teedubbya
7 years ago
No big deal anymore. MAGA
Gene363
7 years ago
Not true, but the only response from the parliament of whores will be to raise taxes or invent new taxes instead cutting government spending.
teedubbya
7 years ago
MAGA

Parlement of whores was all R. Now half R. Ang the big pile of orange **** Prez. He’s great though and the deficit no longer matters.
teedubbya
7 years ago
To be clear the orange carnival barker isn’t a real R nor are many of the Congress. The party. Of law and order is no longer. I’m not pretending it doesn’t ,are sense. Just disappointed by the support for this dung heap.
gummy jones
7 years ago
its repulsive

id venture 80% of the goons are big gov advocates regardless of parties

the base never seems to care as long as their pet project gets funded
ZRX1200
7 years ago
The deficit.

Now I’m upset because I hate Cheeto, and I have to use every argument I can.

dstieger
7 years ago
List the Congressmen who got reelected by promising to spend less on stuff. Rand Paul and Mike Lee come to mind...cannot think of another.
It is political suicide. Screw the deficit. We only got 12 years before Global Warming wipes out humanity....who cares about debt?
tailgater
7 years ago
The voters WANT a deficit.
There is no other explanation for who we elect.

Everyone wants free stuff. The new wave of socialists are by no means original in their intent, they're just the most obvious.
It's now socially acceptable to mortgage our children's future in the name of propping up big government.
Free stuff.
Restrictive regulations on unfounded problems.
We'll spend hundreds of billions, perhaps more, on climate change with no possible means to measure the impact our dollars will or won't have.
Lost in all the hoopla surrounding "man made climate change" is the severity of our influence. If we have control over 1% of climate change and we somehow completely eliminate our influence, then there is still 99% change that's going to occur. Instead of preparing to adapt to a possible change, we're going to go broke in futile pursuit of Don Quixote's windmills.
So it's not far fetched to simply shrug our shoulders at the prospect of drowning in deficit debt. Because it truly won't matter.

victor809
7 years ago

The voters WANT a deficit.
There is no other explanation for who we elect.

Everyone wants free stuff. The new wave of socialists are by no means original in their intent, they're just the most obvious.
It's now socially acceptable to mortgage our children's future in the name of propping up big government.
Free stuff.
Restrictive regulations on unfounded problems.
We'll spend hundreds of billions, perhaps more, on climate change with no possible means to measure the impact our dollars will or won't have.
Lost in all the hoopla surrounding "man made climate change" is the severity of our influence. If we have control over 1% of climate change and we somehow completely eliminate our influence, then there is still 99% change that's going to occur. Instead of preparing to adapt to a possible change, we're going to go broke in futile pursuit of Don Quixote's windmills.
So it's not far fetched to simply shrug our shoulders at the prospect of drowning in deficit debt. Because it truly won't matter.

tailgater wrote:



Dear lord the stupid hurts.

Tail... you really need to back off your "socialists want to spend all our money and blah blah blah" .... it's dumb. It shows your obvious bias against facts....

Our US budget deficit is about $1Trillion a year.

How much money do you think the "socialists" want to spend on.... well.... anything? You think their contribution is even going to put a dent in that deficit?

The total US budget is about 3.8 Trillion (give or take).
The total Mandatory spending is 2.5 Trillion (give or take).
Then you have our interest on debt.... about 0.3 Billion

That means the ENTIRETY of the Discretionary spending is our deficit.
Don't blame the "socialists"... that's... dumb.
Every single budget item in discretionary spending adds to our deficit.

whining about the socialists wanting green energy is the equivalent to complaining about Drafter eating a "wafer thin mint". Sure... he probably can't afford to eat it. But it was likely the 10 course meal ahead of that which really was the problem.
ZRX1200
7 years ago
Nobody grabs one part without missing the bigger point just to feign outrage like you buddy.
ZRX1200
7 years ago
“The voters”

He’s correct
teedubbya
7 years ago
Are you ok with an exploding deficit Z? I’ve never been no mater who has been in office. It was one of my few complaints about Reagan.
opelmanta1900
7 years ago
I'm not ok with an exploding deficit.... Not ok with war either... Or starvation... Or malaria... Or illegal deforestation... Or poaching... Or carrot top... God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change...
victor809
7 years ago
It's amazing how it's always the other guy's stuff that's definitely exploding our deficit. Never whatever our thing is.

The only way we are going to get near managing our debt is a significant tax increase. We cannot actually reduce spending enough at this time without shutting down every single aspect of the government (including military). Reducing spending is great, and we should do it. But unless we increase taxes, we are "pro deficit". Tax revenue should have been increased, not decreased.
opelmanta1900
7 years ago
That sounds good... Unfortunately, every politician sees a tax increase as an opportunity for spending increases...
Gene363
7 years ago

That sounds good... Unfortunately, every politician sees a tax increase as an opportunity for spending increases...

opelmanta1900 wrote:



Exactly!
teedubbya
7 years ago
Just accept it huh.
ZRX1200
7 years ago
No I’m not Teedubya, and I’m not going to pretend it’s selective outrage for me.....I also know the POTUS role...the POTUS is a cog in the wheel even if he’s a sharply dressed half brown guy. I don’t get more or less upset when he’s orange.

So we’re playing the “its Ok it’s my guy” accusation game yet we don’t get posts the other way.

The continuation of current social programs the feds operate are not sustainable, so I do have MAJOR issues with more going forward. Is it or is it not within their enumerated powers and role. That’s always my question.
tailgater
7 years ago

Dear lord the stupid hurts.

Tail... you really need to back off your "socialists want to spend all our money and blah blah blah" .... it's dumb. It shows your obvious bias against facts....

Our US budget deficit is about $1Trillion a year.

How much money do you think the "socialists" want to spend on.... well.... anything? You think their contribution is even going to put a dent in that deficit?

The total US budget is about 3.8 Trillion (give or take).
The total Mandatory spending is 2.5 Trillion (give or take).
Then you have our interest on debt.... about 0.3 Billion

That means the ENTIRETY of the Discretionary spending is our deficit.
Don't blame the "socialists"... that's... dumb.
Every single budget item in discretionary spending adds to our deficit.

whining about the socialists wanting green energy is the equivalent to complaining about Drafter eating a "wafer thin mint". Sure... he probably can't afford to eat it. But it was likely the 10 course meal ahead of that which really was the problem.

victor809 wrote:



This.
Based on my quote:
"The new wave of socialists are by no means original in their intent, they're just the most obvious."

Pretty much the exact OPPOSITE of what you claim I said.

Someone else recently commented that you have pre-programmed retorts and don't even pay attention to what you read.
I'm not sure if it's lack of attention, or of comprehension.

Either way.



teedubbya
7 years ago

The deficit.

Now I’m upset because I hate Cheeto, and I have to use every argument I can.

ZRX1200 wrote:




I was responding to this because it seemed to say I’m being selective. I am not. I’m not seeing anything from the Pres or either party to address the issue. There sure is a a lot of howling about everything else though.

Maybe I’m just pissed I paid more in taxes this year but spending went up much more. And the President players and played more than a passive role. He did shut down things for fiscal issues, it just happened to be for the more important wall.
Users browsing this topic