The quintessential response of the liberal - resort to label something as racism as a means of responding to the truth - knowing any such response would only expose their "argument" for what it is - irrational.

And then, you get to their other go-to response - redefine the argument with skewed facts - as it what, the it's R who are trying to protect certain people from brown people (is that the new term? are we moving away from African American, as we moved away from black, as we moved away from colored - even though their own organization refers to themselves as colored - SEE NAACP). HINT: the Dems are doing that by themselves by keeping the _____ (you fill in the new politically correct term) - uneducated, unemployed, dependant on gov't - until their genocide is completed -- SEE ABORTION STATISITICS!

The distinction being that the Dems have no problem using Budget expenses - and uncontrolled spending to facilitate their ends --

Parenthetically, tax cuts --- you equate that as being evil: HINT: that mindset presupposes that it's the gov't money to begin with and that gov't and gov't alone gets to decide the winners and losers. How's that concept working out in the USSR (ooops, they're out of business, Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, and every communistic, socialistic and dictatorship since the inception of gov't?

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 1:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"We . . . who? I don't know that. No source I can find knows that. Did I catch you making things up yet again? While you're correct that the "true" rate can probably never be calculated, if you actually believe it's anywhere close to that 10% figure, you're even more naive than I thought, which is hard to imagine.

Tang doesnt get basic math.

Gov't earns $100.
Gov't spends $120
Gov't is $20 in the red.
Military costs $16. Entitlement cost $66.
Tang says cut military!!!!!
Tang cannot do basic math. Arguing with him is insanity.

Your proportions are off.

More like the government spends $1,000 in 2017.

Broken down:

$210 defense
$250 disability and social security (along with a bunch of other stuff - black lung disability trust fund, disabled miners, rail worker pensions, etc.)
$280 health care (mostly medicare and medicaid but also other public health services)

$90 welfare (unemployment, food stamps, other safety nets)
$70 interest on debt
$40 education
$60 other stuff (infrastructure, transportation, federal police forces, court systems, etc)

While spending $1000, the government takes in $830 in 2017. And then it decides in 2018 it's going to reduce the amount it takes in to $750 because rich people need more money.





So you'll have to excuse me when I completely ignore any feigned concern for the deficit.

No. Entitlements are 66% and military is 16%. The # of people on welfare nearly doubled under BHO. It was not for rich people as poor people got breaks too and it was for corporations to halt inversions. Actually wait. I said on these boards I would only mock you as you re an A HOLE.

So...F*CK off you loser.

Um, no, that's not correct.

Maybe you're looking at a different year, but federal outlays in 2017 were $3.9 trillion. Total defense outlays were $819.2 billion. That's 20.97%. Or 21% if you round up.

That's actual spending. Not the base budget or a projected figure.

You kind of look like an idiot calling other people names and being wrong all the time.

F*CK OFF.

Jesus, maybe shoot alexjonesbukakisbenshapiro.com an email and let them know their numbers are out of date. The CBO rounds the outlays up to an even $4 trillion. Every other place lists actual outlays at $3.9 trillion.

Budget request for FY2018. On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending—$54 billion—which represents a 10 percent increase—for FY 2018 as well as $30 billion for FY2017 which ends in September.

Where did your $800Bn+ Number come from?

So we're just going to ignore the fact that your chart was completely wrong? OK.

You're forgetting the cost of wars, referred to in the budget as OCO.

DOD base budget actual spending in 2017 was $523.2B. Then you have the almost $200B OCO, defense spending totals $818B.
For 2018, the enacted budget has a base of $574.5B plus OCO of another $200B, totalling $874.4B

Wars are not recurring. Well they are these days. So mine is wrong and yours is right? LMAO.

So you don't think we need to address entitlements? You want free healthcare for all? You think that the current welfare programs are run well. You think Medicaid is run well?

And the cost of wars, recurring or not, count toward the defense budget. So yeah, I'm right, you're wrong.




