ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
I'll just continue going to work, earning my paycheck, paying my taxes, and working on my plan to one day legally convince these stupid ass overentitled pussy millenials to give me all their parents' money.

These retards vote. Remember that when you drive to the poll next November. Ask yourself, "am I really going to pull the lever for the same candidate as some 21 year old who overhears the word "savage" and demands the president of a college resign?"

I've said it many, many times on here. More damage has been done to this country by idiots with votes than could ever be done by idiots with guns. You want background and mental health checks for guns? Great. I'll concede those if you let me implement intelligence and mental health checks for voting.
 
YEAAAA because old people didn't vote for all kinds of fairy tale bullshit that is still crippling our country and will be for quite some time. Yeaaaaa because old people aren't ruining Missouri. Yeaaaa because old people don't run politics.

You old people, man. Never will another generation even have the opportunity to F this country financially like you old folks have. My generation and the next and the next will spend their lives attemptin to make sense and fix the ridiculous shit old people created.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Big_Blue79
Trump already fading, public has already overseen his tired act, and realize it is in fact just an act that he is doing this not to be Pres but to start a new TV show of some variety. Forget the numbers, Rubio is 3rd or 4th and coming on behind 2 guys who when it comes time for GOP Conservatives to actually go vote for they will realize what silly wastes of time both are.
Probably - definitely for Trump. His negative numbers/disapprovals are so high, it's always seemed evident that it would catch up to him sooner or later. If a large percentage of voters, even Republican voters, don't like you and wouldn't vote for you under any circumstance, that will eventually out. Like, when you have less than 15 candidates. But Carson is more interesting. I agree, he'll very likely fade - very likely after doing something dumb or saying something dumb or even more likely after saying something that is portrayed as dumb whether it really is or not. But his negative numbers are by far the best of any candidate in either race, IIRC. People really like the guy. That is worth something...
 
I knew there had to be more to this story - even in these crazy times:

"COLUMBIA, Mo.—Racial tensions were merely the tip of the iceberg leading to the dramatic resignations Monday of University of Missouri President Tim Wolfe and Chancellor R. Bowen Loftin, according to professors, students, state lawmakers and others.

Both men made a series of enemies among faculty, graduate students and legislators, these people said. As students’ discontent over a series of recent racial incidents escalated, they found few ready supporters around campus, they added."
 
25 percent of female college students are sexually assaulted? Gimme a freaking break.

Yep this stat is a complete joke.

The HillVerified account ‏@thehill 19h19 hours ago
Bryan Cranston: "Aspects of socialism are a good thing" http://hill.cm/J89XIAv

Bryan Cranston compares Hillary’s Benghazi hearings to Trumbo being blacklisted - http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/movies/bryan-cranston-bares-trumbo-article-1.2427041…

"I’m excited to see what she can bring to her platform."
Bryan Cranston recently revealed his 2016 presidential choice is Hillary Clinton.
-Hollywood Reporter

Shocker. A liberal elite/celebrity is in favor of all the peons having to share money equally. Of course they should still be able to keep their riches.

I'll just continue going to work, earning my paycheck, paying my taxes, and working on my plan to one day legally convince these stupid ass overentitled pussy millenials to give me all their parents' money.

in 30 years, anyone who knows the difference between theyre, their, and there will deemed geniuses. We just have to stay alive long enough. Idiocracy is already well on its way.
 
You old people, man. Never will another generation even have the opportunity to F this country financially like you old folks have. My generation and the next and the next will spend their lives attemptin to make sense and fix the ridiculous shit old people created.

Yeah, the Old lefty's got their social programs and the old Righty's got their tax cuts and a military 10 times bigger than any other country's military. And the now generations get to deal with the fallout of an uncontrollable national debt.
 
Yeah, the Old lefty's got their social programs and the old Righty's got their tax cuts and a military 10 times bigger than any other country's military. And the now generations get to deal with the fallout of an uncontrollable national debt.

Your comparisons are invalid as usual.

The military protects EVERYBODY, rich and poor alike. How many wars have been fought on American soil, which would drastically upset your video gaming and texting?

