And how can you guys talk about cutting spending without mentioning the biggest govt. spending in the last 20 years, The Iraq and afghan wars. So spending 1 trillion to help prop up private investment and spending in a depressed market is less important than the 4 trillion we spent or are going to spend in Iraq for absolutely nothing. Really? ! trillion spent on problems at home is less useful than 4 trillion spent on proping up a failed state that we created...genius
@durhamdf The military budget is insane, no matter who has been in office, the US gov never cuts military spending, it just keeps going up, even when we aren't at war and its being wasted. It's obviously a main cause of debt, but no one will talk about cutting it because they will lose any political leverage they have because their opponents will attack them saying they don't care about America. It's about political power, politicians don't really care about the real issues
@lionslicer9999 true that, the millitary budget makes up about a quarter of our total budget for what? So we can opperate millitary bases in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Germany,Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc, etc, etc.... What a joke, and the GOP is talking like they actually care about the defecit and yet all they cut is discretionary spending and the cuts they make are the exact same ideological cuts to federal programs they dissagree with that make up a tiny fraction of the debt.
I still don't understand how you guys would plan to pay for the bush tax cuts which would cost 3.7 trillion dollars over 10 years (U.S. Treasury). Its not even an option! There isn't 3.7 trillion worth of spending to cut unless you do away with social security and medicare. And I'm sure if you ran on that, you'd get pounded in elections. So how about some real solutions especially since these tax cuts for the rich already cost us over a trillion dollars and it didn't motivate spending at all!
@durhamdf ..Simple question, and we can do this without you and I calling each other names. You say pay for tax-cuts, does that mean you believe all money is Washingtons? If you say they have to be paid for, then your premise has to be that the money starts in DC and flows to the people. Do you think money flows from DC to the people?
@snobaldus simple Question, how are you going to find 3.7 trillion to cut from the budget. Try cutting medicare or social security and see what happens when all the elderly vote democrat. There is absolutely no way that you can cut that amount of money from the budget unless you cut entitlements PERIOD! SO that means adding 3.7 trillion to the deficit which I though conservatives were REALLY opposed to...Also, the bush cuts failed to stimulate anything but the chinese economy (b/c of interest)
@durhamdf .Where is this 3.7 coming from? That is the entire budget for this year. No one is talking about cutting that. You are right, entitlements have to be reformed. The best way to do that is introduce free market reforms. In medicare you can model it after HSA, letting everyone under 45 choose their own plan that they contribute to and govt cant touch. We will have to honor those above 45 and continue to root out the fraud and waste. The same process applies to SSI. Personalize it...
@durhamdf ..You didn't say over ten years. That was the total of this years budget. That is an easy enough figure to reach, if they will remain firm and do it. As I mentioned, freezing spending at 2007 levels would get you there even if you didn't make any cuts. In addition, making the tax cuts permanent would stimulate economic growth which in turn increases revenue to the treasury. You would achieve less spending with more revenues and could cut into the deficit. This is only a start...
@snobaldus actually I did say over ten years... But when it serves you guys you don't mention the time period. Example: "Stimulous was a 1 trillion dollar dissaster" Well stimulous is over a ten year period too and it is 40 percent tax cuts...
@durhamdf ..Yes, you did mention ten years when I looked at your post. But what wasn't clear was the 3.7 figure..since that is also the amount of this years budget. See, sometimes there is actually a legit reason why there is a misunderstanding, not some conservative conspiracy to deprive you of your life, liberty, and govt. cheese. Ouch! Sorry, that slipped. And no, stimulous is going to be well over several trillions worth of disaster. Anything else I can clear up for you?
@durhamdf .for those under 45. Let these individuals have their personal acct. so the govt cant touch it. Honor SSI to those 45 and over. This is going to be a long process but it has to be done. The Bush tax-cuts did stimulate economic growth. Look at where we were right after 9/11 and where we went from there. Tax revenues increased to the treasury. We built debt because of the lack of spending discipline on the part of Bush and the congress. Tax cuts always increase revenues, not decrease...
@snobaldus of course the economy expanded over a decade... but at bellow natural growth rate, and certainly much much lower than the decade before before the bush tax cuts went into place. I am not arguing against tax cuts to stimulate a depressed economy, I'm saying tax cuts favoring the rich don't stimulate the economy as much as cuts for middle and lower class because of something called the "multiplier effect".Not going to explain it but whether u believe me or not just look at what happened
@durhamdf ..Let's be clear, everyone who paid taxes, and even those who didn't got a tax cut. It was not a tax cut for the rich, everyone got a cut. You cannot stimulate an economy if you don't incentivize those who create jobs. No disrespect to those in the lower class, but they don't create jobs. People in the middle class and upper middle class do. They also generally file as individuals which is why the individual rate is so important to keep low. Economic growth was strong this decade...
@durhamdf ..the unfortunate thing is that the govt created the sub-prime crisis that was bound to bust the housing bubble as well as the financial market. Expanding the tax base requires lower tax rates, JFK understood this as did Reagan. Leaving more money in the private sector for investment, spending, and saving is the key to sustained growth. Govt. spending crowds out the private sector and impacts the financial market in terms of tightening the money supply(meanining govt prints more too)
@snobaldus Lol if we honor social security and medicare to those over 45 then savings wont come for over 30 years!!!!! SO how are you going to pay for the 3.7 billion dollars bush tax cuts?
@durhamdf ..Let me try this again, one more time. You don't pay for tax-cuts. The money belongs to the people! OK? Do you get that? Money does not originate in DC, we the people create it. Govt. creates debt, we create wealth. I asked you earlier if you thought all money was DC's and you said no. So either you lied or you are ignorant. For you to believe tax-cuts are to be paid for means you believe all money originates in DC. It does not. The money belongs to the producers...
@snobaldus and no of course the money is the peoples, but there are Entitlements as well as absoluteley necessary federal govt. functions and federal agencies that the republicans won't even think of talking about cutting. I challange you to show me how you can cut 3.7 trillion dollars in spending over the next 10 years. Come on one example that will same more than the 200 million dollar bs drop in the bucket ideas that republicans bring up when you ask this question.
@durhamdf .What happens to pols when they give specifics in a compaign? Their opponent distorts, twists, and outright lies about their ideas. Happens on both sides, but more on the left. There are a few candidates out there, Paul Ryan being one, who have talked about tackling SSI and medicare in a meaningful way. We could freeze the budget for instance at 2007 levels and start chipping away at the deficit. Understand, we didn't get here over night and we aren't going to eliminate it overnight.
@snobaldus you can't just freeze the budget, there are new issues and issues that expire, that is just arbitrary and useless. Besides social security may not be perfect but it brought 30 million elderly americans out of poverty...And don't even try to say democrats are more negative in campaign ads. Republicans have recieved RECORD amounts of outside money from special interest and outside groups that have ALL been negative campaigning. "Death Pannels", Obama is a kenyan" who s being negative
@durhamdf ..Yes you can freeze the budget. The fact you think we can't only furthers the obvious, you are a big govt. addict. SSI has lifted people out of poverty? Give me a hit of what you are smoking. Like medicare brought people out of poverty too right? How absurdly wrong can one person be? No, Alan Grayson didn't call his opponent the Taliban did he? Jerry Brown's campaign didn't call Whitman a whore did they? Aqua Buddha? That is all the dems had, personal attacks. But tuesday was sweet..
@durhamdf ..And no, democrats received more money from outside the country than did the GOP. Hell, unions alone spent 50 million from outside the country. But I know, that doesn't count because it makes you look bad. Your beloved president ran around attacking the chamber of commerce. It was so bad even his buddies at the NY "Slimes" had to distance themselves from that BS. You are stuck with Moonbeam and senator Maam, don't be a sore loser.....
@snobaldus First of all the spending in this election through PACs and interest groups was 200 million for republicans, 100 million for democrats, so your full of shit. Secondly, unions at least provide some form of representation from the money they spend. The money comes from the people who they support. Insurance companies that bankrolled the republlicans take their donations from general funds and don't necessarily represent the views of shareholders or employees.
@durhamdf ..Reading the daily kos again? Unions take money from their members and piss it away on election of candidates that the members have no say on. Yeah, thats fair. You think unions support candidates that all their members support? Are you that far gone son? You are the tea-pot calling the kettle black. Don't point a finger at the GOP when your boys wrote the book on illegal campaign financing...see Clinton and the chi-coms..Obama and all his secret donors...don't open that can boy....
@snobaldus it is much different for an insurance company to take money from memebers and then use that money to campaign against those members interests to allow them to price gouge and drop people for no reason, than it is for a union, that has an elected board elected by the members who don't all necessarily agree, but at least it is somewhat representative. I don't like that shit either though, I think all campsign finance needs to regulated and made much more transparent
@snobaldus and we'll never know how much came in from outside countries because of the retarded Americans United vertict you conservitard supreme court came up with. But one would assume ouside spending would be in favor of republicans because China wants the guys in charge that refused to deal with their unfair trade behaviors like pegging the yuan to the dollar
@durhamdf ..you just said you knew. Which is it? Of course you would think free speech is retarded, you are a govt tool. What are you, 7 years old? You can't disagree with a supreme court decision without calling them retards? Is that the best you can do? Pretty lame bro. The Chinese hope dems stay in power because they know they will keep piling debt on top of debt which gives them more power over us. See how that works jr?
@snobaldus Are you really so stupid that you don't know that campaign contribution have always been regulated because they corrupt free and fair elections. The only thing the Americans united verdict did was allow corporations to hide their contribution and allowed for unlimited contributions in the last month. Direct contributions are already limited because that corrupts our democracy!!!! This is nothing new, and of course republicans would side with the rights of big corporations over individ
@durhamdf ..You confuse me. You say you don't believe all money is DC's but yet you say tax cuts cost us a trillion dollars? How is that possible? Tax cuts is not spending. All money is the private sectors. The notion has been spread(wrongly) by dems that deficits are caused by tax cuts. That is nonsense. Deficits are caused by spending. Every time there have been real tax cuts, revenues to the treasury increase. That is not my theory, it is an economic fact. We have a spending problem...
@snobaldus And the bush tax cuts favoring the rich is an undisputable fact. I'm not going to argue with you just go read the Congressional Budget Office's report. And more importantly they didn't Work! Bush inherited a surplus and pissed it away with tax cuts and ran up the deffecit like crazy and republicans talk small govt. while supporting virtually every spending blunder bush made. Not to mention the "dreaded stimulous" was actually 40% tax cuts and you all call that wild spending...
