Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 9:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/16/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I would rather be bankrupt but have social programs rather than having a great economy with no healthcare, terrible education, and no welfare. Fortunately the two things aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, yes, we are bigger, but you can account for that by making it be on a % of GDP scale. For all your talk about BL not answering questions, you haven't answered a ton of mine.

Also also, states fending for themselves is a terrible idea. I don't want Kris Kobach having any more control than he already will. Don't torture me more.

I cannot answer your question as I don't know nor do I care to delve into the economies of France, UK, Germany, etc.

Our budget is not balanced. Entitltments account for the vast majority of the expenses. They need to be reduced/revamped. Since you don't care about the economy and have zero finance accumen. This discussion is pointless. If I open my fridge up to the neighborhood. Eventually I'll run out of money and my family will starve. It is a stupid way to live.

You probably don't understand what I wrote. So again. If your dad asks you..."how much should we allocate for our cell phone budget?" and you in turn respond with. "Let's see what cccp and his family spend and go by that %"....it is stupid. You need to balance your own budget and see what % you can or want to afford. Comparing the US to other countries on budget makes zero sense. Not sure why you don't understand that.

Here's a better analogy: Your family has an about even income with other households in your neighborhood, yet your family is starving and other families have plenty to eat. Well the solution would be to look at what other households are doing and take what is successful for them.

Your analogy fails because unlike cell phone budget, entitlements are a necessity and not a privilege. Defense spending is the privilege. Yes, I am open to entitlements cutting IF you can prove that it makes life better for all Americans, not just businesses and the uber rich. The best way to prove that is by looking at what other countries do and saying "X country does this, and they have the best healthcare in the world. Maybe we should do something like that too."

But you won't do that, because the best healthcare systems in the world spend a lot and are universal. It doesn't support your argument.

Fine. Maybe those families shop and go out once a month and I go out too frequently. In the end you have revenues and expenses and if your expenses are higher than your revenues you need to cut them. Why can you not comprehend that cutting the military budget will cost jobs? And if you cut it to ZERO, which you cannot the entitlements spend will still be too high. Defense is not a privelege. It is a critical component. We have the best healthcare systems in the world. What are you talking about?

I need someone else to weight in on this before I start using ad hominems again.

To clarify, I am not saying that a defense is a privilege, I meant it more in the excess that we spend. Another way to do things is to increase revenues (COUGH TAXES COUGH). I agree that we have a relatively good healthcare system with Obama, lots of flaws, but better than many. My point is that you are trying to prove that cutting entitlements is good for the country, and I am saying to win me over you have to prove that your plan is better for all Americans. One way to do that is look at other countries.

Europe is F*CKED. China is awful. Japan has been bad for a white. What countries should we look at exactly? Are we not the world leader? We have the best healthcare in the world and it is not close.

I already told you:

#1) Raise the SS retirement age
#2) Investigate medicare and medicaid fraud and inefficiences.
#3) Alter how pharma companies provide meds to the elderly.

I can list more. Stop the darn spend less on the military rhetoric. It protects the country and creates a significant amount of jobs. Millions. And stop with the revenues. Our expenses are out of control.

Europe is not ******, in fact the best healthcare systems in the world are European. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

I don't see where you are getting the 'best healthcare in the world' argument.

Prove that your plan helps all Americans.

The military spend could be cut by 200 billion and do the same thing, far more than any other country. And if you want to balance the budget, increasing revenues is a very valid way of doing it.

Did you see Brexit? France, Spain, Greece? Facing major economic and political hurdles. Same with Germany. Europe is a mess.

You want to tax more? How much more? Enough to cause a recession? I am not following your logic. We spend $4.3Trn on entitlments. $200Bn is NOTHING. We spend $610bn on the military, which again employs millions.

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 11:49:00 AM (view original):
"Obama was intentionally divisive. He was probably the most divisive president we have had politically and racially prior to Trump. Bob is a smart man, but he was wrong about this."

I don't believe that Coach. I think a LOT of that perception came with the territory. Being the 1st anything has it's price.
Much less the 1st POTUS of color-----------when he wasn't even 100%, so NOT all the blacks thought he was black enough, NOR did they think he was agenda driven enough. Had HE done THAT, You'd have REALLY thought He was divisive. I just think you read that issue wrong, perhaps from the reflection of the region/society you live amongst. I can pretty much guarantee you that Obama wasn't all that divisive in places like (say) East Nashville, or Memphis! (Or Tonto Basin either really. The non racists had no problem with Obama in the WH, and the Fairly large population that DID would have had a problem with HIM moving next door! It didn't have anything to do with his being POTUS on EITHER side!

No, he constantly made derogatory comments regarding Republicans. He took jabs whenever the opportunity presented itself. As far as race, I feel that someone in his position should remain neutral until facts come out. He did not. He was a very divisive person. It's not like he tried to hide this. He made it obvious. He made no attempt to unite the country.

That is Republican BULLSHIT Coach! Obama attempted to use the "bully pulpit" to sway public opinion and get his supporters to pressure members of Congress to act/vote a certain way on specific issues on his agenda. EVERY POTUS since Truman (and WAY WAY before that!) has attempted to do the same thing. Obama was vilified for it and the Repugs. used his race to divide the public as NEVER before. It was that VAST right wing media operation led by such stalwarts citizens as Fox News head Rupert Murdoch (oh, Wait!), and solid and stable genuis's like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones that non-stop blasted their message of hatred and racism to the (unfortunately) racist ears of way way too many Americans.

It makes me wanna Puke, and is nearly driving me (after ALL this time) to join the Dems. in opposition to the Repugnant regime!
They are traitors to the Country and (maybe) worse. I'm still waiting for the drip drip drip to finally cease and that report to come out.
Will it reveal that The Republican party sold their soul to a Traitor?? (I'm already convinced he's a con man and a crook!)

Take away the parties. I think Bob and I agree that entitlements need to be addressed first and foremost.

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 11:49:00 AM (view original):
"Obama was intentionally divisive. He was probably the most divisive president we have had politically and racially prior to Trump. Bob is a smart man, but he was wrong about this."

I don't believe that Coach. I think a LOT of that perception came with the territory. Being the 1st anything has it's price.
Much less the 1st POTUS of color-----------when he wasn't even 100%, so NOT all the blacks thought he was black enough, NOR did they think he was agenda driven enough. Had HE done THAT, You'd have REALLY thought He was divisive. I just think you read that issue wrong, perhaps from the reflection of the region/society you live amongst. I can pretty much guarantee you that Obama wasn't all that divisive in places like (say) East Nashville, or Memphis! (Or Tonto Basin either really. The non racists had no problem with Obama in the WH, and the Fairly large population that DID would have had a problem with HIM moving next door! It didn't have anything to do with his being POTUS on EITHER side!

No, he constantly made derogatory comments regarding Republicans. He took jabs whenever the opportunity presented itself. As far as race, I feel that someone in his position should remain neutral until facts come out. He did not. He was a very divisive person. It's not like he tried to hide this. He made it obvious. He made no attempt to unite the country.

That is Republican BULLSHIT Coach! Obama attempted to use the "bully pulpit" to sway public opinion and get his supporters to pressure members of Congress to act/vote a certain way on specific issues on his agenda. EVERY POTUS since Truman (and WAY WAY before that!) has attempted to do the same thing. Obama was vilified for it and the Repugs. used his race to divide the public as NEVER before. It was that VAST right wing media operation led by such stalwarts citizens as Fox News head Rupert Murdoch (oh, Wait!), and solid and stable genuis's like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones that non-stop blasted their message of hatred and racism to the (unfortunately) racist ears of way way too many Americans.

It makes me wanna Puke, and is nearly driving me (after ALL this time) to join the Dems. in opposition to the Repugnant regime!
They are traitors to the Country and (maybe) worse. I'm still waiting for the drip drip drip to finally cease and that report to come out.
Will it reveal that The Republican party sold their soul to a Traitor?? (I'm already convinced he's a con man and a crook!)

I think you naturally want to defend the guy because he took so much heat while in office, but he made no attempts to unite the parties. Lets be clear, I'm not defending the Republicans over the last 8 years. They made no effort to work with Obama either, but Obama made it very clear that he had no intention to compromise.

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 9:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/16/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I would rather be bankrupt but have social programs rather than having a great economy with no healthcare, terrible education, and no welfare. Fortunately the two things aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, yes, we are bigger, but you can account for that by making it be on a % of GDP scale. For all your talk about BL not answering questions, you haven't answered a ton of mine.

Also also, states fending for themselves is a terrible idea. I don't want Kris Kobach having any more control than he already will. Don't torture me more.

I cannot answer your question as I don't know nor do I care to delve into the economies of France, UK, Germany, etc.

Our budget is not balanced. Entitltments account for the vast majority of the expenses. They need to be reduced/revamped. Since you don't care about the economy and have zero finance accumen. This discussion is pointless. If I open my fridge up to the neighborhood. Eventually I'll run out of money and my family will starve. It is a stupid way to live.

You probably don't understand what I wrote. So again. If your dad asks you..."how much should we allocate for our cell phone budget?" and you in turn respond with. "Let's see what cccp and his family spend and go by that %"....it is stupid. You need to balance your own budget and see what % you can or want to afford. Comparing the US to other countries on budget makes zero sense. Not sure why you don't understand that.

Here's a better analogy: Your family has an about even income with other households in your neighborhood, yet your family is starving and other families have plenty to eat. Well the solution would be to look at what other households are doing and take what is successful for them.

Your analogy fails because unlike cell phone budget, entitlements are a necessity and not a privilege. Defense spending is the privilege. Yes, I am open to entitlements cutting IF you can prove that it makes life better for all Americans, not just businesses and the uber rich. The best way to prove that is by looking at what other countries do and saying "X country does this, and they have the best healthcare in the world. Maybe we should do something like that too."

But you won't do that, because the best healthcare systems in the world spend a lot and are universal. It doesn't support your argument.

Fine. Maybe those families shop and go out once a month and I go out too frequently. In the end you have revenues and expenses and if your expenses are higher than your revenues you need to cut them. Why can you not comprehend that cutting the military budget will cost jobs? And if you cut it to ZERO, which you cannot the entitlements spend will still be too high. Defense is not a privelege. It is a critical component. We have the best healthcare systems in the world. What are you talking about?

I need someone else to weight in on this before I start using ad hominems again.

To clarify, I am not saying that a defense is a privilege, I meant it more in the excess that we spend. Another way to do things is to increase revenues (COUGH TAXES COUGH). I agree that we have a relatively good healthcare system with Obama, lots of flaws, but better than many. My point is that you are trying to prove that cutting entitlements is good for the country, and I am saying to win me over you have to prove that your plan is better for all Americans. One way to do that is look at other countries.

Europe is F*CKED. China is awful. Japan has been bad for a white. What countries should we look at exactly? Are we not the world leader? We have the best healthcare in the world and it is not close.

I already told you:

#1) Raise the SS retirement age
#2) Investigate medicare and medicaid fraud and inefficiences.
#3) Alter how pharma companies provide meds to the elderly.

I can list more. Stop the darn spend less on the military rhetoric. It protects the country and creates a significant amount of jobs. Millions. And stop with the revenues. Our expenses are out of control.

Europe is not ******, in fact the best healthcare systems in the world are European. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

I don't see where you are getting the 'best healthcare in the world' argument.

Prove that your plan helps all Americans.

The military spend could be cut by 200 billion and do the same thing, far more than any other country. And if you want to balance the budget, increasing revenues is a very valid way of doing it.

Tang, what percentage would you have to tax the 1% to balance the budget and where did your $200B number come from?

I'm not sure on your first question and the answer to your second question is that we could cut the budget by 200 billion and still spend more than any other country, by far.

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 9:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/16/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I would rather be bankrupt but have social programs rather than having a great economy with no healthcare, terrible education, and no welfare. Fortunately the two things aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, yes, we are bigger, but you can account for that by making it be on a % of GDP scale. For all your talk about BL not answering questions, you haven't answered a ton of mine.

Also also, states fending for themselves is a terrible idea. I don't want Kris Kobach having any more control than he already will. Don't torture me more.

I cannot answer your question as I don't know nor do I care to delve into the economies of France, UK, Germany, etc.

Our budget is not balanced. Entitltments account for the vast majority of the expenses. They need to be reduced/revamped. Since you don't care about the economy and have zero finance accumen. This discussion is pointless. If I open my fridge up to the neighborhood. Eventually I'll run out of money and my family will starve. It is a stupid way to live.

You probably don't understand what I wrote. So again. If your dad asks you..."how much should we allocate for our cell phone budget?" and you in turn respond with. "Let's see what cccp and his family spend and go by that %"....it is stupid. You need to balance your own budget and see what % you can or want to afford. Comparing the US to other countries on budget makes zero sense. Not sure why you don't understand that.

Here's a better analogy: Your family has an about even income with other households in your neighborhood, yet your family is starving and other families have plenty to eat. Well the solution would be to look at what other households are doing and take what is successful for them.

Your analogy fails because unlike cell phone budget, entitlements are a necessity and not a privilege. Defense spending is the privilege. Yes, I am open to entitlements cutting IF you can prove that it makes life better for all Americans, not just businesses and the uber rich. The best way to prove that is by looking at what other countries do and saying "X country does this, and they have the best healthcare in the world. Maybe we should do something like that too."

But you won't do that, because the best healthcare systems in the world spend a lot and are universal. It doesn't support your argument.

Fine. Maybe those families shop and go out once a month and I go out too frequently. In the end you have revenues and expenses and if your expenses are higher than your revenues you need to cut them. Why can you not comprehend that cutting the military budget will cost jobs? And if you cut it to ZERO, which you cannot the entitlements spend will still be too high. Defense is not a privelege. It is a critical component. We have the best healthcare systems in the world. What are you talking about?

I need someone else to weight in on this before I start using ad hominems again.

To clarify, I am not saying that a defense is a privilege, I meant it more in the excess that we spend. Another way to do things is to increase revenues (COUGH TAXES COUGH). I agree that we have a relatively good healthcare system with Obama, lots of flaws, but better than many. My point is that you are trying to prove that cutting entitlements is good for the country, and I am saying to win me over you have to prove that your plan is better for all Americans. One way to do that is look at other countries.

Europe is F*CKED. China is awful. Japan has been bad for a white. What countries should we look at exactly? Are we not the world leader? We have the best healthcare in the world and it is not close.

I already told you:

#1) Raise the SS retirement age
#2) Investigate medicare and medicaid fraud and inefficiences.
#3) Alter how pharma companies provide meds to the elderly.

I can list more. Stop the darn spend less on the military rhetoric. It protects the country and creates a significant amount of jobs. Millions. And stop with the revenues. Our expenses are out of control.

Europe is not ******, in fact the best healthcare systems in the world are European. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

I don't see where you are getting the 'best healthcare in the world' argument.

Prove that your plan helps all Americans.

The military spend could be cut by 200 billion and do the same thing, far more than any other country. And if you want to balance the budget, increasing revenues is a very valid way of doing it.

Did you see Brexit? France, Spain, Greece? Facing major economic and political hurdles. Same with Germany. Europe is a mess.

You want to tax more? How much more? Enough to cause a recession? I am not following your logic. We spend $4.3Trn on entitlments. $200Bn is NOTHING. We spend $610bn on the military, which again employs millions.

Prove that cutting the entitlement budget helps all Americans.

It's funny that you didn't answer any of my arguments, save the last one.

"I think you naturally want to defend the guy because he took so much heat while in office, but he made no attempts to unite the parties. Lets be clear, I'm not defending the Republicans over the last 8 years. They made no effort to work with Obama either, but Obama made it very clear that he had no intention to compromise."


I don't believe he COULD have compromised on the matters under debate. In FACT, I think he compromised way way too much on the ACA. THAT is what made it problematic in SOME markets. Even with that, it addressed (and SOLVED) some long standing issues within the insurance industry scam that NEEDED fixed for the public. Little matters like the pre-existing condition clause/escape. EVERYBODY has some sort of pre-existing condition and ALL insurance IS, is a promise made on a bunch of papers filled with legalese (the policy). Allowing the corps/Insurance deliverers to use the concept of "we'll cover your healthcare, EXCEPT for anything having to do with what really ails you" is, (as I hinted) a SCAM! There were OTHER insurance areas/issues that were successfully addressed under the ACA/Obamacare. I'm alive because of IT! Unfortunately, it was also somewhat of a sellout to the corporations who held all the insurance carriers and resulted in MASS profits for most of them because they just dropped coverage in areas where it was "too expensive" (read that as areas wherein there were a LOT of sick folks who had been without insurance at all!)
In other words, he sold out to corporate interests to get his signature legislation passed. It's called compromise. Sometimes it works and sometimes it shouldn't be done, depending on what is being compromised!

The ONLY reason I support a military budget at ALL is because our Freedom must NOT be compromised.
Are you willing to declare (with ANY faith) that we weren't already sold out/compromised in 11/2016?

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 12:29:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 9:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/16/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I would rather be bankrupt but have social programs rather than having a great economy with no healthcare, terrible education, and no welfare. Fortunately the two things aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, yes, we are bigger, but you can account for that by making it be on a % of GDP scale. For all your talk about BL not answering questions, you haven't answered a ton of mine.

Also also, states fending for themselves is a terrible idea. I don't want Kris Kobach having any more control than he already will. Don't torture me more.

I cannot answer your question as I don't know nor do I care to delve into the economies of France, UK, Germany, etc.

Our budget is not balanced. Entitltments account for the vast majority of the expenses. They need to be reduced/revamped. Since you don't care about the economy and have zero finance accumen. This discussion is pointless. If I open my fridge up to the neighborhood. Eventually I'll run out of money and my family will starve. It is a stupid way to live.

You probably don't understand what I wrote. So again. If your dad asks you..."how much should we allocate for our cell phone budget?" and you in turn respond with. "Let's see what cccp and his family spend and go by that %"....it is stupid. You need to balance your own budget and see what % you can or want to afford. Comparing the US to other countries on budget makes zero sense. Not sure why you don't understand that.

Here's a better analogy: Your family has an about even income with other households in your neighborhood, yet your family is starving and other families have plenty to eat. Well the solution would be to look at what other households are doing and take what is successful for them.

Your analogy fails because unlike cell phone budget, entitlements are a necessity and not a privilege. Defense spending is the privilege. Yes, I am open to entitlements cutting IF you can prove that it makes life better for all Americans, not just businesses and the uber rich. The best way to prove that is by looking at what other countries do and saying "X country does this, and they have the best healthcare in the world. Maybe we should do something like that too."

But you won't do that, because the best healthcare systems in the world spend a lot and are universal. It doesn't support your argument.

Fine. Maybe those families shop and go out once a month and I go out too frequently. In the end you have revenues and expenses and if your expenses are higher than your revenues you need to cut them. Why can you not comprehend that cutting the military budget will cost jobs? And if you cut it to ZERO, which you cannot the entitlements spend will still be too high. Defense is not a privelege. It is a critical component. We have the best healthcare systems in the world. What are you talking about?