Now think about that in the context of every other country, say, in the last 100 years... England, Germany, Japan, Russia, France, Italy.

Still want to gut the military (and yes, I'm sure there's some fat to be trimmed like any govt agency)?


Tax cuts: why are taxes this high in the first place? Actually, I'll partially agree: get ride of tax cuts after you reduce taxes to barely enough to pay for infrastructure and defense.


Social programs are not the govt's responsibility. The fed govt has proven time and time again to be unable to manage ANYTHING effectively and efficiently.
 
Your comparisons are invalid as usual.

The military protects EVERYBODY, rich and poor alike. How many wars have been fought on American soil, which would drastically upset your video gaming and texting?

Now think about that in the context of every other country, say, in the last 100 years... England, Germany, Japan, Russia, France, Italy.

Still want to gut the military (and yes, I'm sure there's some fat to be trimmed like any govt agency)?


Tax cuts: why are taxes this high in the first place? Actually, I'll partially agree: get ride of tax cuts after you reduce taxes to barely enough to pay for infrastructure and defense.


Social programs are not the govt's responsibility. The fed govt has proven time and time again to be unable to manage ANYTHING effectively and efficiently.
Awe, I figured someone would find a way to imply republicans should be held blameless.
 
"Education should be free. The United States is the richest country in the world, yet students have to take on crippling debt in order to get a college education," the movement's organizers said in a statement on their website.

From Reuters, "Students across US set to march over debt, free college education"
 
Awe, I figured someone would find a way to imply republicans should be held blameless.
We all know they're not blameless and they will most definitely have to make hard decisions on their military budget discussions.

But it doesn't take away from the ridiculousness of your post.
 
Bob Dole endorse Bush
Postal Union endorses Bernie

Has a candidate ever said "thanks, but no thanks"?
 
Trump already fading, public has already overseen his tired act, and realize it is in fact just an act that he is doing this not to be Pres but to start a new TV show of some variety. Forget the numbers, Rubio is 3rd or 4th and coming on behind 2 guys who when it comes time for GOP Conservatives to actually go vote for they will realize what silly wastes of time both are.
Yeah, the right is getting tired of his antics and is bailing. Conversely, the left has studied the laundry list of dumb and unethical behavior of HRC and are all in.
 
Your comparisons are invalid as usual.

The military protects EVERYBODY, rich and poor alike. How many wars have been fought on American soil, which would drastically upset your video gaming and texting?

Now think about that in the context of every other country, say, in the last 100 years... England, Germany, Japan, Russia, France, Italy.

Still want to gut the military (and yes, I'm sure there's some fat to be trimmed like any govt agency)?


Tax cuts: why are taxes this high in the first place? Actually, I'll partially agree: get ride of tax cuts after you reduce taxes to barely enough to pay for infrastructure and defense.


Social programs are not the govt's responsibility. The fed govt has proven time and time again to be unable to manage ANYTHING effectively and efficiently.
We also spend more that the next 15 highest spending countries on the military...combined.
The question that needs to be asked is; when is enough, enough?
There is no amount of military spending that will ever keep everyone safe.
There's an old and wise saying...when your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. Good gawd people! Study history.
The outright stupidity and gullibility required to accept Carson's response to the question in which he responded that the solution to defeating ISIS was to go into Iraq and defeat them. Where has Ben Carson been? Does he not recall the 10+ years we had troops in Iraq fighting first the Iraqi army, then al qaeda...and then the next group that is sucked into that vacuum of chaos? What magical force is going to sweep into Iraq and result in the Shiite and Suni loving one another? The problems in the middle east are 1500+ years in the making. The idea that we're going to march in and solve the problem defies logic.