@durhamdf ..Tax-cuts don't cause defecits. How did we get to this point in our country where people are so economically ignorant. Revenues to the treasury increased, that is fact. When you cut taxes you spur growth which creates a larger tax-base with more tax revenue. Period! The GOP lost their way and spent like democrats, thats why they were rightfully kicked to the curb. And if they do it again, they will be kicked there again. Yes, the GOP spent like dems and they paid the price...
@durhamdf ..Everyone had their rate lowered, that is the only fact. Learn it, love it, live it. We had econ growth, which we havent had with this president. The stimulous was tax cuts? Come again? The stimulous was a payback to the unions and other thugs who helped Obama get elected. Wait til the dems come after your 401K to bail out the union pension funds....then you come talk this nonsense to me.......
@snobaldus sorry only half read your bullshit and skim for bits of information in the nonsense to quote you.But the stimulous did stimulate the economy, we went from losing over 2.6 million jobs a year to gaining almost a million private sector jobs in 10 months of straight private sector growth. And we can argue whether or not bush tax cuts stimulated growth for 10 years but you have to admit it wasn't to impressive at best.
I have to say that a lot of you red staters are pretty stupid to want to do away with the current federal tax system. A system where California recieves like 80 cents on the dollar of its taxes back to the state in the form of federal spending and states like MIssissippi Arkansas and Alabama get back between $1.50 and $1.80 for every dollar they spend. Thats fine with me, do away with the fed and the south will turn into basically Mexico while California will still be the 8th largest economy!
@durhamdf ..Have you looked at your state lately? You aren't just broke, you are Greece, the EU, and the U.S. wrapped into one. The unions and your pensions have buried you for at a minimum two generations(unless you get a Christie in office, and soon). Wanting to do away with the tax code is not about selfishness. I know liberals don't understand that, since you base every idea on your selfishness. It's about simplicity and economic growth, and yes, morality. Our current system is broken...
@snobaldus way to totally miss the point I was making retard. I'm guessing you don't have any intelligent comments of your own so you have copied and pasted the stock conservative response to anything that has to do with taxes. Is what I said wrong? Oh yeah, california is so broken! Listen, we are still the 8th largest economy in the world and the only reason we have state deficits is because of the disparity in the money we send out and what we take in from the fed. Go back to alabama bitch
@durhamdf Miss the point? No, I get it. You wanted to demonstrate your bias and arrogance. Point taken. The reason you have deficits mr. wizard is because you piss away money you don't have. You drive off business with insane envrionmental policy, insane regs., and a rip-off everyone tax code. Combine that with your public sector union pensions and health services(and lack of illegal immigration enforcement) and you have an economic catastrophe in the making. If you want to blame Alabama, ok..
@snobaldus again we drive off business? What the hell do you guys know about bussiness?!?! California has like 40 percent of the fortune 500 hundred companies and again..its freakin GDP is 1.8 trillion! I don't think you guys have much to give advice about. Even texas has the same amount of fortune 500 companies despite its rediculous tax breaks and exemptions for corporations. And by the way, tax cuts are a form of spending too. You talk about small govt. and spend trillions on tax cuts and war
@durhamdf ..Yes, you drive off business. Are you so blind that you can't see the debt wave that is getting ready to crush your state...and if not stopped, crush the whole nation. Tax-cuts are NOT spending. To make that argument you have to believe all money is governments. Judging from your other errors, you probably do believe all money is Sacramentos and DCs. Tax cuts always spur economic growth and in so doing expand the tax-base and tax revenues. The public sector, unions, are killing you.
I showed you when and how they didn't...but again, you think you make your own reality, so it all makes sense since you accept no truth but your own; no matter how faulted/prepackaged it is.
You realize a fact is a fact whether it helps your case hold water or not.
@willdrake1 ..Yes they do, but what is the point? You live in that other dimension, where tuesday night didn't happen either...somehow your message didn't get out....people just don't understand how smart you are......lol.
@durhamdf ..That is why you have a 50 billion dollar defecit that will have every California kid being born into debt. Until you take on the unions, reform pensions, address energy and illegal immigration, earthquakes will not take down Cali, your red ink will. War? Well, I can say this much, at least with war we can see tangible results, unlike the billions pissed away everyday by your benevolent friends in Sac and DC. Don't go Code Pink on me, war is not always evil.....
@willdrake1 ..Yes, I'm for making a profit which makes me intelligent. You on the other hand.....not so much...
It would be nice to know whether the slaves freed because of the civil war cared that some republicans made money on the war.....but you probably feel entitled to speak for them....it's that arrogance thing all you Marxists have....
You are like the proverbial shooting fish in a barrel......too easy...
Thanks for seconding your stance on promoting/furthering war, for the sake or profit.
Good business model for you to follow.
Yea, funny thing about me (I like profit too) I just kinda think profiting from war...I don't know, is in bad taste; but you kinda seem like the type though who would also be ok with grave robbing----anyway to make a buck right.
WOW: War Profiteers = Noble Good-doers----who simply want to make a buck.
@durhamdf ..Alabama is not your problem, bad ideas and bad policy are your problems. You think you have a trade imbalance with the feds.? Give me a hit of that. And really, bitch? Is it necessary to bring your boyfriend into this?? And retard? Is that the best you can do? Stuck in the 70's huh??
Yeah because medicare has been such a failure... It only brought 30 million elderly U.S. citizens out of poverty. But you all must have forgotten that. I love hearing these old farts at tea party rallies screaming no government intervention in our lives, oh yeah and by the way don't touch our medicare benefits. How about this, the south won't have to pay any taxes, but you won't get any fireman, police, new roads, hospitals, dissaster response, courts, public parks, or public schools.
Sure because we both know all the tax money goes to " fireman, police, new roads, hospitals, dissaster response, courts, public parks, or public schools.". It's of course impossible to keep those and cut taxes at the same time. I don't know what time you're living in but there are many other things. I'm sorry if this message is confusing to you because I'm not comparing you with my dog, nor am I telling you to end your life...
@123ggn ..If you think there is nowhere in our bloated budget to cut, you simply have jumped the gun in your state on the legal use of mary jane. To think anyone, anyone believes 3 trillion is still not enough is just beyond sane. I mean, there is only 35 percent fraud in medicare alone. Of course, this is considered a success by those idiots known as the ruling class. Stop inhaling the ruling class grass and wake up to the real world. My family is not your ATM.....
@snobaldus Were you to read my comment right, you'd know I was on your side and that I was merely being sarcastic of Durhamdf's reason of why the government shouldn't stop spending money.
@123ggn I didn't tell anyone to die or compare anyone to a dog. Can you read? Guesss not. So no millitary is needed huh? No federal agencies to keep us safe like consumer protection agency or the epa.
If you haven't said such things, surely one wouldn't mind if I made a few quotations?
"you should just end your life and do the gene pool a favor" Which is not only an insult to foxnewfollower to whom this comment was made by you, but also to people who share his genes. Second one "Freakin morons man, I mean my dog has a longer memory than you"... Perhaps you're right, though. It's as simple as everything you say is right, and people who disagree are stupid folks that cannot read.
@durhamdf - Firemen, Police, Roads, and School are all paid by local Town, County, and State taxes; the State government is distinct from the Federal government.
@durhamdf - Firemen, Police, Roads, and Schools are all paid by local Town, County, and State taxes; the State government is distinct from the Federal government.
@monkeywho Yea, except they get money, to pay for those things all the time---not just when they can't on theirown, which happens alot---from the Gov.
@durhamdf ..lol...this explains it all now. Only a govt. educated flunky would call medicare a success. A program rife will tens of billions in fraud and waste, a program destined to bankrupt us all. I especially love the five pizza joints in Florida who get paid for medicare claims to the tune of millions. Or the dentist in New York who has bus-loads of people come by his office so he can scam tens of millions from tax-payers. Yeah, what a great success story that program is...
@durhamdf ..Another thing genius, if medicare brought folks out of poverty they wouldn't need medicare anymore. I suppose food stamps elevate people from poverty to huh mr wizard? And what is your issue with the south? We can think and do for ourselves? We don't need the failures of the Golden State? Every state govt. in the south is in much, much better financial shape than yours. But hey, at least now you will have an excuse for your foggy thinking once you legalize mary jane......
@snobaldus lol lets see one republican declare medicare a failure...You will never see that because the vast majority of americans realize that it has been fairly successful in its results. Nobody is saying it is perfect, there is waste like any govt. program that can be cleaned up but it is still widely popular. Second, the states with the lowest employment, Wyoming, north/south dakota, utah, and so on get back between 1.50 and 1.30 of every tax dollar spent from the fed. And they still bitch
@snobaldus california would be in no problem at all if we didn't lose 20 cents of every dollar holding up the economies of the southern states. And california is still the largest economy in the U.S. so stfu. We could crush the south with our wallet. I love how states like texas with 25 percent uninsured rate say "keep govt. away from healthcare. But keep paying for our rediculously expensive charity care programs" You can't have it both ways. And thats right legalize it bitch
I love how you conservatives love reagan and yet he raised taxes multiple times, and raised the defecit to its highest levels in nearly 50 years at the time. Reagan knew that you need to get the country back on its feet before you can start contracting government spending but I guess all you southerners didn't have history in high school.
@durhamdf ..How stupid can one person be? You are setting the bar pretty high. The last three years of Reagan saw declining budget deficits. This is not a theory, this is fact. When Reagan took office, the highest marginal tax rate was at 70 percent. Think about that for a second, even for a Jerry Brown soul-mate that has to seem awfully high. He lowered all rates, cut regs(airline industry began it's boon) and set this nation on course for twenty years of growth and expansion..
@snobaldus but before he cut the budget during the first 80 percent of his presidency, WHILE THE ECONOMY WAS STILL ROCKY, he raised taxes and increased spending. And where did you get that the marginal tax rate for the top percent is 70 percent?
@durhamdf ..I was alive when the top marignal rate was 70 percent. Any other questions? He didn't cut the budget, the budget never gets cut. Forget this man, you idiots are so programmed it's F'n ridiculous. You don't tax your way into economic growth, do you not understand that? And you don't raise taxes especially on those who create jobs. You stay out of their pockets. The lower class don't create jobs, you don't stimulate growth by giving tax-cuts to folks who don't pay taxes.....
@durhamdf .Unfortunately Bush/Clinton impeded the progress or it would have been even greater. Reagan is responsible, his policies, for the explosion of silicone valley. He did all this while rebuilding the military that Carter had destroyed(along with the economy) and defeating communism with very little help from the democrats. Reagan understood that if govt would just get out of the way the American people would once again flourish. All you have in Cali is govt schools? It shows............
@willdrake1 ..You give me too much power....but then I understand considering your inferiority complex regarding me. Even your hero Teddy Kennedy admitted Reagan beat the commies. I'm sure that was a sad day for both of you. No, he had help from Mags and Pope John Paul. And you hate? I would have never guessed that, what with your all so positive outlook on America.
