d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Democrat Division Megathread
Prev11213141516205Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Mar 18 2019 04:08pm
Quote (bogie160 @ 18 Mar 2019 22:17)
A majority of Americans want abortion restricted, oppose reparations, oppose affirmative action, support the police, and despise political correctness.

The war is between economic illiterates (Bernie, AOC) and fiscally responsible voters.


have you looked at the deficit lately? under a president who specifically ran on fiscal responsibility no less...

how people are still claiming that unironically is beyond me...
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Mar 18 2019 04:29pm
Quote (fender @ Mar 18 2019 03:08pm)
have you looked at the deficit lately? under a president who specifically ran on fiscal responsibility no less...

how people are still claiming that unironically is beyond me...


The Federal Debt was $19.9 trillion when Obama left office. It is currently $22 trillion. That's $2.1 trillion added. Trump has been in office for 2 years and 2 months. So he is averaging just shy of $1 Trillion added to the debt per year in office. That's not a good thing. However, assuming 8 years, that means he's going to add roughly $8 Trillion to the Federal Debt.

Obama added $9.3 Trillion to the Federal Debt. So as far as fiscal responsibility, while orange man is certainly bad, his predecessor was worse, at least so far.

Now, given the federal budget has been higher both years under Trump than it was under Obama, the only reason that the more excessive spending HASN'T been increasing the debt a greater amount is because more revenue is flowing in. But with tax cuts and cut regulations, where's that revenue coming from? Oh, that's right. 4 million new private sector jobs, as well as a trend of companies raising the minimum wage they will pay their employees to a more livable level (Walmart, Costco, Amazon are all prime examples). They ALL cited their reason for doing this as the tax cuts.

What AOC and Bernie want to do has nothing to do with sparking more jobs or wage increases. They want to stifle the private market, and make the public sector take it's place. They want to impose MORE corporate taxes, MORE personal taxes, MORE regulations to the point of wiping out entire industries, and somehow have faith that "it'll all work out".

We can all agree that the orange man needs to curb his spending habits. On the flipside, any time he tries to cut spending ANYWHERE, congress refuses to pass his budget. In fact, unless he INCREASES spending to social programs drastically, Congress refuses to pass his budget. Seems to me, maybe orange man has no real say in the budget at all, and you should be looking at the power of the purse, rather than the orange man.

Just a thought.
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Mar 18 2019 04:51pm
Quote (InsaneBobb @ 18 Mar 2019 23:29)
The Federal Debt was $19.9 trillion when Obama left office. It is currently $22 trillion. That's $2.1 trillion added. Trump has been in office for 2 years and 2 months. So he is averaging just shy of $1 Trillion added to the debt per year in office. That's not a good thing. However, assuming 8 years, that means he's going to add roughly $8 Trillion to the Federal Debt.

Obama added $9.3 Trillion to the Federal Debt. So as far as fiscal responsibility, while orange man is certainly bad, his predecessor was worse, at least so far.

Now, given the federal budget has been higher both years under Trump than it was under Obama, the only reason that the more excessive spending HASN'T been increasing the debt a greater amount is because more revenue is flowing in. But with tax cuts and cut regulations, where's that revenue coming from? Oh, that's right. 4 million new private sector jobs, as well as a trend of companies raising the minimum wage they will pay their employees to a more livable level (Walmart, Costco, Amazon are all prime examples). They ALL cited their reason for doing this as the tax cuts.

What AOC and Bernie want to do has nothing to do with sparking more jobs or wage increases. They want to stifle the private market, and make the public sector take it's place. They want to impose MORE corporate taxes, MORE personal taxes, MORE regulations to the point of wiping out entire industries, and somehow have faith that "it'll all work out".

We can all agree that the orange man needs to curb his spending habits. On the flipside, any time he tries to cut spending ANYWHERE, congress refuses to pass his budget. In fact, unless he INCREASES spending to social programs drastically, Congress refuses to pass his budget. Seems to me, maybe orange man has no real say in the budget at all, and you should be looking at the power of the purse, rather than the orange man.

Just a thought.


you're missing (at least) two crucial points in your little whataboutism there:

first of all, obama inherited a significantly worse economy than trump did (as most democrats following republican presidents do) and one of the worst financial crises in american history.
secondly, it is republicans who specifically make 'fiscal responsibility' a focus of their campaigns

also, let's not forget that while trump is injecting some short term sugar highs into the economy, he's simultaneously deregulating the very institutions that lead to the 2008 crisis, directly facilitating a new collapse, even though it might not happen during his term.

the point is, the incredibly hypocritical and simplistic fearmongering about taxes being economy killers (after trump's tax break for rich and corporations predictably failed to generate more revenue, like all the 3,481 trickle down attempts before) just does not cut it, at least for people who think about issues critically and draw valid comparisons with peer countries...
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Mar 18 2019 05:26pm
Quote (fender @ Mar 18 2019 03:51pm)
you're missing (at least) two crucial points in your little whataboutism there:

first of all, obama inherited a significantly worse economy than trump did (as most democrats following republican presidents do) and one of the worst financial crises in american history.
secondly, it is republicans who specifically make 'fiscal responsibility' a focus of their campaigns

also, let's not forget that while trump is injecting some short term sugar highs into the economy, he's simultaneously deregulating the very institutions that lead to the 2008 crisis, directly facilitating a new collapse, even though it might not happen during his term.

the point is, the incredibly hypocritical and simplistic fearmongering about taxes being economy killers (after trump's tax break for rich and corporations predictably failed to generate more revenue, like all the 3,481 trickle down attempts before) just does not cut it, at least for people who think about issues critically and draw valid comparisons with peer countries...


Everything you just said is and was false.

First, the financial crises of 2008 is alternatively referred to as either the housing or banking crisis/crash, and the auto crash. Bailouts were given to banks and auto industries, sure. However, the banks AND the auto industries had to pay back those bailouts. They were LOANS, not gifts. More was paid back by the banking sector alone than the total output of all loans. The loan repayment of the housing crash repaid more than all bailout incomes combined, by a severe margin. And the interest rates were insane. One example, Bank of America, took $45 Billion in loans, and repaid $116 Billion before their TARP repayments were complete. All repayments occurred while Obama was still president.

The economy was not "good" when Trump took over. It had gone from a slight uptick to nearly stagnant. It has since gone on to see record growth that was never even thinkable during the Bush or Obama years.

Further, none of the "deregulation is what caused the crash" shit is even close to accurate. The government policies that CAUSED the crash had to do with the government regulating that the banks HAD to extend loans to people who could not realistically be expected to repay those loans. The same regulation set up a couple of funds to insure that the banks wouldn't lose out if any of those loans were defaulted on. So you had people being extended loans they couldn't possibly repay, the banks HAD to hit quotas on how many of these loans they extended, and the government was guaranteeing that the banks wouldn't lose. Thus, the loans were what the banks thought of as "securities" aka guaranteed investments, and they traded them like stocks, and inflated a lot of their numbers to inhuman levels based on capital that didn't actually exist. Add in the managers of those funds being completely corrupt Clintonites who redirected a lot of the funding to unrelated shit... Bush tried to address this issue in 2005, and was called a racist for even bringing it up. Nowhere in his deregulation is Trump attempting to force banks to give out loans to people who don't qualify for them. It was REGULATION and corruption that caused the crash, not deregulation.

Taxes ARE an economy killer. The more you increase overhead to a company, the more they have to cut costs and/or increase prices to maintain a profit. Some of the costs companies face currently:
1. Local, state, and federal corporate taxes.
2. Local, state, and federal property taxes.
3. SSI match for all employees.
4. Unemployment Insurance for all employees (based on percentage of wage paid, up to a maximum amount).
5. Group health insurance plan matches for all employees.
6. Power bills. And if you think YOUR electric and natural gas bill is high after all the bullshit carbon taxes, just IMAGINE what it takes to light and heat/AC a Costco.
7. Employee wages.
8. Other more standard overhead.

Now the employees:
1. Local, State, and Federal Income taxes.
2. Local, State, and Federal Property taxes - If you rent, rather than own, the massive increases in property taxes and assessed property values are reflected directly in your insanely increased rent costs.
3. SSI tax.
4. FICA tax (medicaid/medicare/etc.).
5. Healthcare, which until Trump's executive order, was mandated, otherwise there was a tax for non-participation.
6. Power bills and transportation. Gas price is still pretty low. But where 15 years ago I was paying a combined $30 for natural gas + electricity per month, now my bill is in excess of $300/month due to all of the carbon taxes imposed at all levels of government.
7. Sales tax.
8. Hidden taxes (such as 70-90% of the cost of your pack of smokes)
9. More standard overhead.

The bottom line is that while the federal government is spending 21% of our GDP, and government at all levels account for just under 40% of our GDP, the government's contribution towards the GDP is less than 1/10th of 1%. The government doesn't actually generate any wealth for the nation. They spend it.