Taxes...our taxes are a fraction of what they were during/following WWII. Add the fact that cutting taxes at the same time you're running deficits is not only stupid, it's irresponsible. A couple of years ago I was going through some of my old records, destroying what I didn't need. I found my 1980 tax return. I paid less in taxes in 2000 than in 1980 despite the fact that I had nearly three times the income.
The same people who have wanted to perpetuate war, perpetuate spending war time rations on the military are the same people who don't want to pay for it. In the 1940's we raised taxes to pay for WWII, they stayed high through the 50's and into the early 60's as we paid off that debt. In 1980 we had less than $800 billion in debt...and the conservatives said it was too much. Their solution, cut taxes. 8 years later we had $2.5 trillion in debt. Bill Clinton SLIGHTLY raised taxes and brought the budget into balance and ever ran a surplus. The economy boomed. Of course W rolled back those taxes, got us into wars and our debt has continued to soar ever since. Obama has done nothing to stem the tide.

Social programs...actually the govt has been very effective in stemming the tide of poverty. The level of poverty today and the standard of living for those in poverty is infinitely higher than what existed pre-1964. The issue, and I'm not sure how you ever solve for the fact that poverty is a moving bar by definition. Poverty is defined as X below the mean...unless everyone is the same there will always be people below the mean.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Deeeefense
"Education should be free. The United States is the richest country in the world, yet students have to take on crippling debt in order to get a college education," the movement's organizers said in a statement on their website.

From Reuters, "Students across US set to march over debt, free college education"

What a bunch of rubes.
 
fuzz or anyone else....you can always send extra money to the IRS or not claim deductions if want to see more taxes, very simple stuff and shows leadership. Our growth in spending is far and away larger than the growth in GDP.

Still waiting on the devastation of the sequestration cuts, $80-$90b, to hit.
 
Neil Cavuto just destroyed the leader of the Million Student March on Fox Business.

If you get a chance check it out but don't watch with food /drink cause your gonna spit it out lol.

"If we just get enough people protesting in the streets we can turn this around".

SMH...
 
Carson and most other Republicans other than Trump and Paul are clueless on fighting ISIS. ISIS is not a country it's an ideology and pockets of ISIS are poping up in numerous countries all over the world including this one. You can't defeat an ideology with guns, you can only do it with better and more persuasive idea. That's why we are now engaging their information campaign with counter ideas. Until enough people around the world realize ISIS is a failed and misguided movement it will continue to grow.

Our military can help our allies fight ISIS armies on individual fronts to win back cities they have overtaken but the movement will continue until the world attitude towards them changes, especially in the Suni community.
 
Fuzz and Deee are clueless, really. First we need to control spending and that means entitlements too. You two need to learn some history too. Taxing more will not fix the problem until you control spending.
 
We also spend more that the next 15 highest spending countries on the military...combined.
The question that needs to be asked is; when is enough, enough?.

And yet, after outspending the rest of the world combined for the last 50 years, we still lost Vietnam, didn't prevent 9-11, left Iraq and the Middle East more dangerous than ever. And a lot of folks will say it was worth every penny, and that we don't spend enough money on military.
 
fuzz or anyone else....you can always send extra money to the IRS or not claim deductions if want to see more taxes, very simple stuff and shows leadership. Our growth in spending is far and away larger than the growth in GDP.

Still waiting on the devastation of the sequestration cuts, $80-$90b, to hit.
You seem to miss the point. If tax revenue < spending then the debt rises. It's relatively easy to get people to agree to tax cuts, not so much to spending cuts. The GOP focuses on beating the "Lower Taxes" drum while never offering their sacred lambs for sacrifice and paying for those cuts. They obviously don't have the political clout or support to enact those cuts with which they might support.
I've said in the past that tax policy should be tied to spending. You want to cut taxes then you must come forward with equal spending cuts. You want additional spending, you must gain support for the additional taxes required to cover said spending. Not having the two tied together only leads to more of what have. Why does it seem that every business has its own credit card, offers you discounts to acquire their card? Because we know that people buying with credit will spend much more than people who pay with cash.

As for your suggestion that I could send extra money...well, GOP controlled states that receive many more federal $$ than they send to Washington could also refuse those funds. The IRS could have 100% my lifetime earnings and it doesn't amount to a mouse fart in a hurricane. But if S. Carolina, N. Dakota, Florida, Louisiana, Alabama...they all want to accept no more than $1 for every $1 paid in taxes...now we're talking real money.