Reagan was mostly alone when it came to help from the dems. I know how you hate hearing that truth too.....
My hero? Way to suggest something, which has no basis in fact, all in an attempt to change the subject or strengthen your argument.
If T.K said it though, he likely did so out of respect--he's not a historian--so you can't (though I know you will) assume it means what you think it does, though I know how hard it is for you to not assume.
Thanks for, after being called out, now paying minor lip services to a few...a few...of the other elements in brining down the Iron Curtain.
Unlike you, I know that the Dems/Reps of yesterday, aren't the same as today.
Only someone who knows as little as you, would try and suggest the parties haven't changed over and over and over again since their separation from one another early in the countries history.
Which is why saying "the party of Lincoln" and such, is dumb political jargon, because who knows if today they would even be allowed in the parties now chanting their name.
@willdrake1 ..So the private sector couldn't create renewable energy sources? And really, you think anything in DC is ever cut? Put the crack pipe down. Your next episode of Jesse Ventura conspiracy theory is on.....you mental midget....
Ofcourse things in DC are cut, maybe you don't like them or its not enough, but its true. And the question isn't if they could or couldn't, its will they or won't they.
And they won't. Why? Well, if you had half the mental capacity of a mental midget (by the way, way`da-go with the 3 attacks instead of having an adult argument) you would know the answer.
Also, notice how you didn't refute my numbers...smart of you
@willdrake1 ..First, I apologize..didn't realize the sensitive nature of the person I was responding to. Hope you are not too crushed. Now onto the truth. No, in DC nothing is ever cut. Ever heard of base-line budgeting? The DC cut is merely to reduce the size of the growth, not actually cut. Instead of a 10 percent increase, we will only have a 5 percent increase. That is the DC way. And what numbers did I not refute? You make an accusation of a quid pro quo. The burden of proof is on you...
@snobaldus It has nothing to do with sensitivity, you’re personal attacks simply points out your inability to debate; and isn't name-calling---a way by which to avoid answering questions---something people wish would stop in D.C...how is that possible if you can't even do it?
Regan cut 90% of research for renewable energy
*the point was related to the video's reference to Regan being the God-send of the Nation.
@willdrake1 ..I don't attach names to people for lack of debate, I do so to accurately portray that individual. I once again tweaked you by attaching sensitivity to you. I don't have any questions to answer, you made an accusation and the burden of proof is on you, not me my friend. And yes, Reagan was a God-send. Sorry that conflicts with your world-view, but sometimes reality has a way of doing that. Again, I don't have to disprove a negative......
Now that you mention it, I can see how saying I smoke crack and watch conspiracy shows; all while being a mental midget (as pointed out by your so benevolent authority and clearly superior wit) accurately portrays me. Thanks!
You dodge and dance: "Hey, look over there!"
Notice that you haven't said or shown that he didn't cut 90% of renewable energy research. His record proves it, though I will wait for more of your deflective b.s
@willdrake1 ..Let me try this one last time, since my portrayal of you is oh so accurate...The burden of proof is NOT on me to dispute anything. You made an accusation and then went even further by implying it was a something for something(maybe you didn't understand the quid pro quo last time) transaction. I don't have to disprove it, you have to prove it. See, funny thing about accusations, they have to proven by those who make them. Notice you haven't provided any evidential support either..
@snobaldus Early in his first term, Ronald Reagan tried to abolish the DOE. He cut hundreds of positions from enforcement divisions of the agency--his abolition attempt failed in Congress: the General Accounting Office study revealed doing so would not save any money. He was still able to change the function significantly.
@willdrake1 ..How do you eliminate jobs and not save money? Are we to assume these individuals were working for free? Your logic is not only flawed, it's downright silly and shows you are not interested in fact. I don't need the GAO, who always has an agenda of their own, regardless who's populating it at the time, to tell me anything.....
@snobaldus Again, I give you the stats from the public records and instead of trying to say anything real, you make a personal call based on nothing and deem it fact. That’s not how reality works.
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it true.
If anything, plz take this truth with you.
R.R did cut 90% of renewable energy research.
He did try and shut down the DOE---the department reasonable for looking for renewable energy.
@willdrake1 ..Public record? Who are you kidding? Just because you accessed it from a public source doesn't make it true. I read from a public source today that bigfoot and Obama had a one night stand but somehow I don't believe that. Again, what if he did try and shut it down? What if he didn't? It has no relation to anything. You still can't answer my question on who has the technology and how are they keeping it secret amongst 8 billion people? I don't buy your phony assertions...period!!
Trying to compare Public State and Fed Records (You I hope know what they are) with something like the GLOBE paper, or whatever other trash you imagined, you know is a b.s defense.
In no way are they the same thing and if you would simply check my facts, instead of wishing me to spoon-feed you the data, you would know that.
There! Finally! You said it.
"I don't buy..." Which in your mind, thereby makes your own thoughts, somehow empirically true.
@willdrake1 ..You are thick aren't you. Your so-called facts, which is nothing more than regurgitated BS from your friends on the left, are not facts. You are spoon fed, you have been programmed....hence your irrational fear and loathing of anything corporate. My facts are based in logic, which has been in short supply on your side. Common sense also helps, again, sorely lacking on your side. As if you would posess facts if they were willed to you....
@willdrake1 .Inconsistent experience? lol...you are reaching now aren't you son? And the facts you present? Some numbers that prove what? They prove your ideology of anti-capitalism, nothing more. You obviously need someone to tell you the sky is blue, or your underwear is wet, whatever the case may be(said with a smile). I don't need the approval or acceptance of a third party when facts and logic are applied by me everyday. You dig? You have proven you don't understand econ...case closed..
@willdrake1 ..You are starting to bore me...and it is almost 4...damn! I'm off to bed..probably dream about some corporate takeover of greenpeace or something like that......
@snobaldus Continued: The R.R-era DOE placed a much stronger focus on nuclear weapons production, nuclear energy, and fossil fuels. His administration cut DOE funding for renewable energy/conservation programs by as much as 90%, while it pledged to speed the licensing process of new nuclear power plants.
@willdrake1 ..There were no cuts, only reduced rate of growth. If you don't understand that, then you won't understand anything. We should have moved forward with nuke power, but democrats stood in the way, and still do stand in the way. They are beholden to the "green" special interests. Had we moved on nukes, we would be well on the way to reducing our dependence on foreign energy....
So...cutting something isn't a cut, its simply a "reduced rate of growth"
Nice Spin and if applied to say: The Bush tax cuts...
Ya know, letting them end, which isn't a HIKE, but a return to what they were; I would agree, but I bet you find issue with that and will somehow try and say the two are totally different things.
@willdrake1 .If your govt aid worker is giving you ten dollars right now and he said next week he is going to bump it to 20, but only gives you 15, did you lose five dollars or gain 5? You gained 5. If you are paying 200 a week in taxes and next week you start paying 300, that is an increase. Get it? Man, I should charge you for this education...lord knows you need it(sorry for the lord reference, I know you Darwinists hate that...)....What else young fella, I can do this all night.....
Simply the fact that it never got to your wallet doesn't make it less of a loss.
If you were promised $100 and got $10; yes, you tec gained $10, but you also tec lost $90.
I'm glad you can so easily be swindled---and with a smile too---because it seems you will take whatever is offered to you regardless of what was said or agreed upon, anything to you is a win and in your mind, you should be lucky to get anything.
@willdrake1 ..It's not a loss. You are hopeless, beyond redemption. You haven't earned a paycheck yet have you? Tell that BS you just stated to anyone who earns a check and they will laugh you out of your liberal-colored glasses. Only in your mind is a 5 dollar increase a loss. You would fit right in with all your corrupt cronies in DC. If you are currently paying one thing and then have to pay more in actual dollars, yes, that is an increase......this isn't about you, remember....
@willdrake1 ..I was merely gving you the benefit of the doubt. If not, I would have to believe you are stupid rather than ignorant. I was actually being kind to you. A simple thank you would be nice. You are strong on ideology but very weak in economic reality. Doesn't make you a bad person it just makes you wrong......
@snobaldus If you simply took the time not to say the first stupid thing that popped into your head, you wouldn't have to later go back and explain/clean up, what you were trying to say in the first place.
Yes its a loss:
If someone owes you $10 but can only pay you $5, you would cut your losses and take whatever you could. Which is fine. However, that $5, which is never repaid, is still a loss.
The same is true with money earned: $100, but get only $50 real dollars, is a loss of $50
@willdrake1 ..How, in any way, was my example an exmaple of lost, earned money? Simply put, it wasn't. Someone promising to raise your allowance by twenty and instead only does so by ten, is not a loss. Period! It is a gain of ten, not a loss of ten. Even my 7 year old niece understands this concept. But, you are from the entitlement establishment so this makes sense.
I'm not as fortunate as you, you can be stupid naturally....makes you a candidate for govt work....
@snobaldus The problem with you is, you only consider a loss when its "physical" money; the problem there is that most money is digital or "theoretical"
Using your analogy:
If your boss says he's going to pay you $20 instead of $10, then you come to find out he can only afford to pay you $15, you still lost that potential/theoretical $5; and yes, as I said, you did tec gain $5 over what you were making, but you still have to record what you were supposed to get.
@willdrake1 Difference between potential and reality. Your wife would sleep with a man for 500 hundred thousand. So would your teen-age daughter. Potentially you are sitting on a million dollars but in reality you're living with two whores. Learn it, love it, live it.....
Tip your waitress, I will be here one more night. Your education has begun....
@snobaldus And if the loss of theor-money isn't a loss, answer me this:
Why are all those Wall Street investors pissed?
Or something easier: Why people who start gambling with $10, then grow it to $10000 *still chips, so not "real" * and then loose it all...I wonder why they're upset?
I mean, they "really" only lost $10, much like the W.S investors, who only lost what they orig put into the markets----not the millions and millions their digitally earnings were “theoretically” worth.
Well, from how would like to simultaneously trust Business to do the right thing, and cut the agencies responsible for them---the bills that would make those things happen...yea, you would take less clean water and air than myself.
Why? Well, you can always buy your water from the store.
And I bet. Once the market for clean air is made, you will somehow beable to buy it too.
@willdrake1 ..Incoherence is a strong point for you isn't it? I will gladly trust business who has to market to my needs over a govt. whose only interest is more power for them and less freedom for me. That seems to be out of your grasp. It would be hard for a business to stay in business if they specialized in hurting or killing their clients. I suspect clean air is clean not because of govt greatness, same with water. Your love and trust of beauracrats is striking...and silly.....