I think we need an expansion of entitlements. Public healthcare, maybe even a minimum guaranteed income.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 1:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"We . . . who? I don't know that. No source I can find knows that. Did I catch you making things up yet again? While you're correct that the "true" rate can probably never be calculated, if you actually believe it's anywhere close to that 10% figure, you're even more naive than I thought, which is hard to imagine.

Tang doesnt get basic math.

Gov't earns $100.
Gov't spends $120
Gov't is $20 in the red.
Military costs $16. Entitlement cost $66.
Tang says cut military!!!!!
Tang cannot do basic math. Arguing with him is insanity.

Your proportions are off.

More like the government spends $1,000 in 2017.

Broken down:

$210 defense
$250 disability and social security (along with a bunch of other stuff - black lung disability trust fund, disabled miners, rail worker pensions, etc.)
$280 health care (mostly medicare and medicaid but also other public health services)

$90 welfare (unemployment, food stamps, other safety nets)
$70 interest on debt
$40 education
$60 other stuff (infrastructure, transportation, federal police forces, court systems, etc)

While spending $1000, the government takes in $830 in 2017. And then it decides in 2018 it's going to reduce the amount it takes in to $750 because rich people need more money.





So you'll have to excuse me when I completely ignore any feigned concern for the deficit.

No. Entitlements are 66% and military is 16%. The # of people on welfare nearly doubled under BHO. It was not for rich people as poor people got breaks too and it was for corporations to halt inversions. Actually wait. I said on these boards I would only mock you as you re an A HOLE.

So...F*CK off you loser.

Um, no, that's not correct.

Maybe you're looking at a different year, but federal outlays in 2017 were $3.9 trillion. Total defense outlays were $819.2 billion. That's 20.97%. Or 21% if you round up.

That's actual spending. Not the base budget or a projected figure.

You kind of look like an idiot calling other people names and being wrong all the time.

F*CK OFF.

Jesus, maybe shoot alexjonesbukakisbenshapiro.com an email and let them know their numbers are out of date. The CBO rounds the outlays up to an even $4 trillion. Every other place lists actual outlays at $3.9 trillion.

Budget request for FY2018. On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending—$54 billion—which represents a 10 percent increase—for FY 2018 as well as $30 billion for FY2017 which ends in September.

Where did your $800Bn+ Number come from?

So we're just going to ignore the fact that your chart was completely wrong? OK.

You're forgetting the cost of wars, referred to in the budget as OCO.

DOD base budget actual spending in 2017 was $523.2B. Then you have the almost $200B OCO, defense spending totals $818B.
For 2018, the enacted budget has a base of $574.5B plus OCO of another $200B, totalling $874.4B

Wars are not recurring. Well they are these days. So mine is wrong and yours is right? LMAO.

So you don't think we need to address entitlements? You want free healthcare for all? You think that the current welfare programs are run well. You think Medicaid is run well?

And the cost of wars, recurring or not, count toward the defense budget. So yeah, I'm right, you're wrong.




I think we need an expansion of entitlements. Public healthcare, maybe even a minimum guaranteed income.

Then you're out of touch with reality. We were discussing budget not wars. So going forward. Cannot predict one time expenses going forward. I am right and you're wrong. You're also stupid but I am wasting my time explaining why giving stuff for free doesn't work.

Why do you think we need public health? Defend that statement. Bet you can't.

Posted by pennsylvania on 9/21/2018 4:45:00 PM (view original):
The quintessential response of the liberal - resort to label something as racism as a means of responding to the truth - knowing any such response would only expose their "argument" for what it is - irrational.

And then, you get to their other go-to response - redefine the argument with skewed facts - as it what, the it's R who are trying to protect certain people from brown people (is that the new term? are we moving away from African American, as we moved away from black, as we moved away from colored - even though their own organization refers to themselves as colored - SEE NAACP). HINT: the Dems are doing that by themselves by keeping the _____ (you fill in the new politically correct term) - uneducated, unemployed, dependant on gov't - until their genocide is completed -- SEE ABORTION STATISITICS!