966724856.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: From-the-stands
Fuzz and Deee are clueless, really. First we need to control spending and that means entitlements too. You two need to learn some history too. Taxing more will not fix the problem until you control spending.
WC, please point to a place in time where tax cuts controlled spending? <-- Never happened.

Look, I'm not against tax cuts as long as they don't add to the deficit. Every single one to date has done that very thing. It is no different than if I went out and ran up a lot of credit card bills to the point where I could only make the minimum payments and then decided to cut my salary. If I don't FIRST cut expenses then I would be making a very irresponsible decision. Why not campaign on cutting spending and once that objective is achieved they can enact tax cuts? You know damn well why they don't. They don't because they don't think they can achieve the cuts. It's easier just to sell the snake oil of the tax cuts.
 
I did not say tax cuts contolled spending, I said we need to control spending before doing anything. Tax hikes would only add to politicians want to spend more. But, just focusing on the military for those cuts will not do it.
 
Increase price gouging and fleecing of Americans by the gov't. I bet if they tax us hard enough, then they could break some spending records. $2 trillion a year.

#WhyNot?
 
I did not say tax cuts contolled spending, I said we need to control spending before doing anything. Tax hikes would only add to politicians want to spend more. But, just focusing on the military for those cuts will not do it.
Who is calling for tax hikes? (although I think that taxes should be set at whatever level covers spending...you want spending hikes, gotta either increase taxes or decrease spending somewhere else...tax cuts wouldn't be able to go into effect until a surplus existed in tax revenues)

I don't think they should focus only on the military...the problem is that the same folks pushing tax cuts are also pushing spending MORE on the military without saying from where the money will come to pay for the spending. Rand Paul appears to be the only GOP candidate with the balls to call them out on their hypocrisy.
 
And yet, after outspending the rest of the world combined for the last 50 years, we still lost Vietnam, didn't prevent 9-11, left Iraq and the Middle East more dangerous than ever. And a lot of folks will say it was worth every penny, and that we don't spend enough money on military.
No one is suggesting the military is "perfect".

But... how many Americans did we save/how many attacks did we discourage... by having the best military in the world?

10,000?
100,000?
1,000,000?
10,000,000?

I'm willing to have my tax dollars spent on the US military.

I'm not willing to have my tax dollars spent on the next Solyndra... or illegal immigrants... or lazy peoples' health care.
 
No one is suggesting the military is "perfect".

But... how many Americans did we save/how many attacks did we discourage... by having the best military in the world?

10,000?
100,000?
1,000,000?
10,000,000?

I'm willing to have my tax dollars spent on the US military.

I'm not willing to have my tax dollars spent on the next Solyndra... or illegal immigrants... or lazy peoples' health care.
How many more people have died in Great Briton and France because they spent 1 dollar on military for every 10 we spend? Do you think the US would be unsafe if we cut military spend back to 5X what France and England spend?
 
Lol...

The issue here is we don't know what our tax dollars are spent on and we don't care because we keep electing people to not represent us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaBossIsBack
I'm willing to have my tax dollars spent on the US military.

I'm not willing to have my tax dollars spent on the next Solyndra... or illegal immigrants... or lazy peoples' health care.

Where exactly do you think your tax dollars "spent on the US military" are going?

Yes, Solyndra was the epitome of bullshit crony capitalism.

But it's not really any better to send troops into the Middle East so your buddy's boot company can sell pairs of boots to the military for those soldiers for $2,000 a piece.
 
  • Like
Reactions: From-the-stands
As of October 2015, American consumers owe $8.17 trillion in mortgages, $900 billion in credit cards, and $1.19 trillion in student loans

http://www.counterpunch.org/2015/11/11/debt-serfdom-in-america/
I think you make my point pretty well. As long as people can delay the pain of paying for something, they will do so. Even if you pay your credit cards off every month we know that you will spend more than if you had to actually lay down cash for every transaction.