@snobaldus Continued: Between 1981 and 1989 the DOE dramatically expanded its weapons production and testing activities. During the previous decades N.W were tested once every two years:1980s three were conducted each year. The DOE also began preparations to store high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
Does his single focus on Nukes (for War mongering reasons mostly) somehow make him for Renewable Energy Research. Nope. It makes him a Republican, siding with his base and a fear-fed American public.
@willdrake1 ..War-mongering? Oh I know, your soviet friends weren't really that bad right? lol....And I'm sure that all this war-mongering over Islamic radicalism is bothering you too. Pathetic my friend, weak! So you admit that republicans are the only ones who wish to protect the country? Well, glad you can admit that....it's a start..
Yes they were a threat, but as much and for so long as they were setup to be, no and if you knew your history, you could atleast admit that, but you don't----doesn't matter, its ok, because you didn't try and resuggest he was somehow still for Renewable Energy Research.
How did I admit Reps were the only ones?
Man, I wish I had your ability to make something from nothing.
If anything, I admitted they were the ones to overreact.dus
@willdrake1 ..So we set the Soviets up huh? lol....you are showing your true colors my friend...I thought for a second you were just naive and ignorant. Now I know it's on purpose. I've made a conversation with you out of nothing from your side, so I agree you could learn a lot from me. People like you scare me. Don't feel bad, it's probably your govt. education at work. And I still regard radical Islam more dangerous than you...though you won't help me much in that fight I suspect..
No. WE didn't set the Soviets up. WE set ourselves up to think they were worse than they really were, for a longer period of time, than they actually were.
I've had extensive public and private education, thanks for guessing wrong again though.
No. I don't like Radical Islam as much as you do, and am glad atleast you can see the difference.
@willdrake1 ..Your ignorance knows no bounds. At least you are consistent, ignorant on multiple subjects. All one has to do is skim the Soviet archives and understand how niave at best we were to the Soviet threat. Of course in your conspiratorial mind, it had to be this country that was at fault. We can add Soviet apologist to your list of credentials now. Which makes sense when viewed through the prism of your ecnonomic ignorance. And I'm sure you are now an Islamic radical apologist....
@snobaldus Continued: During R.R’s tenure a DOE official was convicted of accepting bribes to pass on internal documents to oil industry officials. The DOE illegally provided a $550,000 grant to aid in a lobbying effort against Congressional attempts to constrain nuclear testing. Independent investigations by the GAO and other agencies found the DOE lacking in both security and safety measures.
@willdrake1 ..Are we to believe that no administration has or had any corruption in it's cabinet or other agencies? This is the basis for your "big oil" conspiracy to deprive the world of renewable energy resources? A guy was convicted in the 80's of bribery so two things have to be, one, Reagan was not a good president, and two, big oil is killing green energy? This is your case? Paper thin comes to mind...along with a few other less kind phrases.....
Don't make this about other admin, we aren't talking about other admin.
This is about the Savior R.R.
No. One doesn't mean another, but it does display a tendency...which, along with his cutting of 90% of Renewable Energy Research and other things, perhaps becomes a trend.
This isn't about you remember.
This is about the Video and the myth of R.R---which now I see you agree is a myth.
@willdrake1 .No, this is about your blinding rage for truth. You point to one person and say that makes a trend or that makes some sort of quid pro quo on his entire presidency. Not going to happen here. And for the last time, he didn't cut 90 percent. I'm sure that uncle Al has convinced you of this...in fact, it's almost like an obsession with you. You haven't been reading Ted too have you? Now I'm starting to worry about you. No myth, Reagan was a great president, glad you agree...
@willdrake1 .Reality is what you make it....that is the secret that alludes you. You have a fatalist mind-set that will paralyze you for the rest of your life. Facts are a funny thing...when you actually start living those things you only read about they never seem quite as they were printed to be. But, you will have to experience this on your own.....thanks for the luck...but you should hold onto that...
@willdrake1 ..Gravity? This coming from the Santa enthusiast, the easter bunny fanatic, the Al Gore really won fan club president? You are a wonder of physics really, how you can simultaneously have your head in the clouds and up your a@#. No small feat my friend.....
@snobaldus This whole post of yours makes no sense.
Maybe you should go to be earlier so you don't type line after line of nothingness drivel.
Remember, I wasn't the one who said "Reality is what you make it"
Which is why I said: "You wish away gravity---cause you seem to be able to, in your own reality---all you want, I will instead realize it exists no matter what I do."
@willdrake1 ..What panels? The White House? And again, I will say for the hundredth time, where is the private sector on this? Reagan was a free market guy, this is the message I take from it. Why would we be wasting millions in tax-payer money on projects that the private sector should and could do more efficiently? I know this may be hard for you to believe, but there are a lot of us out here that don't believe the govt. should be involved in every aspect of our lives...
@willdrake1 It's only corporate welfare if it's a subsidy, but I suspect you think tax-cuts are welfare. That is what libs/socialists have been programmed to think. Govt. looks at things in 3 ways, if it moves, tax it, if it moves too much regulate it, and if it doesnt move at all subsidize it. That has got to change my friend, we are out of everyones money. The auto industry in particular should have been left to fail. Failure is as much needed in an economy as success.....
@willdrake1 .That would be write-off. I believe I said subsidy, meaning tax-payers pay to keep a business in business. A company not having to pay taxes on things they write off is still their money. So no, your defintion is not correct. Only in your twisted mind is keeping what you rightfully own called welfare. In that case, your paycheck is welfare. You obviously believe all money is govts. Why don't you just let them keep all your money..live your principles my friend..
Most of the tax-code is subsidy, though you would argue many are ok because of who they go to.
No. Its not there money.
Because they write it off, they're getting back what they spend at our expense.
Its like this: If i donate $1000 and the Gov gives me back a $1000 I didn't donate anything...really it was a loan.
Also, If I pay money to take a client out, I shouldn't get that money back---it was the cost of doing business. I didn't have to take that person out to dinner.
@willdrake1 ..For you to believe that you must think all money originates in DC. Is that what you really believe? It would make sense to a confused Marxist like yourself. Of course it only has the one problem of not being correct. Money originates in the private sector. Say it with me, money originates in the private sector, meaning wealth is earned outside of govt. Any money that ends up in DC has been confiscated from its rightful owner. Hence, any money returned is done so rightfully.
@snobaldus Money originates in the FED, so it does start in DC; unless you think your HOLY Big Businesses can print/certify money now? I mean, from the way they act, maybe they can.
Or is it that you lack understanding of the Fractional Reserve system for the creation and growth of money in the US?
If so, maybe instead of saying a lot of nothing through factless “soapbox" speeches, you should use the internet to learn something.
@willdrake1 ..Oh, an original thought, how original. I know people create wealth, govt. creates debt. I know people create jobs, govt policy tends to destroy them. The way they act. You are a pompous ass aren't you. Must be the frustration of not being able to hold a job and only able to hold your own joke.
I use the interent through the good graces of Al Gore thank you very little. Just a tip for you, internet porn will make you go blind so be careful.....
@willdrake1 ..You shouldn't get the money back you spent to take a client out? You paid your taxes didn't you? Then you are getting your money back. This is why the tax code needs to be blown up. This is why we need the fair tax. Of course this is anathema to a statist. Keeping your own money is not welfare...neither is doing business......I like that, it was the cost of doing business but I didn't have to take that person to dinner. What? Incoherence central are you....
This doesn't mean it was the REAL or NEEDED cost of doing business; this was the cost YOU CHOSE.
Which is to say, NO, you didn't have to take that person to dinner to make the deal, you chose to do so; so NO, you don’t get money back for it.
Same for a golf trip: It isn't "business" I know some people like to trick the system, but its stealing and lying and this is why we have the problems we do.
@willdrake1 ..Oh, I get it. The producers are the real problems in this country. Gald you finally got that off your bra. So now you decide what business needs and wants to do? You are the legend in your own mind aren't you?
Remember your line about assumptions? Take your own advice much?
Stealing and lying? As the old bumper sticker read, don't do that, congress hates the competition.....
Read the comments and read the death of America.
RagnarRepossessions 6 months ago
Yeah, let bomb healthcare and increase discretionary spending! And now, let see what China will do...
Probably get the fuck out by changing the american money to something else!
therrydicule 1 year ago
And how can you guys talk about cutting spending without mentioning the biggest govt. spending in the last 20 years, The Iraq and afghan wars. So spending 1 trillion to help prop up private investment and spending in a depressed market is less important than the 4 trillion we spent or are going to spend in Iraq for absolutely nothing. Really? ! trillion spent on problems at home is less useful than 4 trillion spent on proping up a failed state that we created...genius
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf The military budget is insane, no matter who has been in office, the US gov never cuts military spending, it just keeps going up, even when we aren't at war and its being wasted. It's obviously a main cause of debt, but no one will talk about cutting it because they will lose any political leverage they have because their opponents will attack them saying they don't care about America. It's about political power, politicians don't really care about the real issues
lionslicer9999 11 months ago
@lionslicer9999 true that, the millitary budget makes up about a quarter of our total budget for what? So we can opperate millitary bases in Italy, Spain, Portugal, Japan, Germany,Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, etc, etc, etc.... What a joke, and the GOP is talking like they actually care about the defecit and yet all they cut is discretionary spending and the cuts they make are the exact same ideological cuts to federal programs they dissagree with that make up a tiny fraction of the debt.
durhamdf 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Google...Debt Free America Act
H.R. 4646
Coming 11/23/10
Govt. will take 1% out of your bank account
johnnybagofdonets 1 year ago
I still don't understand how you guys would plan to pay for the bush tax cuts which would cost 3.7 trillion dollars over 10 years (U.S. Treasury). Its not even an option! There isn't 3.7 trillion worth of spending to cut unless you do away with social security and medicare. And I'm sure if you ran on that, you'd get pounded in elections. So how about some real solutions especially since these tax cuts for the rich already cost us over a trillion dollars and it didn't motivate spending at all!
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Simple question, and we can do this without you and I calling each other names. You say pay for tax-cuts, does that mean you believe all money is Washingtons? If you say they have to be paid for, then your premise has to be that the money starts in DC and flows to the people. Do you think money flows from DC to the people?
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus simple Question, how are you going to find 3.7 trillion to cut from the budget. Try cutting medicare or social security and see what happens when all the elderly vote democrat. There is absolutely no way that you can cut that amount of money from the budget unless you cut entitlements PERIOD! SO that means adding 3.7 trillion to the deficit which I though conservatives were REALLY opposed to...Also, the bush cuts failed to stimulate anything but the chinese economy (b/c of interest)
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf .Where is this 3.7 coming from? That is the entire budget for this year. No one is talking about cutting that. You are right, entitlements have to be reformed. The best way to do that is introduce free market reforms. In medicare you can model it after HSA, letting everyone under 45 choose their own plan that they contribute to and govt cant touch. We will have to honor those above 45 and continue to root out the fraud and waste. The same process applies to SSI. Personalize it...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus from the U.S. treasury 3.7 trillion over 10 years look it up
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..You didn't say over ten years. That was the total of this years budget. That is an easy enough figure to reach, if they will remain firm and do it. As I mentioned, freezing spending at 2007 levels would get you there even if you didn't make any cuts. In addition, making the tax cuts permanent would stimulate economic growth which in turn increases revenue to the treasury. You would achieve less spending with more revenues and could cut into the deficit. This is only a start...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus actually I did say over ten years... But when it serves you guys you don't mention the time period. Example: "Stimulous was a 1 trillion dollar dissaster" Well stimulous is over a ten year period too and it is 40 percent tax cuts...
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Yes, you did mention ten years when I looked at your post. But what wasn't clear was the 3.7 figure..since that is also the amount of this years budget. See, sometimes there is actually a legit reason why there is a misunderstanding, not some conservative conspiracy to deprive you of your life, liberty, and govt. cheese. Ouch! Sorry, that slipped. And no, stimulous is going to be well over several trillions worth of disaster. Anything else I can clear up for you?
snobaldus 1 year ago
@durhamdf .for those under 45. Let these individuals have their personal acct. so the govt cant touch it. Honor SSI to those 45 and over. This is going to be a long process but it has to be done. The Bush tax-cuts did stimulate economic growth. Look at where we were right after 9/11 and where we went from there. Tax revenues increased to the treasury. We built debt because of the lack of spending discipline on the part of Bush and the congress. Tax cuts always increase revenues, not decrease...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus of course the economy expanded over a decade... but at bellow natural growth rate, and certainly much much lower than the decade before before the bush tax cuts went into place. I am not arguing against tax cuts to stimulate a depressed economy, I'm saying tax cuts favoring the rich don't stimulate the economy as much as cuts for middle and lower class because of something called the "multiplier effect".Not going to explain it but whether u believe me or not just look at what happened
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Let's be clear, everyone who paid taxes, and even those who didn't got a tax cut. It was not a tax cut for the rich, everyone got a cut. You cannot stimulate an economy if you don't incentivize those who create jobs. No disrespect to those in the lower class, but they don't create jobs. People in the middle class and upper middle class do. They also generally file as individuals which is why the individual rate is so important to keep low. Economic growth was strong this decade...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..the unfortunate thing is that the govt created the sub-prime crisis that was bound to bust the housing bubble as well as the financial market. Expanding the tax base requires lower tax rates, JFK understood this as did Reagan. Leaving more money in the private sector for investment, spending, and saving is the key to sustained growth. Govt. spending crowds out the private sector and impacts the financial market in terms of tightening the money supply(meanining govt prints more too)
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Lol if we honor social security and medicare to those over 45 then savings wont come for over 30 years!!!!! SO how are you going to pay for the 3.7 billion dollars bush tax cuts?
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Let me try this again, one more time. You don't pay for tax-cuts. The money belongs to the people! OK? Do you get that? Money does not originate in DC, we the people create it. Govt. creates debt, we create wealth. I asked you earlier if you thought all money was DC's and you said no. So either you lied or you are ignorant. For you to believe tax-cuts are to be paid for means you believe all money originates in DC. It does not. The money belongs to the producers...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus and no of course the money is the peoples, but there are Entitlements as well as absoluteley necessary federal govt. functions and federal agencies that the republicans won't even think of talking about cutting. I challange you to show me how you can cut 3.7 trillion dollars in spending over the next 10 years. Come on one example that will same more than the 200 million dollar bs drop in the bucket ideas that republicans bring up when you ask this question.
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf .What happens to pols when they give specifics in a compaign? Their opponent distorts, twists, and outright lies about their ideas. Happens on both sides, but more on the left. There are a few candidates out there, Paul Ryan being one, who have talked about tackling SSI and medicare in a meaningful way. We could freeze the budget for instance at 2007 levels and start chipping away at the deficit. Understand, we didn't get here over night and we aren't going to eliminate it overnight.
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus you can't just freeze the budget, there are new issues and issues that expire, that is just arbitrary and useless. Besides social security may not be perfect but it brought 30 million elderly americans out of poverty...And don't even try to say democrats are more negative in campaign ads. Republicans have recieved RECORD amounts of outside money from special interest and outside groups that have ALL been negative campaigning. "Death Pannels", Obama is a kenyan" who s being negative
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Yes you can freeze the budget. The fact you think we can't only furthers the obvious, you are a big govt. addict. SSI has lifted people out of poverty? Give me a hit of what you are smoking. Like medicare brought people out of poverty too right? How absurdly wrong can one person be? No, Alan Grayson didn't call his opponent the Taliban did he? Jerry Brown's campaign didn't call Whitman a whore did they? Aqua Buddha? That is all the dems had, personal attacks. But tuesday was sweet..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..And no, democrats received more money from outside the country than did the GOP. Hell, unions alone spent 50 million from outside the country. But I know, that doesn't count because it makes you look bad. Your beloved president ran around attacking the chamber of commerce. It was so bad even his buddies at the NY "Slimes" had to distance themselves from that BS. You are stuck with Moonbeam and senator Maam, don't be a sore loser.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus First of all the spending in this election through PACs and interest groups was 200 million for republicans, 100 million for democrats, so your full of shit. Secondly, unions at least provide some form of representation from the money they spend. The money comes from the people who they support. Insurance companies that bankrolled the republlicans take their donations from general funds and don't necessarily represent the views of shareholders or employees.
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Reading the daily kos again? Unions take money from their members and piss it away on election of candidates that the members have no say on. Yeah, thats fair. You think unions support candidates that all their members support? Are you that far gone son? You are the tea-pot calling the kettle black. Don't point a finger at the GOP when your boys wrote the book on illegal campaign financing...see Clinton and the chi-coms..Obama and all his secret donors...don't open that can boy....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus it is much different for an insurance company to take money from memebers and then use that money to campaign against those members interests to allow them to price gouge and drop people for no reason, than it is for a union, that has an elected board elected by the members who don't all necessarily agree, but at least it is somewhat representative. I don't like that shit either though, I think all campsign finance needs to regulated and made much more transparent
durhamdf 1 year ago
@snobaldus and we'll never know how much came in from outside countries because of the retarded Americans United vertict you conservitard supreme court came up with. But one would assume ouside spending would be in favor of republicans because China wants the guys in charge that refused to deal with their unfair trade behaviors like pegging the yuan to the dollar
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..you just said you knew. Which is it? Of course you would think free speech is retarded, you are a govt tool. What are you, 7 years old? You can't disagree with a supreme court decision without calling them retards? Is that the best you can do? Pretty lame bro. The Chinese hope dems stay in power because they know they will keep piling debt on top of debt which gives them more power over us. See how that works jr?
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Are you really so stupid that you don't know that campaign contribution have always been regulated because they corrupt free and fair elections. The only thing the Americans united verdict did was allow corporations to hide their contribution and allowed for unlimited contributions in the last month. Direct contributions are already limited because that corrupts our democracy!!!! This is nothing new, and of course republicans would side with the rights of big corporations over individ
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..You confuse me. You say you don't believe all money is DC's but yet you say tax cuts cost us a trillion dollars? How is that possible? Tax cuts is not spending. All money is the private sectors. The notion has been spread(wrongly) by dems that deficits are caused by tax cuts. That is nonsense. Deficits are caused by spending. Every time there have been real tax cuts, revenues to the treasury increase. That is not my theory, it is an economic fact. We have a spending problem...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus And the bush tax cuts favoring the rich is an undisputable fact. I'm not going to argue with you just go read the Congressional Budget Office's report. And more importantly they didn't Work! Bush inherited a surplus and pissed it away with tax cuts and ran up the deffecit like crazy and republicans talk small govt. while supporting virtually every spending blunder bush made. Not to mention the "dreaded stimulous" was actually 40% tax cuts and you all call that wild spending...
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Tax-cuts don't cause defecits. How did we get to this point in our country where people are so economically ignorant. Revenues to the treasury increased, that is fact. When you cut taxes you spur growth which creates a larger tax-base with more tax revenue. Period! The GOP lost their way and spent like democrats, thats why they were rightfully kicked to the curb. And if they do it again, they will be kicked there again. Yes, the GOP spent like dems and they paid the price...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Everyone had their rate lowered, that is the only fact. Learn it, love it, live it. We had econ growth, which we havent had with this president. The stimulous was tax cuts? Come again? The stimulous was a payback to the unions and other thugs who helped Obama get elected. Wait til the dems come after your 401K to bail out the union pension funds....then you come talk this nonsense to me.......
snobaldus 1 year ago
Comment removed
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Your 401k is your retirement idiot!! Dicscussion over, I'm not wasting my time debating someone with the IQ of a ham sandwich.......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus sorry only half read your bullshit and skim for bits of information in the nonsense to quote you.But the stimulous did stimulate the economy, we went from losing over 2.6 million jobs a year to gaining almost a million private sector jobs in 10 months of straight private sector growth. And we can argue whether or not bush tax cuts stimulated growth for 10 years but you have to admit it wasn't to impressive at best.
durhamdf 1 year ago
@snobaldus
"All money is the private sectors"
Man, why don't you say these cherry things when talking to me.
Oh, I know why, cause Id say you’ve just proven you're what you claim to hate:
A Corporatist Elitist.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Oh wow, that was sooo clever. Did Ralph Nader help you with that one. You bore me...just not in my class....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Your words dude, don't be upset.
And if you don't like the taste, stop talking shit.
willdrake1 1 year ago
I have to say that a lot of you red staters are pretty stupid to want to do away with the current federal tax system. A system where California recieves like 80 cents on the dollar of its taxes back to the state in the form of federal spending and states like MIssissippi Arkansas and Alabama get back between $1.50 and $1.80 for every dollar they spend. Thats fine with me, do away with the fed and the south will turn into basically Mexico while California will still be the 8th largest economy!
