "4 units to an acre" density AND the City specifies housing types that can go on R-4 (land use). Until their recent zoning change, townhomes were precluded from being built on land zoned R-4.

Now, Raleigh allows townhomes (attached housing) on R-4 so on a 1-acre property you can either build 4 single family homes or four townhomes. The density (4 units to the acre) is the same either way. The modified land use provision doesn't change the allowable density on the site.

What it does do is allow for more effective density because there are many sites that may meet a minimum size threshold (in this case, being able to build 4 units on one acre of land) but due to other site characteristics (stream buffers, parcel shape, minimum lot road frontage requirements, setbacks, etc.) you can't fit four single family homes with conforming lots on them. Because townhome lots are so much smaller, developers have more site planning flexibility and may be able to fit four townhomes on the site.

Also from an affordable housing perspective, it's easier to bring townhomes to market at lower price points given their construction efficiencies. Opening up allowable multi-family land uses on previously restricted zoning classifications is a relatively low-impact way of encouraging more achievable price points in private development.

---

Thank you for that clarification! I can see that being effective in certain areas. But, not sure if that's a good broad sweeping decision that I agree with. Not sure if that's what Hokie was talking about, the broad sweeping aspect of it, that is.

---

it needs to be dealt on the local level. It's not a state or national thing. The question was asked what can we do about housing in Raleigh, and honestly that's part of the answer. Better use of the land currently surrounding Raleigh

---

Got it!

bgr3 said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

---

I will admit, I missed where PackBacker said rent inflation. I bought my house in 2016 with the idea that when I did move out, I would turn it into a rental. Good location, multiple bed/bath, not too large, etc. Since the day I bought it, my property tax has gone up roughly 41%. If I were renting it out, there is no way I wouldn't have been able to keep my prices the same year over year. I do still think a large part of it would be inflation overall (repair costs have shot through the roof this year due to lack of supply). I think fixing inflation in general would help out with rent prices.

If I were moving today, I would sell it without a seconds hesitation. Home value is way above what I bought it at and I don't think I could resist that type of tax free windfall at this point.

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

bgr3 said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

---

I will admit, I missed where PackBacker said rent inflation. I bought my house in 2016 with the idea that when I did move out, I would turn it into a rental. Good location, multiple bed/bath, not too large, etc. Since the day I bought it, my property tax has gone up roughly 41%. If I were renting it out, there is no way I wouldn't have been able to keep my prices the same year over year. I do still think a large part of it would be inflation overall (repair costs have shot through the roof this year due to lack of supply). I think fixing inflation in general would help out with rent prices.

If I were moving today, I would sell it without a seconds hesitation. Home value is way above what I bought it at and I don't think I could resist that type of tax free windfall at this point.

---

My wife's closet friend said that her neighbor (they live in Preston) bought their house, two years ago, for 500K. They just sold it last week for 1M.

I know the market is hot; but, that's ridiculous!!! My understanding is that they did nothing in renovations.

A recent report said: of all the housing sales that have happened this year, 20% were by companies like Blackrock, Vanguard, etc...

caryking said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

bgr3 said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

---

I will admit, I missed where PackBacker said rent inflation. I bought my house in 2016 with the idea that when I did move out, I would turn it into a rental. Good location, multiple bed/bath, not too large, etc. Since the day I bought it, my property tax has gone up roughly 41%. If I were renting it out, there is no way I wouldn't have been able to keep my prices the same year over year. I do still think a large part of it would be inflation overall (repair costs have shot through the roof this year due to lack of supply). I think fixing inflation in general would help out with rent prices.

If I were moving today, I would sell it without a seconds hesitation. Home value is way above what I bought it at and I don't think I could resist that type of tax free windfall at this point.

---

My wife's closet friend said that her neighbor (they live in Preston) bought their house, two years ago, for 500K. They just sold it last week for 1M.

I know the market is hot; but, that's ridiculous!!! My understanding is that they did nothing in renovations.

A recent report said: of all the housing sales that have happened this year, 20% were by companies like Blackrock, Vanguard, etc...

---

A friend of mine just bought a 1500 sq ft ranch for the high 200s, I've known that neighborhood for years and wouldn't want to buy any of those shacks for even 100K. He bought because of FOMO and a growing family, but he bought it "as is" and immediately had to deal with inherited issues including mold. There's just very little leverage for buyers at the moment.

caryking said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

bgr3 said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

---

I will admit, I missed where PackBacker said rent inflation. I bought my house in 2016 with the idea that when I did move out, I would turn it into a rental. Good location, multiple bed/bath, not too large, etc. Since the day I bought it, my property tax has gone up roughly 41%. If I were renting it out, there is no way I wouldn't have been able to keep my prices the same year over year. I do still think a large part of it would be inflation overall (repair costs have shot through the roof this year due to lack of supply). I think fixing inflation in general would help out with rent prices.

If I were moving today, I would sell it without a seconds hesitation. Home value is way above what I bought it at and I don't think I could resist that type of tax free windfall at this point.

---

My wife's closet friend said that her neighbor (they live in Preston) bought their house, two years ago, for 500K. They just sold it last week for 1M.

I know the market is hot; but, that's ridiculous!!! My understanding is that they did nothing in renovations.

A recent report said: of all the housing sales that have happened this year, 20% were by companies like Blackrock, Vanguard, etc...

---

That's the other caveat. Ive been in the market for a small condo for my mother (basically I pay the down payment and title goes into my name and "rent" it to her at cost) and every. single. thing. in that price range (100-150k) are all going as cash offers. We saw one like six months ago where I offered 10k over asking at 7.5k in due diligence and we still lost out because there was a cash offer. That due diligence number is 3x what I did for my house. Its insanity.

Censorship related article. Is gmail or the NC State study accurate…

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/google-gmail-censorship-cost-gop-candidates-2b-study

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

bgr3 said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

---

I will admit, I missed where PackBacker said rent inflation. I bought my house in 2016 with the idea that when I did move out, I would turn it into a rental. Good location, multiple bed/bath, not too large, etc. Since the day I bought it, my property tax has gone up roughly 41%. If I were renting it out, there is no way I wouldn't have been able to keep my prices the same year over year. I do still think a large part of it would be inflation overall (repair costs have shot through the roof this year due to lack of supply). I think fixing inflation in general would help out with rent prices.

If I were moving today, I would sell it without a seconds hesitation. Home value is way above what I bought it at and I don't think I could resist that type of tax free windfall at this point.

---

Yeah, if you aren't in a good place to cash flow it you're better off taking the capital appreciation since the last year in particular has seen 2-3% a month in a lot of parts of this area.

caryking said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

bgr3 said:

---

FlossyDFlynt said:

---

PackBacker07 said:

---

While you guys are fixing the nation's problems yelling into your own tinfoil vortex, can you ask Q how we fix rent inflation as well? We're on a scary track there, much worse than paying 8% more for your basement Funyuns.

---

Stop printing money and raise interest rates. But guess what that leads to?

---

Ding ding ding.

---

I will admit, I missed where PackBacker said rent inflation. I bought my house in 2016 with the idea that when I did move out, I would turn it into a rental. Good location, multiple bed/bath, not too large, etc. Since the day I bought it, my property tax has gone up roughly 41%. If I were renting it out, there is no way I wouldn't have been able to keep my prices the same year over year. I do still think a large part of it would be inflation overall (repair costs have shot through the roof this year due to lack of supply). I think fixing inflation in general would help out with rent prices.

If I were moving today, I would sell it without a seconds hesitation. Home value is way above what I bought it at and I don't think I could resist that type of tax free windfall at this point.

---

My wife's closet friend said that her neighbor (they live in Preston) bought their house, two years ago, for 500K. They just sold it last week for 1M.

I know the market is hot; but, that's ridiculous!!! My understanding is that they did nothing in renovations.

A recent report said: of all the housing sales that have happened this year, 20% were by companies like Blackrock, Vanguard, etc...

---

I work in this space, and I can tell you that big firms like that have been buyers, but so have REITs and eBuyers like Opendoor and Zillow, the later of which quit their home flipping business and laid off 25% of their workforce late last year because they dont' really have any idea how to actually value homes. Their "zestimates" completely miss some of the most important pricing factors and are worth exactly what you pay for them. Opendoor and Zillow have had distortionary effects on supply and prices though. If you can't turn a profit flipping homes in this market you never will lol.

I think its reasonable to keep an eye on the share of the market going to big firms but in this area at least its a combination of (IMO, obviously): artificially low interest rates/restricted supply through zoning (going on everywhere) + investors (both large and small, using their capital and ability to borrow, which is happing more here than other places) + people moving from high cost of living areas who have more cash to start with (Part of this is older buyers, who have the most money, they are the ones you hear about offering a ton over list price because their kids live nearby or something like that).

What does tobacco and a prostitute have in common? Seriously though, Biden has something going on.

Biden: “Imagine had the tobacco industry been immune to prostitute being sued, come on” 🤔

No, no, there’s no cognitive decline, this is fine.
pic.twitter.com/hxyIEjgZwZ

— Rita Panahi (@RitaPanahi) April 11, 2022

hokiewolf said:

---

What does tobacco and a prostitute have in common?

Lol such a loaded question. I'm sure Hunter knows!

---

LOL…and he is the smartest person Joe knows

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/bidens-new-atf-nominee-is-a-spreader-of-misinformation/

Quote:

---

The Reload reports that Steve Dettelbach, President Joe Biden's new nominee to run the ATF, has claimed 19 times that the 2018 election attorney-general race, in which he lost to David Yost by nearly 190,000 votes, was "rigged." There is no evidence of any illegal manipulation or stolen votes. And, as we all know, the contention, even the insinuation, that an election was stolen is a broadside against our sacred democratic institutions and disqualifies a person from decent company with exceptions made for Stacey Abrams, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, a raft of CNN and MSNBC staff and guests, Washington Post columnists, the New York Times, the New Yorker, New York magazine, and so on and so forth.

---

Yet another extreme left shill nominee from Biden. Whatever those extremists have on Joe Biden, he is completely subservient and has abandoned most of what he claimed to believe through 50 years in Washington.

---

I have a hard time believing this guy would be worse than failed nominee David Chipman (said 2 helicopters were shot down at Waco, previously worked for Gabby Giffords IIRC).

PackFansXL said:

---

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/bidens-new-atf-nominee-is-a-spreader-of-misinformation/

Quote:

---

The Reload reports that Steve Dettelbach, President Joe Biden's new nominee to run the ATF, has claimed 19 times that the 2018 election attorney-general race, in which he lost to David Yost by nearly 190,000 votes, was "rigged." There is no evidence of any illegal manipulation or stolen votes. And, as we all know, the contention, even the insinuation, that an election was stolen is a broadside against our sacred democratic institutions and disqualifies a person from decent company with exceptions made for Stacey Abrams, Hillary Clinton, Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Jimmy Carter, a raft of CNN and MSNBC staff and guests, Washington Post columnists, the New York Times, the New Yorker, New York magazine, and so on and so forth.

---

Yet another extreme left shill nominee from Biden. Whatever those extremists have on Joe Biden, he is completely subservient and has abandoned most of what he claimed to believe through 50 years in Washington.

---

We all know what they have on him. Just not enough people willing to admit it.

RunsWithWolves26 said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Governor Abbott's unnecessary and redundant inspections of trucks transiting ports of entry between Texas and Mexico are causing significant disruptions to the food and automobile supply chains, delaying manufacturing, impacting jobs, and raising prices for families in Texas and across the country.," Psaki said.

---

Fine I'll say it.

**** YOU JOE BIDEN!!!

---

Yayyyyy!!!

She'll have a great career telling her whoppers at MSNBC to shrinking audiences

PackFansXL said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Governor Abbott's unnecessary and redundant inspections of trucks transiting ports of entry between Texas and Mexico are causing significant disruptions to the food and automobile supply chains, delaying manufacturing, impacting jobs, and raising prices for families in Texas and across the country.," Psaki said.

---

LOLLLL!!!!!!

Spin Psaki is a joke.

---

This image comes to mind when she starts spinning.

Don't fear The Reaper!!

PackFansXL said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Governor Abbott's unnecessary and redundant inspections of trucks transiting ports of entry between Texas and Mexico are causing significant disruptions to the food and automobile supply chains, delaying manufacturing, impacting jobs, and raising prices for families in Texas and across the country.," Psaki said.

---

LOLLLL!!!!!!

Spin Psaki is a joke.

---

how exactly is this spin? From my understanding - and this was while I was driving today listening to fox business that the boarder agents inspect the truck at the time of crossing and then the Texas rangers are doing the exact same inspection. Not really sure how that's solving the border crisis.

so now it's putins fault and now throw Texas into the equation

Well, since the Border Patrol seems to be under the control of someone who doesn't appear to be committed to securing the border, and the Rangers are under the control of someone who is committed to that goal, she's spinning to obscure the fact that the BP maybe isn't being very effective by intention and need to have their work checked by the Rangers.

hokiewolf said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

"Governor Abbott's unnecessary and redundant inspections of trucks transiting ports of entry between Texas and Mexico are causing significant disruptions to the food and automobile supply chains, delaying manufacturing, impacting jobs, and raising prices for families in Texas and across the country.," Psaki said.

---

LOLLLL!!!!!!

Spin Psaki is a joke.

---

how exactly is this spin? From my understanding - and this was while I was driving today listening to fox business that the boarder agents inspect the truck at the time of crossing and then the Texas rangers are doing the exact same inspection. Not really sure how that's solving the border crisis.

---

They are holding up each truck by an hour or so…. This may backfire on Abbott; however, I like this move to get Mexico to the negotiating table. Sounds like they may very well negotiate something outside of the Federal Government…