The distinction being that the Dems have no problem using Budget expenses - and uncontrolled spending to facilitate their ends --

Parenthetically, tax cuts --- you equate that as being evil: HINT: that mindset presupposes that it's the gov't money to begin with and that gov't and gov't alone gets to decide the winners and losers. How's that concept working out in the USSR (ooops, they're out of business, Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, and every communistic, socialistic and dictatorship since the inception of gov't?

I'm not "resorting" to labeling you racist. I'm pointing out that you were CLEARLY referring to black people when you described the people in "every inner city" who are "to (sic) dumb to realize how dumb they are."

Seems pretty racist. Especially when you start looking around at groups of dumb poor people who continually vote against their best interests and see entire states. Kansas. Oklahoma. Kentucky. etc.

At least poor blacks in inner cities can point to centuries of racism and oppression causing generational entrenched poverty. Poor rural whites have no excuse. They're just dumb as ****.

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pennsylvania on 9/21/2018 4:45:00 PM (view original):
The quintessential response of the liberal - resort to label something as racism as a means of responding to the truth - knowing any such response would only expose their "argument" for what it is - irrational.

And then, you get to their other go-to response - redefine the argument with skewed facts - as it what, the it's R who are trying to protect certain people from brown people (is that the new term? are we moving away from African American, as we moved away from black, as we moved away from colored - even though their own organization refers to themselves as colored - SEE NAACP). HINT: the Dems are doing that by themselves by keeping the _____ (you fill in the new politically correct term) - uneducated, unemployed, dependant on gov't - until their genocide is completed -- SEE ABORTION STATISITICS!

The distinction being that the Dems have no problem using Budget expenses - and uncontrolled spending to facilitate their ends --

Parenthetically, tax cuts --- you equate that as being evil: HINT: that mindset presupposes that it's the gov't money to begin with and that gov't and gov't alone gets to decide the winners and losers. How's that concept working out in the USSR (ooops, they're out of business, Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, and every communistic, socialistic and dictatorship since the inception of gov't?

I'm not "resorting" to labeling you racist. I'm pointing out that you were CLEARLY referring to black people when you described the people in "every inner city" who are "to (sic) dumb to realize how dumb they are."

Seems pretty racist. Especially when you start looking around at groups of dumb poor people who continually vote against their best interests and see entire states. Kansas. Oklahoma. Kentucky. etc.

At least poor blacks in inner cities can point to centuries of racism and oppression causing generational entrenched poverty. Poor rural whites have no excuse. They're just dumb as ****.

LMAO. Bad Idiot strikes again. Its the Dems who were against the Civil War. Its the Dems who wanted to keep the blacks poor. Its the Dems who were pro planned parenthood so that fewer blacks could reproduce. But you just keep living in your fairy tale land. The GOP are mostly capitalists and like the color green. They could not care less how they get the green.

I cannot even do this anymore. Tang and bad luck are the epitome of stupidity in America.

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 3:36:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/21/2018 11:47:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"We . . . who? I don't know that. No source I can find knows that. Did I catch you making things up yet again? While you're correct that the "true" rate can probably never be calculated, if you actually believe it's anywhere close to that 10% figure, you're even more naive than I thought, which is hard to imagine.

http://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-fraud.html

You realize the 1st sentence says "estimated", right? (Sorry for sounding like b_l.) Estimated percentages do not mean anyone "knows" anything. Even at the ridiculously low 10% figure that equates to $78 billion - with a B, of abuse. Don't think that's a problem?

Also, the points about abusing handouts is NOT linked to whether or not there is a balanced budget. People scamming the system because they don't want to work, or don't have to work because they're such good scammers, is a problem no matter what the budget situation.

I agree with you. Fraud and abuse are major issues.

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 1:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"We . . . who? I don't know that. No source I can find knows that. Did I catch you making things up yet again? While you're correct that the "true" rate can probably never be calculated, if you actually believe it's anywhere close to that 10% figure, you're even more naive than I thought, which is hard to imagine.