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Have you looked at your state lately? You aren't just broke, you are Greece, the EU, and the U.S. wrapped into one. The unions and your pensions have buried you for at a minimum two generations(unless you get a Christie in office, and soon). Wanting to do away with the tax code is not about selfishness. I know liberals don't understand that, since you base every idea on your selfishness. It's about simplicity and economic growth, and yes, morality. Our current system is broken...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus way to totally miss the point I was making retard. I'm guessing you don't have any intelligent comments of your own so you have copied and pasted the stock conservative response to anything that has to do with taxes. Is what I said wrong? Oh yeah, california is so broken! Listen, we are still the 8th largest economy in the world and the only reason we have state deficits is because of the disparity in the money we send out and what we take in from the fed. Go back to alabama bitch
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf Miss the point? No, I get it. You wanted to demonstrate your bias and arrogance. Point taken. The reason you have deficits mr. wizard is because you piss away money you don't have. You drive off business with insane envrionmental policy, insane regs., and a rip-off everyone tax code. Combine that with your public sector union pensions and health services(and lack of illegal immigration enforcement) and you have an economic catastrophe in the making. If you want to blame Alabama, ok..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus again we drive off business? What the hell do you guys know about bussiness?!?! California has like 40 percent of the fortune 500 hundred companies and again..its freakin GDP is 1.8 trillion! I don't think you guys have much to give advice about. Even texas has the same amount of fortune 500 companies despite its rediculous tax breaks and exemptions for corporations. And by the way, tax cuts are a form of spending too. You talk about small govt. and spend trillions on tax cuts and war
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Yes, you drive off business. Are you so blind that you can't see the debt wave that is getting ready to crush your state...and if not stopped, crush the whole nation. Tax-cuts are NOT spending. To make that argument you have to believe all money is governments. Judging from your other errors, you probably do believe all money is Sacramentos and DCs. Tax cuts always spur economic growth and in so doing expand the tax-base and tax revenues. The public sector, unions, are killing you.
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Tax cuts don't always "spur economic growth"
I showed you when and how they didn't...but again, you think you make your own reality, so it all makes sense since you accept no truth but your own; no matter how faulted/prepackaged it is.
You realize a fact is a fact whether it helps your case hold water or not.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Yes they do, but what is the point? You live in that other dimension, where tuesday night didn't happen either...somehow your message didn't get out....people just don't understand how smart you are......lol.
Pathetic brother, you are lost.......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Reading from yourown personal list of truths right...
I see; can't get you to see the light cause you can't seem to come back to reality.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..That is why you have a 50 billion dollar defecit that will have every California kid being born into debt. Until you take on the unions, reform pensions, address energy and illegal immigration, earthquakes will not take down Cali, your red ink will. War? Well, I can say this much, at least with war we can see tangible results, unlike the billions pissed away everyday by your benevolent friends in Sac and DC. Don't go Code Pink on me, war is not always evil.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Nice…so you admit, though not to me, that you’re for war profiteering?
Good to know.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Yes, I'm for making a profit which makes me intelligent. You on the other hand.....not so much...
It would be nice to know whether the slaves freed because of the civil war cared that some republicans made money on the war.....but you probably feel entitled to speak for them....it's that arrogance thing all you Marxists have....
You are like the proverbial shooting fish in a barrel......too easy...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Thanks for seconding your stance on promoting/furthering war, for the sake or profit.
Good business model for you to follow.
Yea, funny thing about me (I like profit too) I just kinda think profiting from war...I don't know, is in bad taste; but you kinda seem like the type though who would also be ok with grave robbing----anyway to make a buck right.
WOW: War Profiteers = Noble Good-doers----who simply want to make a buck.
Nice image, but failed rationalization.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Alabama is not your problem, bad ideas and bad policy are your problems. You think you have a trade imbalance with the feds.? Give me a hit of that. And really, bitch? Is it necessary to bring your boyfriend into this?? And retard? Is that the best you can do? Stuck in the 70's huh??
snobaldus 1 year ago
Glenn Beck is an uneducated, religion changing, hemorrhoid infested, fear monger who who traded his coke fix for an adderall fix.
camyoung133 1 year ago
@camyoung133 wow, such words, so where is he wrong, where is he lying so far he is right on. dems wrong on all issues
daveh69 1 year ago
@camyoung133 Sooooooooo, you don't have an argument?
MrJohn2010 1 year ago
Yeah because medicare has been such a failure... It only brought 30 million elderly U.S. citizens out of poverty. But you all must have forgotten that. I love hearing these old farts at tea party rallies screaming no government intervention in our lives, oh yeah and by the way don't touch our medicare benefits. How about this, the south won't have to pay any taxes, but you won't get any fireman, police, new roads, hospitals, dissaster response, courts, public parks, or public schools.
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf
Sure because we both know all the tax money goes to " fireman, police, new roads, hospitals, dissaster response, courts, public parks, or public schools.". It's of course impossible to keep those and cut taxes at the same time. I don't know what time you're living in but there are many other things. I'm sorry if this message is confusing to you because I'm not comparing you with my dog, nor am I telling you to end your life...
123ggn 1 year ago
@123ggn ..If you think there is nowhere in our bloated budget to cut, you simply have jumped the gun in your state on the legal use of mary jane. To think anyone, anyone believes 3 trillion is still not enough is just beyond sane. I mean, there is only 35 percent fraud in medicare alone. Of course, this is considered a success by those idiots known as the ruling class. Stop inhaling the ruling class grass and wake up to the real world. My family is not your ATM.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Were you to read my comment right, you'd know I was on your side and that I was merely being sarcastic of Durhamdf's reason of why the government shouldn't stop spending money.
123ggn 1 year ago
@123ggn ..My bad......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
he he, that's all right. We're cool.
123ggn 1 year ago
@123ggn I didn't tell anyone to die or compare anyone to a dog. Can you read? Guesss not. So no millitary is needed huh? No federal agencies to keep us safe like consumer protection agency or the epa.
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..What, no one ever told you not to put your vagina in a toaster? Good thing they banned trans fat, or you would really be lost.......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@durhamdf
If you haven't said such things, surely one wouldn't mind if I made a few quotations?
"you should just end your life and do the gene pool a favor" Which is not only an insult to foxnewfollower to whom this comment was made by you, but also to people who share his genes. Second one "Freakin morons man, I mean my dog has a longer memory than you"... Perhaps you're right, though. It's as simple as everything you say is right, and people who disagree are stupid folks that cannot read.
123ggn 1 year ago
@durhamdf - Firemen, Police, Roads, and School are all paid by local State taxes; the State government is distinct from the Federal government.
monkeywho 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@durhamdf - Firemen, Police, Roads, and School are all paid by local Town, County, and State taxes; the State government is distinct from the Federal government.
monkeywho 1 year ago
@durhamdf - Firemen, Police, Roads, and Schools are all paid by local Town, County, and State taxes; the State government is distinct from the Federal government.
monkeywho 1 year ago
@monkeywho Yea, except they get money, to pay for those things all the time---not just when they can't on theirown, which happens alot---from the Gov.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..lol...this explains it all now. Only a govt. educated flunky would call medicare a success. A program rife will tens of billions in fraud and waste, a program destined to bankrupt us all. I especially love the five pizza joints in Florida who get paid for medicare claims to the tune of millions. Or the dentist in New York who has bus-loads of people come by his office so he can scam tens of millions from tax-payers. Yeah, what a great success story that program is...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..Another thing genius, if medicare brought folks out of poverty they wouldn't need medicare anymore. I suppose food stamps elevate people from poverty to huh mr wizard? And what is your issue with the south? We can think and do for ourselves? We don't need the failures of the Golden State? Every state govt. in the south is in much, much better financial shape than yours. But hey, at least now you will have an excuse for your foggy thinking once you legalize mary jane......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus lol lets see one republican declare medicare a failure...You will never see that because the vast majority of americans realize that it has been fairly successful in its results. Nobody is saying it is perfect, there is waste like any govt. program that can be cleaned up but it is still widely popular. Second, the states with the lowest employment, Wyoming, north/south dakota, utah, and so on get back between 1.50 and 1.30 of every tax dollar spent from the fed. And they still bitch
durhamdf 1 year ago
@snobaldus california would be in no problem at all if we didn't lose 20 cents of every dollar holding up the economies of the southern states. And california is still the largest economy in the U.S. so stfu. We could crush the south with our wallet. I love how states like texas with 25 percent uninsured rate say "keep govt. away from healthcare. But keep paying for our rediculously expensive charity care programs" You can't have it both ways. And thats right legalize it bitch
durhamdf 1 year ago
I love how you conservatives love reagan and yet he raised taxes multiple times, and raised the defecit to its highest levels in nearly 50 years at the time. Reagan knew that you need to get the country back on its feet before you can start contracting government spending but I guess all you southerners didn't have history in high school.
durhamdf 1 year ago
GOD Bless American idependence! Free from Big Government take over!
TheFoxFollower 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..How stupid can one person be? You are setting the bar pretty high. The last three years of Reagan saw declining budget deficits. This is not a theory, this is fact. When Reagan took office, the highest marginal tax rate was at 70 percent. Think about that for a second, even for a Jerry Brown soul-mate that has to seem awfully high. He lowered all rates, cut regs(airline industry began it's boon) and set this nation on course for twenty years of growth and expansion..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus but before he cut the budget during the first 80 percent of his presidency, WHILE THE ECONOMY WAS STILL ROCKY, he raised taxes and increased spending. And where did you get that the marginal tax rate for the top percent is 70 percent?
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf ..I was alive when the top marignal rate was 70 percent. Any other questions? He didn't cut the budget, the budget never gets cut. Forget this man, you idiots are so programmed it's F'n ridiculous. You don't tax your way into economic growth, do you not understand that? And you don't raise taxes especially on those who create jobs. You stay out of their pockets. The lower class don't create jobs, you don't stimulate growth by giving tax-cuts to folks who don't pay taxes.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus who are you talking under here?
durhamdf 1 year ago
@durhamdf .Unfortunately Bush/Clinton impeded the progress or it would have been even greater. Reagan is responsible, his policies, for the explosion of silicone valley. He did all this while rebuilding the military that Carter had destroyed(along with the economy) and defeating communism with very little help from the democrats. Reagan understood that if govt would just get out of the way the American people would once again flourish. All you have in Cali is govt schools? It shows............
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus I hate when people like you say, "Reagan defeated communism"
As if he alone was responsible; which isn't true.
Its sad
Worse, its an attempt to change history to your version of reality to help maintain your American ideology.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..You give me too much power....but then I understand considering your inferiority complex regarding me. Even your hero Teddy Kennedy admitted Reagan beat the commies. I'm sure that was a sad day for both of you. No, he had help from Mags and Pope John Paul. And you hate? I would have never guessed that, what with your all so positive outlook on America.
Reagan was mostly alone when it came to help from the dems. I know how you hate hearing that truth too.....
Still boring me.
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
My hero? Way to suggest something, which has no basis in fact, all in an attempt to change the subject or strengthen your argument.
If T.K said it though, he likely did so out of respect--he's not a historian--so you can't (though I know you will) assume it means what you think it does, though I know how hard it is for you to not assume.