BTW, I've not no problems with people carrying mortgages although I think they should be limited to 15 yrs max. People have to have someplace to live and in many markets rental property can be more expensive than a mortgage. Student loans are alone, not bad things. It's their abuse that is sickening. My youngest daughter had scholarships that paid for about 90% of her attending UK. The process required that she apply for financial aid every year and despite the fact that her scholarships paid for all of her tuition and a good part of her living expenses she was still offered $15,000 in student loans every year. Thankfully she was smart enough to reject the offers. But too many kids see it as easy money today that they don't need to worry about paying back until they are out of school and at a time they think they'll be making big money. Then reality hits them. I blame the lenders and the schools for this problem. They are the adults who are taking advantage of mostly young, inexperienced kids.
 
The problem with defense spending is we are still wasting money on cold war weapons that have little or no value. The one Trillion dollar F-35 "Flying White Elephant" is a classic example. There are many more. Some weapons systems the Pentagon doesn't even want but they were pushed on them by politicians that have their buttons pushed by defense contractors in their states/districts.

Here is where I have something good to say about Donald Trump. He is the only politician from either party that has pointed out how we get ripped off by everyone. Why should the US be maintaining military installations for NATO at the cost of Billions a year, to protect Europe from ???? Billions of dollars for what? Why 60 years after the Korean war ended does this country have to pay for 30,000 troops in south Korea? South Korea has become a modern industrialized nation - why can't they pay for their own defense needs? Trump at least points this out.

It's nothing short of criminal to be spending tax payers money in such a reckless and foolish fashion on other countries issues while our own infrastructure is crumbling.

If you go through all the waste, and all the expenses we have paying for weapons we don't need and will never use, and other countries defenses that they could damn well pay for themselves we could have a great Department of Defense to fully serve our needs in the 21st Century for half or less what we are paying or should I say wasting right now.
 
No one is suggesting the military is "perfect".

But... how many Americans did we save/how many attacks did we discourage... by having the best military in the world?

10,000?
100,000?
1,000,000?
10,000,000?

I'm willing to have my tax dollars spent on the US military.

I'm not willing to have my tax dollars spent on the next Solyndra... or illegal immigrants... or lazy peoples' health care.
On the flip side, how many attacks did we provoke because we saw fit to stick our nose in other countries business? Would ISIS exist if Saddam Hussein was still in Iraq?

Those are questions that nobody can answer.

I don't see Canada, Great Britain, France, Germany, Japan, Spain, etc being subject to any more attacks than what we've seen over the years. Attacks like 9/11, the Boston Marathon bombers, Oklahoma City bombing showed that there are plenty of ways to "attack" the US without engaging the military. Meanwhile, because we deploy our forces all around the world we allow many other nations to not spend on their military so they can then use their resources to battle us on the economic front. They can subsidize there industries to make their products cheaper to our markets putting thousand if not millions of workers out of work or having to revert to lower paying service sector jobs.
 
How many more people have died in Great Briton and France because they spent 1 dollar on military for every 10 we spend? Do you think the US would be unsafe if we cut military spend back to 5X what France and England spend?
Fair question and I'll answer it with a question: how many people are you willing to let die to find out?
 
Where exactly do you think your tax dollars "spent on the US military" are going?

Yes, Solyndra was the epitome of bullshit crony capitalism.

But it's not really any better to send troops into the Middle East so your buddy's boot company can sell pairs of boots to the military for those soldiers for $2,000 a piece.

We ABSOLUTELY need a strong military.

We DON'T need Solyndra, national health care, or a myriad of other fiscal sinkholes that we're currently funding.

That's all I'm trying to convey.
 
Why doesn't Obama just put another $10T on our tab and wipe this all away?

I mean, $20T, $30T (in total debt)... what's the difference at this point?

Honestly, because with student loans he has essentially created a program where college grads are now pouring money to the govt by this new student loan program. A ton of money in payments are now being made that weren't before and at some point whatever you don't pay is just gone!

So pay some money and forget your total balance, just remember to keep that money coming.

So that said why worry about creating more debt as a nation when you've created a new money scheme?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT