192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
Baldimo
 
  -3  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 11:04 am
@jcboy,
Quote:
How can it be reasonable to think corporate tax can be lowered to 15% and personal taxes lowered to who knows what, then the debt will be become lower.

It's easier than you think, while lowering the tax rates, you also remove write-offs. If you leave the write-offs in place and lower the tax rate, you will have problems. The two have to be done hand in hand.

Quote:
The deficit has been reduced by 2/3rds under Obama but deficit is the number it takes to run the government programs and it is still running in the minus column.

Obama was putting forth 1 trillion plus budgets each year he was in office and the GOP refused to pass his budgets. Did Obama really cut spending or did Congress refuse to pass his spending?

Quote:
What is the magic that's supposed to happen here? Collect less incoming monies and still pay off the debt. How's that work in your lives? Let's lessen your salary. Do your financial commitments decrease i.e. mortgage, loans? This trickle down crap needs to stop. It never has. I'm all for fiscal responsibility but there is also the cost of doing business. This administration is the biggest joke in history!

You can't even explain basic family spending correctly. In times of lesser pay, you find area's to cut back on. You don't full steam ahead with normal spending if the income is lower, that's the problem with the govt, they never want to lessen their spending. You down size from the house to an apartment and from the SUV to a smaller more fuel efficient car.
revelette1
 
  4  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 11:23 am
@Baldimo,
You make it sound so simple, lower spending. Which one is going to be lowered? Social Security? Medicaid/Medicare? Military? Aren't those the biggest budget spenders? All of the polls show most voters and American citizens want the government to help with health care and other government programs even if you have to pay more in taxes, preferably the richest at the top. We are supposed to be a government of the people and if the people want more help with health care and the cost of living with the elderly and poor and middle class, then we should find a way to do it.
Baldimo
 
  -3  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 11:56 am
@revelette1,
Quote:
You make it sound so simple, lower spending.

It is simple, it's the politics that make it difficult.

Quote:
Which one is going to be lowered? Social Security? Medicaid/Medicare? Military?

Are these the only govt programs that can be cut? Of course not but by mentioning these programs, you highlight the political side of the debate.

Quote:
Aren't those the biggest budget spenders?

You don't always have to start with the big "spenders", you can start with smaller duplicate programs, and others that have several other area's of overlap with other programs. It's the small stuff that is going to add up. Do we really need to spend research money on the mating habits of shrimp, we already have shrimp farms that seem to completely understand how it works, why taxpayer funds? (This was a study done in Canada)

Quote:
All of the polls show most voters and American citizens want the government to help with health care and other government programs even if you have to pay more in taxes,

Polls are improtant but the govt is suppose to be limited in it's power and scope. Where does govt care and and personal responsibility start/stop?

Quote:
preferably the richest at the top.

Polls state people want more stuff but want others to pay for it? Why doesn't this surprise me. More stuff is ok as long as someone else is footing the bill. There should be a limit to how much compassion the govt can show with other peoples money.

Quote:
We are supposed to be a government of the people and if the people want more help with health care and the cost of living with the elderly and poor and middle class, then we should find a way to do it.

We are a govt of the people by the people and for the people, we are mot a govt to take from one group of people and give to another. Can you point to the place in the Constitution where we are allowed to rob Peter to pay Paul?
Below viewing threshold (view)
revelette1
 
  4  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 01:07 pm
@Baldimo,
You have your brand of politics and I have mine, mine is shared by more people. Calling having the top 1% pay more in taxes robbing Peter to pay Paul is more politics. The constitution luckily is a living constitution and adjusts to the times. If it did not, there wouldn't be a such thing as amendments. Our economy does better when the middle class and lower are doing better financially and programs which help facilitate that is a good thing.
Baldimo
 
  -3  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 01:18 pm
@revelette1,
Quote:
You have your brand of politics and I have mine, mine is shared by more people.

I wouldn't be so sure of that. The majority of people do not want to see their taxes go up, the only people who don't have a problem with taxes going up are those who think the US govt should pay for every need.

Quote:
Calling having the top 1% pay more in taxes robbing Peter to pay Paul is more politics.

Calling for the wealthy to pay for everything is politics, asking everyone to pay more for the services they want isn't.

Quote:
The constitution luckily is a living constitution and adjusts to the times.

As it should, but you can't change the Constitution to reflect the wealthy to pay for everything. The Constitution is meant to apply to everyone equally and by taxing the wealthy just because they are wealthy should be unConstitutional. Why is it you people always thinking you have a right to someone else's income and property? That's pretty unAmerican if you ask me.

Quote:
If it did not, there wouldn't be a such thing as amendments.

Which Amendment says to take from the wealthy to care for the poor? How would you make such a Amendment Constitutional?

Quote:
Our economy does better when the middle class and lower are doing better financially and programs which help facilitate that is a good thing.

I wouldn't disagree with you, but where is the limit to what should be done? There are over 170+ govt aide programs between Fed, State and local govt's? When is enough, enough?
0 Replies
 
jcboy
 
  8  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 01:46 pm
So the GOP thinks they can threaten a shutdown to force the Dems to spend billions to build a stupid, useless wall that the president "promised" Mexico would pay for.
Yeah, no. Cool
jcboy
 
  8  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 02:28 pm
@jcboy,
Sums up his Presidency. Ignorance on stilts. Read. A. BOOK! Cool

Trump didn’t know ‘much’ about NATO when he called it ‘obsolete’: report

Quote:
President Trump admitted he did not know much about NATO when he first called it “obsolete” on the campaign trail last year, he told the Associated Press.

“They had a quote from me that NATO's obsolete. But they didn't say why it was obsolete. I was on Wolf Blitzer, very fair interview, the first time I was ever asked about NATO, because I wasn't in government. People don't go around asking about NATO if I'm building a building in Manhattan, right?” Trump said to the AP, according to a full transcript published late Sunday.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Mon 24 Apr, 2017 10:04 pm
@revelette1,
Yes.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 12:13 am
@revelette1,
revelette1 wrote:
The constitution luckily is a living constitution and adjusts to the times. If it did not, there wouldn't be a such thing as amendments.

People who use the term living constitution are not talking about amendments.

They are talking about pretending that the Constitution means the opposite of what it clearly says, without passing any amendment.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -3  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 12:21 am
@Walter Hinteler,
Walter Hinteler wrote:
The "populist tsunami" has faded on the shores of France.

Not necessarily. Le Pen may not win, but for the first time since de Gaulle founded the Fifth Republic, the winner of the election will be someone other than the two main parties.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 12:43 am
@Lash,
Lash wrote:
Looks like Trump fizzled out too. Although I'm personally relieved that he's not ratcheting up the brinkmanship with Weirdo Fatty, he has opened himself to bad sex metaphors. Did the just spend several million on a drive by?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-39638012?ocid=socialflow_facebook&ns_mchannel=social&ns_campaign=bbcnews&ns_source=facebook

The Carl Vinson group diverts from NK.

The ships are still going to the Koreas. They just stopped off for some military exercises with Australia on their way.

Although I'm not sure what people are expecting from surface ships to begin with. When we shower North Korea with nukes, the missiles will be fired from a sub.
Walter Hinteler
 
  3  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 01:07 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:
Although I'm not sure what people are expecting from surface ships to begin with. When we shower North Korea with nukes, the missiles will be fired from a sub.
That's why the USS Michigan is there.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 03:05 am
@gungasnake,
An indirect homage to Barack Obama, whose college records are seen as far more important than Trompe's money.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 03:17 am
@oralloy,
oralloy wrote:

Walter Hinteler wrote:
The "populist tsunami" has faded on the shores of France.

Not necessarily. Le Pen may not win, but for the first time since de Gaulle founded the Fifth Republic, the winner of the election will be someone other than the two main parties.

Macron is no populist. He is popular BECAUSE he is not a populist.

France doesn't go by a two party sustem. The reason is primarily a two-round voting system which reduces the incentive for a two-party system. The existence of two large and dominant parties in recent years is due to Sarkozy merging two or three rightist parties to form Les Republicains. Note the US copy-cat. This artificial construct may not survive this election.

On the left, Miterrand created the Socialist party around 1970 and he was elected president thanks to it 11 years later. Miterrand and the Socialists managed to reduce the Communist party vote to almost nothing, and then behaved as a dominant party on the left but it was conjunctural. The party is now in ruin and will be replaced by something else.
0 Replies
 
giujohn
 
  -1  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 05:36 am
Hey CI... New poll says that if election were held today Trump would still win...New poll says 67% say Democrats are out of touch with the American voter and public...and half of the respondents were DEMOCRATS. Poor dysfunctional Snowflakes​.😭😭😭😭😭
0 Replies
 
revelette1
 
  3  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 06:15 am
Speaking of polls. I am thinking neither would win, democrats or republicans.

Public pans Republicans' latest approach to replacing Obamacare (WP)
Quote:

In strategy and substance, the American public disagrees with the course that President Trump and congressional Republicans are pursuing to replace the Affordable Care Act with conservative policies, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Large majorities oppose the ideas at the heart of the most recent GOP negotiations to forge a plan that could pass in the House. These would allow states to choose whether to keep the ACA’s insurance protection for people with preexisting medical problems and its guarantee of specific health benefits.

Public sentiment is particularly lopsided in favor of an aspect of the current health-care law that blocks insurers from charging more or denying coverage to customers with medical conditions. Roughly 8 in 10 Democrats, 7 in 10 independents and even a slight majority of Republicans say that should continue to be a national mandate, rather than an option for states to retain or drop.

“All states should be required to do the same thing,” said Bayonni Handy-Baker of Killeen, Texas, who supports nationwide requirements on both preexisting conditions and minimum benefits for insurance plans. As the 25 year-old Army veteran and political independent reasoned, “when you have people picking and choosing what to cover, you have this system of holes and disruption and disorder.”

Beyond their criticism of GOP proposals for devolving health policy to the states, many Americans appear leery in general about a major overhaul to the health-care law often called Obamacare, with 61 percent preferring to “keep and try to improve” it, compared with 37 percent who say they want to “repeal and replace” it. Roughly three-quarters of Republicans prefer repealing and replacing the ACA, but more than 6 in 10 independents and nearly 9 in 10 Democrats favor working within its framework.


Rest at the source.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 06:29 am
So now it seems that border wall isn't really important after all.

Not that Trump voters got conned, or anything.
McGentrix
 
  -1  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 07:22 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

So now it seems that border wall isn't really important after all.

Not that Trump voters got conned, or anything.


Yeah, that's a no win for Trump with people like you regardless of what happens. If he sticks to his plans, he shuts down government over the wall, if he doesn't, it's not really important... That's a cheese eater thing. You'll find something wrong with whatever he does so your opinion has stopped really mattering.
revelette1
 
  4  
Tue 25 Apr, 2017 07:55 am
@McGentrix,
"that's a cheese eater thing"

You have regressed, can't you guys come up something besides cheese eater? Besides, in all of statistics, it has been found republican states receive more government assistance than democrat/liberal leaning independents states. Or could you guys mean, one who rats out their fellow criminals? In either case, it hardly applies to liberals alone.

Moreover, I can't remember any of you guys approving of anything Obama did or said.

Lastly, all of his big sounding campaign promises were empty campaign slogans of which he had no clue to what he was talking about, which now he is admitting.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.45 seconds on 05/07/2024 at 02:51:02