Thanks for, after being called out, now paying minor lip services to a few...a few...of the other elements in brining down the Iron Curtain.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Unlike you, I know that the Dems/Reps of yesterday, aren't the same as today.
Only someone who knows as little as you, would try and suggest the parties haven't changed over and over and over again since their separation from one another early in the countries history.
Which is why saying "the party of Lincoln" and such, is dumb political jargon, because who knows if today they would even be allowed in the parties now chanting their name.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@snobaldus so reagan is responsible for the clinton expansion and democrats are responsible for the Bush market collapse. Someone is in denial
durhamdf 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Under Reagan--90% cut in research for Renewable Energy was made.
Shortly after he took ofice, 23 oil executives gave $270000 to redecorate the W.H living quarters.
This is you're White Knight? Really, I could go on, but there isn't enough room.
willdrake1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Under Reagan--90% cut in research for Renewable Energy was made.
Shortly after he took ofice, 23 oil executives gave $270000 to redecorate the W.H living quarters.
This is you're White Knight? Really, I could go on, but there isn't enough room.
willdrake1 1 year ago
Under Reagan--90% cut in research for Renewable Energy was made.
Shortly after he took ofice, 23 oil executives gave $270000 to redecorate the W.H living quarters.
This is you're White Knight? Really, I could go on, but there isn't enough room.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..So the private sector couldn't create renewable energy sources? And really, you think anything in DC is ever cut? Put the crack pipe down. Your next episode of Jesse Ventura conspiracy theory is on.....you mental midget....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Ofcourse things in DC are cut, maybe you don't like them or its not enough, but its true. And the question isn't if they could or couldn't, its will they or won't they.
And they won't. Why? Well, if you had half the mental capacity of a mental midget (by the way, way`da-go with the 3 attacks instead of having an adult argument) you would know the answer.
Also, notice how you didn't refute my numbers...smart of you
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..First, I apologize..didn't realize the sensitive nature of the person I was responding to. Hope you are not too crushed. Now onto the truth. No, in DC nothing is ever cut. Ever heard of base-line budgeting? The DC cut is merely to reduce the size of the growth, not actually cut. Instead of a 10 percent increase, we will only have a 5 percent increase. That is the DC way. And what numbers did I not refute? You make an accusation of a quid pro quo. The burden of proof is on you...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus It has nothing to do with sensitivity, you’re personal attacks simply points out your inability to debate; and isn't name-calling---a way by which to avoid answering questions---something people wish would stop in D.C...how is that possible if you can't even do it?
Regan cut 90% of research for renewable energy
*the point was related to the video's reference to Regan being the God-send of the Nation.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..I don't attach names to people for lack of debate, I do so to accurately portray that individual. I once again tweaked you by attaching sensitivity to you. I don't have any questions to answer, you made an accusation and the burden of proof is on you, not me my friend. And yes, Reagan was a God-send. Sorry that conflicts with your world-view, but sometimes reality has a way of doing that. Again, I don't have to disprove a negative......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
"Accurately portray that individual"
Now that you mention it, I can see how saying I smoke crack and watch conspiracy shows; all while being a mental midget (as pointed out by your so benevolent authority and clearly superior wit) accurately portrays me. Thanks!
You dodge and dance: "Hey, look over there!"
Notice that you haven't said or shown that he didn't cut 90% of renewable energy research. His record proves it, though I will wait for more of your deflective b.s
Sad.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Let me try this one last time, since my portrayal of you is oh so accurate...The burden of proof is NOT on me to dispute anything. You made an accusation and then went even further by implying it was a something for something(maybe you didn't understand the quid pro quo last time) transaction. I don't have to disprove it, you have to prove it. See, funny thing about accusations, they have to proven by those who make them. Notice you haven't provided any evidential support either..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Early in his first term, Ronald Reagan tried to abolish the DOE. He cut hundreds of positions from enforcement divisions of the agency--his abolition attempt failed in Congress: the General Accounting Office study revealed doing so would not save any money. He was still able to change the function significantly.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..How do you eliminate jobs and not save money? Are we to assume these individuals were working for free? Your logic is not only flawed, it's downright silly and shows you are not interested in fact. I don't need the GAO, who always has an agenda of their own, regardless who's populating it at the time, to tell me anything.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Again, I give you the stats from the public records and instead of trying to say anything real, you make a personal call based on nothing and deem it fact. That’s not how reality works.
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it true.
If anything, plz take this truth with you.
R.R did cut 90% of renewable energy research.
He did try and shut down the DOE---the department reasonable for looking for renewable energy.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Public record? Who are you kidding? Just because you accessed it from a public source doesn't make it true. I read from a public source today that bigfoot and Obama had a one night stand but somehow I don't believe that. Again, what if he did try and shut it down? What if he didn't? It has no relation to anything. You still can't answer my question on who has the technology and how are they keeping it secret amongst 8 billion people? I don't buy your phony assertions...period!!
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Trying to compare Public State and Fed Records (You I hope know what they are) with something like the GLOBE paper, or whatever other trash you imagined, you know is a b.s defense.
In no way are they the same thing and if you would simply check my facts, instead of wishing me to spoon-feed you the data, you would know that.
There! Finally! You said it.
"I don't buy..." Which in your mind, thereby makes your own thoughts, somehow empirically true.
Facts don't work that way.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..You are thick aren't you. Your so-called facts, which is nothing more than regurgitated BS from your friends on the left, are not facts. You are spoon fed, you have been programmed....hence your irrational fear and loathing of anything corporate. My facts are based in logic, which has been in short supply on your side. Common sense also helps, again, sorely lacking on your side. As if you would posess facts if they were willed to you....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Your "points" are from inconsistent experience and personal belief based upon ideology----neither alone or even together make fact you understand.
You've yet to counter anything I've said with some kinda information, except to say I'm wrong...no 3rd party data. Nothing.
I mean, I can say "NO NO NO NO NO" all day long too when asked if the sky is blue, doesn't mean I'm right.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 .Inconsistent experience? lol...you are reaching now aren't you son? And the facts you present? Some numbers that prove what? They prove your ideology of anti-capitalism, nothing more. You obviously need someone to tell you the sky is blue, or your underwear is wet, whatever the case may be(said with a smile). I don't need the approval or acceptance of a third party when facts and logic are applied by me everyday. You dig? You have proven you don't understand econ...case closed..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@willdrake1 .I don't have cancer either but I don't need third party data to explain to me the danger and pain involved.......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..You are starting to bore me...and it is almost 4...damn! I'm off to bed..probably dream about some corporate takeover of greenpeace or something like that......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Continued: The R.R-era DOE placed a much stronger focus on nuclear weapons production, nuclear energy, and fossil fuels. His administration cut DOE funding for renewable energy/conservation programs by as much as 90%, while it pledged to speed the licensing process of new nuclear power plants.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..There were no cuts, only reduced rate of growth. If you don't understand that, then you won't understand anything. We should have moved forward with nuke power, but democrats stood in the way, and still do stand in the way. They are beholden to the "green" special interests. Had we moved on nukes, we would be well on the way to reducing our dependence on foreign energy....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
So...cutting something isn't a cut, its simply a "reduced rate of growth"
Nice Spin and if applied to say: The Bush tax cuts...
Ya know, letting them end, which isn't a HIKE, but a return to what they were; I would agree, but I bet you find issue with that and will somehow try and say the two are totally different things.
Also, I’m for safe Nuke Power.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 .If your govt aid worker is giving you ten dollars right now and he said next week he is going to bump it to 20, but only gives you 15, did you lose five dollars or gain 5? You gained 5. If you are paying 200 a week in taxes and next week you start paying 300, that is an increase. Get it? Man, I should charge you for this education...lord knows you need it(sorry for the lord reference, I know you Darwinists hate that...)....What else young fella, I can do this all night.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Its a loss.
Simply the fact that it never got to your wallet doesn't make it less of a loss.
If you were promised $100 and got $10; yes, you tec gained $10, but you also tec lost $90.
I'm glad you can so easily be swindled---and with a smile too---because it seems you will take whatever is offered to you regardless of what was said or agreed upon, anything to you is a win and in your mind, you should be lucky to get anything.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..It's not a loss. You are hopeless, beyond redemption. You haven't earned a paycheck yet have you? Tell that BS you just stated to anyone who earns a check and they will laugh you out of your liberal-colored glasses. Only in your mind is a 5 dollar increase a loss. You would fit right in with all your corrupt cronies in DC. If you are currently paying one thing and then have to pay more in actual dollars, yes, that is an increase......this isn't about you, remember....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
"Haven't earned a paycheck yet have you"
Do you know how many assumptions you've made?
You do know what someone is who makes assumptions...
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..I was merely gving you the benefit of the doubt. If not, I would have to believe you are stupid rather than ignorant. I was actually being kind to you. A simple thank you would be nice. You are strong on ideology but very weak in economic reality. Doesn't make you a bad person it just makes you wrong......
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus If you simply took the time not to say the first stupid thing that popped into your head, you wouldn't have to later go back and explain/clean up, what you were trying to say in the first place.
Yes its a loss:
If someone owes you $10 but can only pay you $5, you would cut your losses and take whatever you could. Which is fine. However, that $5, which is never repaid, is still a loss.
The same is true with money earned: $100, but get only $50 real dollars, is a loss of $50
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..How, in any way, was my example an exmaple of lost, earned money? Simply put, it wasn't. Someone promising to raise your allowance by twenty and instead only does so by ten, is not a loss. Period! It is a gain of ten, not a loss of ten. Even my 7 year old niece understands this concept. But, you are from the entitlement establishment so this makes sense.
I'm not as fortunate as you, you can be stupid naturally....makes you a candidate for govt work....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus The problem with you is, you only consider a loss when its "physical" money; the problem there is that most money is digital or "theoretical"
Using your analogy:
If your boss says he's going to pay you $20 instead of $10, then you come to find out he can only afford to pay you $15, you still lost that potential/theoretical $5; and yes, as I said, you did tec gain $5 over what you were making, but you still have to record what you were supposed to get.
Its called ACCOUNTING.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 Difference between potential and reality. Your wife would sleep with a man for 500 hundred thousand. So would your teen-age daughter. Potentially you are sitting on a million dollars but in reality you're living with two whores. Learn it, love it, live it.....
Tip your waitress, I will be here one more night. Your education has begun....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Nice one. Way to again show your class...I mean, your ass.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@snobaldus And if the loss of theor-money isn't a loss, answer me this:
Why are all those Wall Street investors pissed?
Or something easier: Why people who start gambling with $10, then grow it to $10000 *still chips, so not "real" * and then loose it all...I wonder why they're upset?