Tang doesnt get basic math.

Gov't earns $100.
Gov't spends $120
Gov't is $20 in the red.
Military costs $16. Entitlement cost $66.
Tang says cut military!!!!!
Tang cannot do basic math. Arguing with him is insanity.

Your proportions are off.

More like the government spends $1,000 in 2017.

Broken down:

$210 defense
$250 disability and social security (along with a bunch of other stuff - black lung disability trust fund, disabled miners, rail worker pensions, etc.)
$280 health care (mostly medicare and medicaid but also other public health services)

$90 welfare (unemployment, food stamps, other safety nets)
$70 interest on debt
$40 education
$60 other stuff (infrastructure, transportation, federal police forces, court systems, etc)

While spending $1000, the government takes in $830 in 2017. And then it decides in 2018 it's going to reduce the amount it takes in to $750 because rich people need more money.





So you'll have to excuse me when I completely ignore any feigned concern for the deficit.

No. Entitlements are 66% and military is 16%. The # of people on welfare nearly doubled under BHO. It was not for rich people as poor people got breaks too and it was for corporations to halt inversions. Actually wait. I said on these boards I would only mock you as you re an A HOLE.

So...F*CK off you loser.

Um, no, that's not correct.

Maybe you're looking at a different year, but federal outlays in 2017 were $3.9 trillion. Total defense outlays were $819.2 billion. That's 20.97%. Or 21% if you round up.

That's actual spending. Not the base budget or a projected figure.

You kind of look like an idiot calling other people names and being wrong all the time.

F*CK OFF.

Jesus, maybe shoot alexjonesbukakisbenshapiro.com an email and let them know their numbers are out of date. The CBO rounds the outlays up to an even $4 trillion. Every other place lists actual outlays at $3.9 trillion.

Budget request for FY2018. On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending—$54 billion—which represents a 10 percent increase—for FY 2018 as well as $30 billion for FY2017 which ends in September.

Where did your $800Bn+ Number come from?

So we're just going to ignore the fact that your chart was completely wrong? OK.

You're forgetting the cost of wars, referred to in the budget as OCO.

DOD base budget actual spending in 2017 was $523.2B. Then you have the almost $200B OCO, defense spending totals $818B.
For 2018, the enacted budget has a base of $574.5B plus OCO of another $200B, totalling $874.4B

Wars are not recurring. Well they are these days. So mine is wrong and yours is right? LMAO.

So you don't think we need to address entitlements? You want free healthcare for all? You think that the current welfare programs are run well. You think Medicaid is run well?

And the cost of wars, recurring or not, count toward the defense budget. So yeah, I'm right, you're wrong.




I think we need an expansion of entitlements. Public healthcare, maybe even a minimum guaranteed income.

Then you're out of touch with reality. We were discussing budget not wars. So going forward. Cannot predict one time expenses going forward. I am right and you're wrong. You're also stupid but I am wasting my time explaining why giving stuff for free doesn't work.

Why do you think we need public health? Defend that statement. Bet you can't.

They aren't one time expenses. They are an ongoing part of the budget. Trump included OCO in his 2018 and 2019 proposals.

Why do we need public healthcare? Because people, in ******* America, die from preventable diseases because they can't afford insurance (or the cost of the care they need). And it's not just like...one crazy person a year.

Relatively young, otherwise able-bodied people, who work jobs and live normal lives die from **** like type 1 diabetes because they don't have insurance and can't afford insulin. It's insane.

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):
You are always wrong bad luck and I would politely debate you if you agree to apologize for being such a D*CK before and answering my questions with questions. Which, you did.

If you cannot apologize then I'll continue to mock you personally. Because you suck.

Telling people to **** off and saying that they suck isn't mocking them. Saying that I am a paperboy and work in a dying industry? That stings.

Also it's funny that you are pretending to be a macho tough guy yet you censor yourself. And capitalize your insults. It's like you are a second grader who just learned these words and you emphasize them to prove how much of a big boy you are.