I need someone else to weight in on this before I start using ad hominems again.

To clarify, I am not saying that a defense is a privilege, I meant it more in the excess that we spend. Another way to do things is to increase revenues (COUGH TAXES COUGH). I agree that we have a relatively good healthcare system with Obama, lots of flaws, but better than many. My point is that you are trying to prove that cutting entitlements is good for the country, and I am saying to win me over you have to prove that your plan is better for all Americans. One way to do that is look at other countries.

Europe is F*CKED. China is awful. Japan has been bad for a white. What countries should we look at exactly? Are we not the world leader? We have the best healthcare in the world and it is not close.

I already told you:

#1) Raise the SS retirement age
#2) Investigate medicare and medicaid fraud and inefficiences.
#3) Alter how pharma companies provide meds to the elderly.

I can list more. Stop the darn spend less on the military rhetoric. It protects the country and creates a significant amount of jobs. Millions. And stop with the revenues. Our expenses are out of control.

Europe is not ******, in fact the best healthcare systems in the world are European. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

I don't see where you are getting the 'best healthcare in the world' argument.

Prove that your plan helps all Americans.

The military spend could be cut by 200 billion and do the same thing, far more than any other country. And if you want to balance the budget, increasing revenues is a very valid way of doing it.

Did you see Brexit? France, Spain, Greece? Facing major economic and political hurdles. Same with Germany. Europe is a mess.

You want to tax more? How much more? Enough to cause a recession? I am not following your logic. We spend $4.3Trn on entitlments. $200Bn is NOTHING. We spend $610bn on the military, which again employs millions.

Prove that cutting the entitlement budget helps all Americans.

It's funny that you didn't answer any of my arguments, save the last one.

WTF? We need to balance the budget and repay the debt. Entitlements are the #1 expense. That is how it helps all Americans. What arguments? You are illiterate in finance. LOL. Bob and KO agree with me. You're alone on this island of stupidity.

How is balancing the budget a better alternative to having healthcare? If you admit that your system means worse healthcare for Americans, then I am out.

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 11:49:00 AM (view original):
"Obama was intentionally divisive. He was probably the most divisive president we have had politically and racially prior to Trump. Bob is a smart man, but he was wrong about this."

I don't believe that Coach. I think a LOT of that perception came with the territory. Being the 1st anything has it's price.
Much less the 1st POTUS of color-----------when he wasn't even 100%, so NOT all the blacks thought he was black enough, NOR did they think he was agenda driven enough. Had HE done THAT, You'd have REALLY thought He was divisive. I just think you read that issue wrong, perhaps from the reflection of the region/society you live amongst. I can pretty much guarantee you that Obama wasn't all that divisive in places like (say) East Nashville, or Memphis! (Or Tonto Basin either really. The non racists had no problem with Obama in the WH, and the Fairly large population that DID would have had a problem with HIM moving next door! It didn't have anything to do with his being POTUS on EITHER side!

No, he constantly made derogatory comments regarding Republicans. He took jabs whenever the opportunity presented itself. As far as race, I feel that someone in his position should remain neutral until facts come out. He did not. He was a very divisive person. It's not like he tried to hide this. He made it obvious. He made no attempt to unite the country.

That is Republican BULLSHIT Coach! Obama attempted to use the "bully pulpit" to sway public opinion and get his supporters to pressure members of Congress to act/vote a certain way on specific issues on his agenda. EVERY POTUS since Truman (and WAY WAY before that!) has attempted to do the same thing. Obama was vilified for it and the Repugs. used his race to divide the public as NEVER before. It was that VAST right wing media operation led by such stalwarts citizens as Fox News head Rupert Murdoch (oh, Wait!), and solid and stable genuis's like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones that non-stop blasted their message of hatred and racism to the (unfortunately) racist ears of way way too many Americans.

It makes me wanna Puke, and is nearly driving me (after ALL this time) to join the Dems. in opposition to the Repugnant regime!
They are traitors to the Country and (maybe) worse. I'm still waiting for the drip drip drip to finally cease and that report to come out.
Will it reveal that The Republican party sold their soul to a Traitor?? (I'm already convinced he's a con man and a crook!)

I think you naturally want to defend the guy because he took so much heat while in office, but he made no attempts to unite the parties. Lets be clear, I'm not defending the Republicans over the last 8 years. They made no effort to work with Obama either, but Obama made it very clear that he had no intention to compromise.

just out of curiosity, who, in your view, was the last president who did try to compromise with the other party? It certainly isn't Trump.

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 12:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:51:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:46:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 11:15:00 AM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/17/2018 9:05:00 AM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/16/2018 10:33:00 PM (view original):
Yes, I would rather be bankrupt but have social programs rather than having a great economy with no healthcare, terrible education, and no welfare. Fortunately the two things aren't mutually exclusive.

Also, yes, we are bigger, but you can account for that by making it be on a % of GDP scale. For all your talk about BL not answering questions, you haven't answered a ton of mine.

Also also, states fending for themselves is a terrible idea. I don't want Kris Kobach having any more control than he already will. Don't torture me more.

I cannot answer your question as I don't know nor do I care to delve into the economies of France, UK, Germany, etc.

Our budget is not balanced. Entitltments account for the vast majority of the expenses. They need to be reduced/revamped. Since you don't care about the economy and have zero finance accumen. This discussion is pointless. If I open my fridge up to the neighborhood. Eventually I'll run out of money and my family will starve. It is a stupid way to live.

You probably don't understand what I wrote. So again. If your dad asks you..."how much should we allocate for our cell phone budget?" and you in turn respond with. "Let's see what cccp and his family spend and go by that %"....it is stupid. You need to balance your own budget and see what % you can or want to afford. Comparing the US to other countries on budget makes zero sense. Not sure why you don't understand that.

Here's a better analogy: Your family has an about even income with other households in your neighborhood, yet your family is starving and other families have plenty to eat. Well the solution would be to look at what other households are doing and take what is successful for them.

Your analogy fails because unlike cell phone budget, entitlements are a necessity and not a privilege. Defense spending is the privilege. Yes, I am open to entitlements cutting IF you can prove that it makes life better for all Americans, not just businesses and the uber rich. The best way to prove that is by looking at what other countries do and saying "X country does this, and they have the best healthcare in the world. Maybe we should do something like that too."

But you won't do that, because the best healthcare systems in the world spend a lot and are universal. It doesn't support your argument.

Fine. Maybe those families shop and go out once a month and I go out too frequently. In the end you have revenues and expenses and if your expenses are higher than your revenues you need to cut them. Why can you not comprehend that cutting the military budget will cost jobs? And if you cut it to ZERO, which you cannot the entitlements spend will still be too high. Defense is not a privelege. It is a critical component. We have the best healthcare systems in the world. What are you talking about?

I need someone else to weight in on this before I start using ad hominems again.

To clarify, I am not saying that a defense is a privilege, I meant it more in the excess that we spend. Another way to do things is to increase revenues (COUGH TAXES COUGH). I agree that we have a relatively good healthcare system with Obama, lots of flaws, but better than many. My point is that you are trying to prove that cutting entitlements is good for the country, and I am saying to win me over you have to prove that your plan is better for all Americans. One way to do that is look at other countries.

Europe is F*CKED. China is awful. Japan has been bad for a white. What countries should we look at exactly? Are we not the world leader? We have the best healthcare in the world and it is not close.

I already told you:

#1) Raise the SS retirement age
#2) Investigate medicare and medicaid fraud and inefficiences.
#3) Alter how pharma companies provide meds to the elderly.

I can list more. Stop the darn spend less on the military rhetoric. It protects the country and creates a significant amount of jobs. Millions. And stop with the revenues. Our expenses are out of control.

Europe is not ******, in fact the best healthcare systems in the world are European. http://www.who.int/healthinfo/paper30.pdf

I don't see where you are getting the 'best healthcare in the world' argument.

Prove that your plan helps all Americans.

The military spend could be cut by 200 billion and do the same thing, far more than any other country. And if you want to balance the budget, increasing revenues is a very valid way of doing it.

Tang, what percentage would you have to tax the 1% to balance the budget and where did your $200B number come from?

I'm not sure on your first question and the answer to your second question is that we could cut the budget by 200 billion and still spend more than any other country, by far.

If you don't know, why do you keep pushing for it?

Posted by tangplay on 9/17/2018 12:47:00 PM (view original):
How is balancing the budget a better alternative to having healthcare? If you admit that your system means worse healthcare for Americans, then I am out.

It is not just healthcare. It is SSI as well. It would not be worse. It would actually be better. But let's say it was a little worse for arguments sake. Would you rather have worse healthcare or no healthcare? LOL.

I just told tang that $200bn is nothing. We spend $600bn on the military and $4.3Trn on entitlements. LOL. He cannot do simple math.

Posted by wylie715 on 9/17/2018 12:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 12:15:00 PM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 12:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by strikeout26 on 9/17/2018 11:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by laramiebob on 9/17/2018 11:49:00 AM (view original):
"Obama was intentionally divisive. He was probably the most divisive president we have had politically and racially prior to Trump. Bob is a smart man, but he was wrong about this."

I don't believe that Coach. I think a LOT of that perception came with the territory. Being the 1st anything has it's price.
Much less the 1st POTUS of color-----------when he wasn't even 100%, so NOT all the blacks thought he was black enough, NOR did they think he was agenda driven enough. Had HE done THAT, You'd have REALLY thought He was divisive. I just think you read that issue wrong, perhaps from the reflection of the region/society you live amongst. I can pretty much guarantee you that Obama wasn't all that divisive in places like (say) East Nashville, or Memphis! (Or Tonto Basin either really. The non racists had no problem with Obama in the WH, and the Fairly large population that DID would have had a problem with HIM moving next door! It didn't have anything to do with his being POTUS on EITHER side!

No, he constantly made derogatory comments regarding Republicans. He took jabs whenever the opportunity presented itself. As far as race, I feel that someone in his position should remain neutral until facts come out. He did not. He was a very divisive person. It's not like he tried to hide this. He made it obvious. He made no attempt to unite the country.

That is Republican BULLSHIT Coach! Obama attempted to use the "bully pulpit" to sway public opinion and get his supporters to pressure members of Congress to act/vote a certain way on specific issues on his agenda. EVERY POTUS since Truman (and WAY WAY before that!) has attempted to do the same thing. Obama was vilified for it and the Repugs. used his race to divide the public as NEVER before. It was that VAST right wing media operation led by such stalwarts citizens as Fox News head Rupert Murdoch (oh, Wait!), and solid and stable genuis's like Rush Limbaugh and Alex Jones that non-stop blasted their message of hatred and racism to the (unfortunately) racist ears of way way too many Americans.

It makes me wanna Puke, and is nearly driving me (after ALL this time) to join the Dems. in opposition to the Repugnant regime!
They are traitors to the Country and (maybe) worse. I'm still waiting for the drip drip drip to finally cease and that report to come out.
Will it reveal that The Republican party sold their soul to a Traitor?? (I'm already convinced he's a con man and a crook!)

I think you naturally want to defend the guy because he took so much heat while in office, but he made no attempts to unite the parties. Lets be clear, I'm not defending the Republicans over the last 8 years. They made no effort to work with Obama either, but Obama made it very clear that he had no intention to compromise.

just out of curiosity, who, in your view, was the last president who did try to compromise with the other party? It certainly isn't Trump.

I think W did to an extent, but Clinton most certainly did and Reagan before him.

I think you guys some times forget that I am a not a Trump supporter as a person. I think he's a swindler.

I think you're right Coach!