I mean, they "really" only lost $10, much like the W.S investors, who only lost what they orig put into the markets----not the millions and millions their digitally earnings were “theoretically” worth.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 Safe nukes? Yeah, and the rest of us want dangerous nukes....also dirty water and air......such a cliche...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Well, from how would like to simultaneously trust Business to do the right thing, and cut the agencies responsible for them---the bills that would make those things happen...yea, you would take less clean water and air than myself.
Why? Well, you can always buy your water from the store.
And I bet. Once the market for clean air is made, you will somehow beable to buy it too.
Way`da Go!
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Incoherence is a strong point for you isn't it? I will gladly trust business who has to market to my needs over a govt. whose only interest is more power for them and less freedom for me. That seems to be out of your grasp. It would be hard for a business to stay in business if they specialized in hurting or killing their clients. I suspect clean air is clean not because of govt greatness, same with water. Your love and trust of beauracrats is striking...and silly.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
How often do you pray at the altar of Business?
Seriously, I’m for a mixture of both, but clearly you're devote to your Corporatocracy.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 You are devoted to a mixture alright. A glass of ignorance chased by generous amounts of stupidity.......
That's funny right there....even your dog is laughing at you....
Still bored.....can you do better??
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Continued: Between 1981 and 1989 the DOE dramatically expanded its weapons production and testing activities. During the previous decades N.W were tested once every two years:1980s three were conducted each year. The DOE also began preparations to store high-level nuclear waste at Yucca Mountain, Nevada.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..And? You are familiar with the Cold War? the Soviets, the evil empire, does that ring a bell?
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Oh I know, but that's not the point.
Does his single focus on Nukes (for War mongering reasons mostly) somehow make him for Renewable Energy Research. Nope. It makes him a Republican, siding with his base and a fear-fed American public.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..War-mongering? Oh I know, your soviet friends weren't really that bad right? lol....And I'm sure that all this war-mongering over Islamic radicalism is bothering you too. Pathetic my friend, weak! So you admit that republicans are the only ones who wish to protect the country? Well, glad you can admit that....it's a start..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobal
Yes they were a threat, but as much and for so long as they were setup to be, no and if you knew your history, you could atleast admit that, but you don't----doesn't matter, its ok, because you didn't try and resuggest he was somehow still for Renewable Energy Research.
How did I admit Reps were the only ones?
Man, I wish I had your ability to make something from nothing.
If anything, I admitted they were the ones to overreact.dus
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..So we set the Soviets up huh? lol....you are showing your true colors my friend...I thought for a second you were just naive and ignorant. Now I know it's on purpose. I've made a conversation with you out of nothing from your side, so I agree you could learn a lot from me. People like you scare me. Don't feel bad, it's probably your govt. education at work. And I still regard radical Islam more dangerous than you...though you won't help me much in that fight I suspect..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Maybe I should take my time with you more.
No. WE didn't set the Soviets up. WE set ourselves up to think they were worse than they really were, for a longer period of time, than they actually were.
I've had extensive public and private education, thanks for guessing wrong again though.
No. I don't like Radical Islam as much as you do, and am glad atleast you can see the difference.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Your ignorance knows no bounds. At least you are consistent, ignorant on multiple subjects. All one has to do is skim the Soviet archives and understand how niave at best we were to the Soviet threat. Of course in your conspiratorial mind, it had to be this country that was at fault. We can add Soviet apologist to your list of credentials now. Which makes sense when viewed through the prism of your ecnonomic ignorance. And I'm sure you are now an Islamic radical apologist....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Continued: During R.R’s tenure a DOE official was convicted of accepting bribes to pass on internal documents to oil industry officials. The DOE illegally provided a $550,000 grant to aid in a lobbying effort against Congressional attempts to constrain nuclear testing. Independent investigations by the GAO and other agencies found the DOE lacking in both security and safety measures.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Are we to believe that no administration has or had any corruption in it's cabinet or other agencies? This is the basis for your "big oil" conspiracy to deprive the world of renewable energy resources? A guy was convicted in the 80's of bribery so two things have to be, one, Reagan was not a good president, and two, big oil is killing green energy? This is your case? Paper thin comes to mind...along with a few other less kind phrases.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Don't make this about other admin, we aren't talking about other admin.
This is about the Savior R.R.
No. One doesn't mean another, but it does display a tendency...which, along with his cutting of 90% of Renewable Energy Research and other things, perhaps becomes a trend.
This isn't about you remember.
This is about the Video and the myth of R.R---which now I see you agree is a myth.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 .No, this is about your blinding rage for truth. You point to one person and say that makes a trend or that makes some sort of quid pro quo on his entire presidency. Not going to happen here. And for the last time, he didn't cut 90 percent. I'm sure that uncle Al has convinced you of this...in fact, it's almost like an obsession with you. You haven't been reading Ted too have you? Now I'm starting to worry about you. No myth, Reagan was a great president, glad you agree...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
I can see for you living in the bubble (not wanting to check the data on your own because it might hurt your idea of reality) works.
Good luck with that.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 .Reality is what you make it....that is the secret that alludes you. You have a fatalist mind-set that will paralyze you for the rest of your life. Facts are a funny thing...when you actually start living those things you only read about they never seem quite as they were printed to be. But, you will have to experience this on your own.....thanks for the luck...but you should hold onto that...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Yea, you wish away gravity all you want.
I will instead realize it exists no matter what I do.
Good to know that's how you live though, makes sense now with your opinions.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Gravity? This coming from the Santa enthusiast, the easter bunny fanatic, the Al Gore really won fan club president? You are a wonder of physics really, how you can simultaneously have your head in the clouds and up your a@#. No small feat my friend.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus This whole post of yours makes no sense.
Maybe you should go to be earlier so you don't type line after line of nothingness drivel.
Remember, I wasn't the one who said "Reality is what you make it"
Which is why I said: "You wish away gravity---cause you seem to be able to, in your own reality---all you want, I will instead realize it exists no matter what I do."
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 Go to be earlier? Who exactly should go to be? You seem to have to repeat yourself a lot. Like the sound of your own keyboard do you?
This just in....you still bore me....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Ronald Reagan took the solar panels---put up by Carter, down in 1986
Yea, this was man who wished "renewable energy" in America.
Seriously, what other message can be taken from this?
If Bush Jr. Had them up and Obama took them down, how would it be read today?
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..What panels? The White House? And again, I will say for the hundredth time, where is the private sector on this? Reagan was a free market guy, this is the message I take from it. Why would we be wasting millions in tax-payer money on projects that the private sector should and could do more efficiently? I know this may be hard for you to believe, but there are a lot of us out here that don't believe the govt. should be involved in every aspect of our lives...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Yes. Do your research.
So are you for any business getting any money, for any reason, from the Gov?
Cause, well, that’s corporate welfare.
If not, then we have no argument cause atleast you aren't a hypocrite.
Something the average Rep/Tea Party person is...not that I think you're one or the other, just saying.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 It's only corporate welfare if it's a subsidy, but I suspect you think tax-cuts are welfare. That is what libs/socialists have been programmed to think. Govt. looks at things in 3 ways, if it moves, tax it, if it moves too much regulate it, and if it doesnt move at all subsidize it. That has got to change my friend, we are out of everyones money. The auto industry in particular should have been left to fail. Failure is as much needed in an economy as success.....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus A right-off is a subsidy of doing business.
Taking people to lunch, buying them hotel rooms, taking them on trips, playing golf…on and on
Tax cuts, when it helps them to cover theirown cost of doing business: parts/labor, is welfare.
You are a Corporatist...not an insult, but a fact since you make Grays for them to exist in while you try and hold people to WHITE and BLACK reality.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 .That would be write-off. I believe I said subsidy, meaning tax-payers pay to keep a business in business. A company not having to pay taxes on things they write off is still their money. So no, your defintion is not correct. Only in your twisted mind is keeping what you rightfully own called welfare. In that case, your paycheck is welfare. You obviously believe all money is govts. Why don't you just let them keep all your money..live your principles my friend..
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Most of the tax-code is subsidy, though you would argue many are ok because of who they go to.
No. Its not there money.
Because they write it off, they're getting back what they spend at our expense.
Its like this: If i donate $1000 and the Gov gives me back a $1000 I didn't donate anything...really it was a loan.
Also, If I pay money to take a client out, I shouldn't get that money back---it was the cost of doing business. I didn't have to take that person out to dinner.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..For you to believe that you must think all money originates in DC. Is that what you really believe? It would make sense to a confused Marxist like yourself. Of course it only has the one problem of not being correct. Money originates in the private sector. Say it with me, money originates in the private sector, meaning wealth is earned outside of govt. Any money that ends up in DC has been confiscated from its rightful owner. Hence, any money returned is done so rightfully.
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus Money originates in the FED, so it does start in DC; unless you think your HOLY Big Businesses can print/certify money now? I mean, from the way they act, maybe they can.
Or is it that you lack understanding of the Fractional Reserve system for the creation and growth of money in the US?
If so, maybe instead of saying a lot of nothing through factless “soapbox" speeches, you should use the internet to learn something.
Just a thought.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Oh, an original thought, how original. I know people create wealth, govt. creates debt. I know people create jobs, govt policy tends to destroy them. The way they act. You are a pompous ass aren't you. Must be the frustration of not being able to hold a job and only able to hold your own joke.
I use the interent through the good graces of Al Gore thank you very little. Just a tip for you, internet porn will make you go blind so be careful.....
Glad you finally had one...
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
Maybe you should stick to watching porn---you know so much about it.
HEY! I think you've found yourself a skill?
Its got to be better than the other b.s you think you know so much about.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..You shouldn't get the money back you spent to take a client out? You paid your taxes didn't you? Then you are getting your money back. This is why the tax code needs to be blown up. This is why we need the fair tax. Of course this is anathema to a statist. Keeping your own money is not welfare...neither is doing business......I like that, it was the cost of doing business but I didn't have to take that person to dinner. What? Incoherence central are you....
snobaldus 1 year ago
@snobaldus
You have alot of issues with reading comp:
"It was the cost of doing business"
This doesn't mean it was the REAL or NEEDED cost of doing business; this was the cost YOU CHOSE.
Which is to say, NO, you didn't have to take that person to dinner to make the deal, you chose to do so; so NO, you don’t get money back for it.
Same for a golf trip: It isn't "business" I know some people like to trick the system, but its stealing and lying and this is why we have the problems we do.
willdrake1 1 year ago
@willdrake1 ..Oh, I get it. The producers are the real problems in this country. Gald you finally got that off your bra. So now you decide what business needs and wants to do? You are the legend in your own mind aren't you?
Remember your line about assumptions? Take your own advice much?
Stealing and lying? As the old bumper sticker read, don't do that, congress hates the competition.....
snobaldus 1 year ago