I told bad luck to F off no one else and he deserves it. You saw rs come at me and I was very polite to him. Sorry the truth hurts but you don't listen to a damn word I say you just continue to preach your crazy rhetoric. Tell how this. Tell me how that. Tell me what do to.

Google stuff yourself. We are running a deficit, We need to cut costs. Entitlements are 66% of our mandatory spend. If you cannot figure out that we need to cut entitlements we need to discuss the Chiefs and Pats.

I am perfectly fine with discussing Chiefs and Pats. Josh Gordon, huh?

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 5:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 1:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"We . . . who? I don't know that. No source I can find knows that. Did I catch you making things up yet again? While you're correct that the "true" rate can probably never be calculated, if you actually believe it's anywhere close to that 10% figure, you're even more naive than I thought, which is hard to imagine.

Tang doesnt get basic math.

Gov't earns $100.
Gov't spends $120
Gov't is $20 in the red.
Military costs $16. Entitlement cost $66.
Tang says cut military!!!!!
Tang cannot do basic math. Arguing with him is insanity.

Your proportions are off.

More like the government spends $1,000 in 2017.

Broken down:

$210 defense
$250 disability and social security (along with a bunch of other stuff - black lung disability trust fund, disabled miners, rail worker pensions, etc.)
$280 health care (mostly medicare and medicaid but also other public health services)

$90 welfare (unemployment, food stamps, other safety nets)
$70 interest on debt
$40 education
$60 other stuff (infrastructure, transportation, federal police forces, court systems, etc)

While spending $1000, the government takes in $830 in 2017. And then it decides in 2018 it's going to reduce the amount it takes in to $750 because rich people need more money.





So you'll have to excuse me when I completely ignore any feigned concern for the deficit.

No. Entitlements are 66% and military is 16%. The # of people on welfare nearly doubled under BHO. It was not for rich people as poor people got breaks too and it was for corporations to halt inversions. Actually wait. I said on these boards I would only mock you as you re an A HOLE.

So...F*CK off you loser.

Um, no, that's not correct.

Maybe you're looking at a different year, but federal outlays in 2017 were $3.9 trillion. Total defense outlays were $819.2 billion. That's 20.97%. Or 21% if you round up.

That's actual spending. Not the base budget or a projected figure.

You kind of look like an idiot calling other people names and being wrong all the time.

F*CK OFF.

Jesus, maybe shoot alexjonesbukakisbenshapiro.com an email and let them know their numbers are out of date. The CBO rounds the outlays up to an even $4 trillion. Every other place lists actual outlays at $3.9 trillion.

Budget request for FY2018. On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending—$54 billion—which represents a 10 percent increase—for FY 2018 as well as $30 billion for FY2017 which ends in September.

Where did your $800Bn+ Number come from?

So we're just going to ignore the fact that your chart was completely wrong? OK.

You're forgetting the cost of wars, referred to in the budget as OCO.

DOD base budget actual spending in 2017 was $523.2B. Then you have the almost $200B OCO, defense spending totals $818B.
For 2018, the enacted budget has a base of $574.5B plus OCO of another $200B, totalling $874.4B

Wars are not recurring. Well they are these days. So mine is wrong and yours is right? LMAO.

So you don't think we need to address entitlements? You want free healthcare for all? You think that the current welfare programs are run well. You think Medicaid is run well?

And the cost of wars, recurring or not, count toward the defense budget. So yeah, I'm right, you're wrong.




I think we need an expansion of entitlements. Public healthcare, maybe even a minimum guaranteed income.

Then you're out of touch with reality. We were discussing budget not wars. So going forward. Cannot predict one time expenses going forward. I am right and you're wrong. You're also stupid but I am wasting my time explaining why giving stuff for free doesn't work.

Why do you think we need public health? Defend that statement. Bet you can't.

They aren't one time expenses. They are an ongoing part of the budget. Trump included OCO in his 2018 and 2019 proposals.

Why do we need public healthcare? Because people, in ******* America, die from preventable diseases because they can't afford insurance (or the cost of the care they need). And it's not just like...one crazy person a year.

Relatively young, otherwise able-bodied people, who work jobs and live normal lives die from **** like type 1 diabetes because they don't have insurance and can't afford insulin. It's insane.

People would die without food too. Should we open up the supermarkets and let people take what they want? LMAO.

Your argument is retarded. Like all your arguments.

Posted by tangplay on 9/21/2018 5:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):
You are always wrong bad luck and I would politely debate you if you agree to apologize for being such a D*CK before and answering my questions with questions. Which, you did.

If you cannot apologize then I'll continue to mock you personally. Because you suck.

Telling people to **** off and saying that they suck isn't mocking them. Saying that I am a paperboy and work in a dying industry? That stings.

Also it's funny that you are pretending to be a macho tough guy yet you censor yourself. And capitalize your insults. It's like you are a second grader who just learned these words and you emphasize them to prove how much of a big boy you are.

I told bad luck to F off no one else and he deserves it. You saw rs come at me and I was very polite to him. Sorry the truth hurts but you don't listen to a damn word I say you just continue to preach your crazy rhetoric. Tell how this. Tell me how that. Tell me what do to.

Google stuff yourself. We are running a deficit, We need to cut costs. Entitlements are 66% of our mandatory spend. If you cannot figure out that we need to cut entitlements we need to discuss the Chiefs and Pats.

I am perfectly fine with discussing Chiefs and Pats. Josh Gordon, huh?

Need a deep threat to allow Gronk to work the seam and White to work the slot until PEdelman returns. Not sure how he'll work out if at all but the compensation was light. The Pats WRs are bleh w/o Edelman but with him they are much better.

Is there a food affordability issue?

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pennsylvania on 9/21/2018 4:45:00 PM (view original):
The quintessential response of the liberal - resort to label something as racism as a means of responding to the truth - knowing any such response would only expose their "argument" for what it is - irrational.

And then, you get to their other go-to response - redefine the argument with skewed facts - as it what, the it's R who are trying to protect certain people from brown people (is that the new term? are we moving away from African American, as we moved away from black, as we moved away from colored - even though their own organization refers to themselves as colored - SEE NAACP). HINT: the Dems are doing that by themselves by keeping the _____ (you fill in the new politically correct term) - uneducated, unemployed, dependant on gov't - until their genocide is completed -- SEE ABORTION STATISITICS!

The distinction being that the Dems have no problem using Budget expenses - and uncontrolled spending to facilitate their ends --

Parenthetically, tax cuts --- you equate that as being evil: HINT: that mindset presupposes that it's the gov't money to begin with and that gov't and gov't alone gets to decide the winners and losers. How's that concept working out in the USSR (ooops, they're out of business, Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, and every communistic, socialistic and dictatorship since the inception of gov't?

I'm not "resorting" to labeling you racist. I'm pointing out that you were CLEARLY referring to black people when you described the people in "every inner city" who are "to (sic) dumb to realize how dumb they are."

Seems pretty racist. Especially when you start looking around at groups of dumb poor people who continually vote against their best interests and see entire states. Kansas. Oklahoma. Kentucky. etc.

At least poor blacks in inner cities can point to centuries of racism and oppression causing generational entrenched poverty. Poor rural whites have no excuse. They're just dumb as ****.

LMAO. Bad Idiot strikes again. Its the Dems who were against the Civil War. Its the Dems who wanted to keep the blacks poor. Its the Dems who were pro planned parenthood so that fewer blacks could reproduce. But you just keep living in your fairy tale land. The GOP are mostly capitalists and like the color green. They could not care less how they get the green.

I cannot even do this anymore. Tang and bad luck are the epitome of stupidity in America.

Dude. The parties switched. You weren't even alive for that.

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 5:18:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 5:02:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:54:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:48:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:40:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:30:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:20:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 2:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 1:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 1:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 11:44:00 AM (view original):

Posted by all3 on 9/21/2018 11:39:00 AM (view original):
"We . . . who? I don't know that. No source I can find knows that. Did I catch you making things up yet again? While you're correct that the "true" rate can probably never be calculated, if you actually believe it's anywhere close to that 10% figure, you're even more naive than I thought, which is hard to imagine.

Tang doesnt get basic math.

Gov't earns $100.
Gov't spends $120
Gov't is $20 in the red.
Military costs $16. Entitlement cost $66.
Tang says cut military!!!!!
Tang cannot do basic math. Arguing with him is insanity.

Your proportions are off.

More like the government spends $1,000 in 2017.

Broken down:

$210 defense
$250 disability and social security (along with a bunch of other stuff - black lung disability trust fund, disabled miners, rail worker pensions, etc.)
$280 health care (mostly medicare and medicaid but also other public health services)

$90 welfare (unemployment, food stamps, other safety nets)
$70 interest on debt
$40 education
$60 other stuff (infrastructure, transportation, federal police forces, court systems, etc)

While spending $1000, the government takes in $830 in 2017. And then it decides in 2018 it's going to reduce the amount it takes in to $750 because rich people need more money.





So you'll have to excuse me when I completely ignore any feigned concern for the deficit.

No. Entitlements are 66% and military is 16%. The # of people on welfare nearly doubled under BHO. It was not for rich people as poor people got breaks too and it was for corporations to halt inversions. Actually wait. I said on these boards I would only mock you as you re an A HOLE.

So...F*CK off you loser.

Um, no, that's not correct.

Maybe you're looking at a different year, but federal outlays in 2017 were $3.9 trillion. Total defense outlays were $819.2 billion. That's 20.97%. Or 21% if you round up.

That's actual spending. Not the base budget or a projected figure.

You kind of look like an idiot calling other people names and being wrong all the time.

F*CK OFF.

Jesus, maybe shoot alexjonesbukakisbenshapiro.com an email and let them know their numbers are out of date. The CBO rounds the outlays up to an even $4 trillion. Every other place lists actual outlays at $3.9 trillion.

Budget request for FY2018. On March 16, 2017 President Trump submitted his request to Congress for $639 billion in military spending—$54 billion—which represents a 10 percent increase—for FY 2018 as well as $30 billion for FY2017 which ends in September.

Where did your $800Bn+ Number come from?

So we're just going to ignore the fact that your chart was completely wrong? OK.

You're forgetting the cost of wars, referred to in the budget as OCO.

DOD base budget actual spending in 2017 was $523.2B. Then you have the almost $200B OCO, defense spending totals $818B.
For 2018, the enacted budget has a base of $574.5B plus OCO of another $200B, totalling $874.4B

Wars are not recurring. Well they are these days. So mine is wrong and yours is right? LMAO.

So you don't think we need to address entitlements? You want free healthcare for all? You think that the current welfare programs are run well. You think Medicaid is run well?

And the cost of wars, recurring or not, count toward the defense budget. So yeah, I'm right, you're wrong.




I think we need an expansion of entitlements. Public healthcare, maybe even a minimum guaranteed income.

Then you're out of touch with reality. We were discussing budget not wars. So going forward. Cannot predict one time expenses going forward. I am right and you're wrong. You're also stupid but I am wasting my time explaining why giving stuff for free doesn't work.

Why do you think we need public health? Defend that statement. Bet you can't.

They aren't one time expenses. They are an ongoing part of the budget. Trump included OCO in his 2018 and 2019 proposals.

Why do we need public healthcare? Because people, in ******* America, die from preventable diseases because they can't afford insurance (or the cost of the care they need). And it's not just like...one crazy person a year.

Relatively young, otherwise able-bodied people, who work jobs and live normal lives die from **** like type 1 diabetes because they don't have insurance and can't afford insulin. It's insane.

People would die without food too. Should we open up the supermarkets and let people take what they want? LMAO.

Your argument is retarded. Like all your arguments.

That's why we have food stamps and welfare.

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 5:19:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/21/2018 5:03:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:11:00 PM (view original):

Posted by tangplay on 9/21/2018 3:09:00 PM (view original):

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 3:00:00 PM (view original):
You are always wrong bad luck and I would politely debate you if you agree to apologize for being such a D*CK before and answering my questions with questions. Which, you did.

If you cannot apologize then I'll continue to mock you personally. Because you suck.

Telling people to **** off and saying that they suck isn't mocking them. Saying that I am a paperboy and work in a dying industry? That stings.

Also it's funny that you are pretending to be a macho tough guy yet you censor yourself. And capitalize your insults. It's like you are a second grader who just learned these words and you emphasize them to prove how much of a big boy you are.

I told bad luck to F off no one else and he deserves it. You saw rs come at me and I was very polite to him. Sorry the truth hurts but you don't listen to a damn word I say you just continue to preach your crazy rhetoric. Tell how this. Tell me how that. Tell me what do to.

Google stuff yourself. We are running a deficit, We need to cut costs. Entitlements are 66% of our mandatory spend. If you cannot figure out that we need to cut entitlements we need to discuss the Chiefs and Pats.

I am perfectly fine with discussing Chiefs and Pats. Josh Gordon, huh?

Need a deep threat to allow Gronk to work the seam and White to work the slot until PEdelman returns. Not sure how he'll work out if at all but the compensation was light. The Pats WRs are bleh w/o Edelman but with him they are much better.

There is no risk. Browns must have been desperate to only get a 7th for him.

Posted by cccp1014 on 9/21/2018 4:59:00 PM (view original):

Posted by bad_luck on 9/21/2018 4:56:00 PM (view original):

Posted by pennsylvania on 9/21/2018 4:45:00 PM (view original):
The quintessential response of the liberal - resort to label something as racism as a means of responding to the truth - knowing any such response would only expose their "argument" for what it is - irrational.

And then, you get to their other go-to response - redefine the argument with skewed facts - as it what, the it's R who are trying to protect certain people from brown people (is that the new term? are we moving away from African American, as we moved away from black, as we moved away from colored - even though their own organization refers to themselves as colored - SEE NAACP). HINT: the Dems are doing that by themselves by keeping the _____ (you fill in the new politically correct term) - uneducated, unemployed, dependant on gov't - until their genocide is completed -- SEE ABORTION STATISITICS!

The distinction being that the Dems have no problem using Budget expenses - and uncontrolled spending to facilitate their ends --

Parenthetically, tax cuts --- you equate that as being evil: HINT: that mindset presupposes that it's the gov't money to begin with and that gov't and gov't alone gets to decide the winners and losers. How's that concept working out in the USSR (ooops, they're out of business, Russia, China, Cuba, Venezuela, and every communistic, socialistic and dictatorship since the inception of gov't?

I'm not "resorting" to labeling you racist. I'm pointing out that you were CLEARLY referring to black people when you described the people in "every inner city" who are "to (sic) dumb to realize how dumb they are."

Seems pretty racist. Especially when you start looking around at groups of dumb poor people who continually vote against their best interests and see entire states. Kansas. Oklahoma. Kentucky. etc.

At least poor blacks in inner cities can point to centuries of racism and oppression causing generational entrenched poverty. Poor rural whites have no excuse. They're just dumb as ****.

LMAO. Bad Idiot strikes again. Its the Dems who were against the Civil War. Its the Dems who wanted to keep the blacks poor. Its the Dems who were pro planned parenthood so that fewer blacks could reproduce. But you just keep living in your fairy tale land. The GOP are mostly capitalists and like the color green. They could not care less how they get the green.

I cannot even do this anymore. Tang and bad luck are the epitome of stupidity in America.

Think back to what you know about the civil rights era. When you think of the people who were fighting to get blacks equal rights, end segregation, etc., do those people strike you as conservative or progressive?

When you think about the people who were fighting to stop those things and continue segregation, jim crow, etc., do those people strike you as conservative or progressive?