Now, overall, that's not a terrible thing. They exist to insure the safety of the citizens, the smooth flow of commerce, and that basic military infrastructure exists. The problem is, infrastructure has been allowed to slide, safety programs are going underfunded (where the fuck is the wall?), and the overwhelming majority of what's spent is going into social programs that rely on stealing from one person to give to another for no reason whatsoever.

The more reasonable way to deal with taxes, and the way to insure that taxation isn't a massive burden to the economy is to pick a tax type and stick with it. Tax property, or tax income, or tax whatever. However, think of it this way:
1. I purchase a house, using money that was already taxed.
2. I now have to pay property tax on that house every year as long as I own it, using money that was already taxed.
3. In order to furnish and make the house livable, I need to pay sales tax on all items in and for the house, using money that was already taxed.
4. In order to power my appliances and warm/cool my house, I need to pay for power that is extremely heavily taxed using a dishonest hidden tax, using money that was already taxed.
5. If I decide that all this taxation is too much, and decide to sell the house, especially if I've only been there a couple years, I'm not only going to be taxed on the sale, but if there's any profit to the sale, I may well get hit with a massive capital gains tax that insures I take a huge loss over the entire endeavor.

Nope, taxes don't hurt the economy, or the individuals that make up that economy. Not at all dude. Keep on keeping on, socialism forever. :D
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Mar 18 2019 05:46pm
Quote (InsaneBobb @ 19 Mar 2019 00:26)
Everything you just said is and was false.

First, the financial crises of 2008 is alternatively referred to as either the housing or banking crisis/crash, and the auto crash. Bailouts were given to banks and auto industries, sure. However, the banks AND the auto industries had to pay back those bailouts. They were LOANS, not gifts. More was paid back by the banking sector alone than the total output of all loans. The loan repayment of the housing crash repaid more than all bailout incomes combined, by a severe margin. And the interest rates were insane. One example, Bank of America, took $45 Billion in loans, and repaid $116 Billion before their TARP repayments were complete. All repayments occurred while Obama was still president.

The economy was not "good" when Trump took over. It had gone from a slight uptick to nearly stagnant. It has since gone on to see record growth that was never even thinkable during the Bush or Obama years.

Further, none of the "deregulation is what caused the crash" shit is even close to accurate. The government policies that CAUSED the crash had to do with the government regulating that the banks HAD to extend loans to people who could not realistically be expected to repay those loans. The same regulation set up a couple of funds to insure that the banks wouldn't lose out if any of those loans were defaulted on. So you had people being extended loans they couldn't possibly repay, the banks HAD to hit quotas on how many of these loans they extended, and the government was guaranteeing that the banks wouldn't lose. Thus, the loans were what the banks thought of as "securities" aka guaranteed investments, and they traded them like stocks, and inflated a lot of their numbers to inhuman levels based on capital that didn't actually exist. Add in the managers of those funds being completely corrupt Clintonites who redirected a lot of the funding to unrelated shit... Bush tried to address this issue in 2005, and was called a racist for even bringing it up. Nowhere in his deregulation is Trump attempting to force banks to give out loans to people who don't qualify for them. It was REGULATION and corruption that caused the crash, not deregulation.

Taxes ARE an economy killer. The more you increase overhead to a company, the more they have to cut costs and/or increase prices to maintain a profit. Some of the costs companies face currently:
1. Local, state, and federal corporate taxes.
2. Local, state, and federal property taxes.
3. SSI match for all employees.
4. Unemployment Insurance for all employees (based on percentage of wage paid, up to a maximum amount).
5. Group health insurance plan matches for all employees.
6. Power bills. And if you think YOUR electric and natural gas bill is high after all the bullshit carbon taxes, just IMAGINE what it takes to light and heat/AC a Costco.
7. Employee wages.
8. Other more standard overhead.

Now the employees:
1. Local, State, and Federal Income taxes.
2. Local, State, and Federal Property taxes - If you rent, rather than own, the massive increases in property taxes and assessed property values are reflected directly in your insanely increased rent costs.
3. SSI tax.
4. FICA tax (medicaid/medicare/etc.).
5. Healthcare, which until Trump's executive order, was mandated, otherwise there was a tax for non-participation.
6. Power bills and transportation. Gas price is still pretty low. But where 15 years ago I was paying a combined $30 for natural gas + electricity per month, now my bill is in excess of $300/month due to all of the carbon taxes imposed at all levels of government.
7. Sales tax.
8. Hidden taxes (such as 70-90% of the cost of your pack of smokes)
9. More standard overhead.

The bottom line is that while the federal government is spending 21% of our GDP, and government at all levels account for just under 40% of our GDP, the government's contribution towards the GDP is less than 1/10th of 1%. The government doesn't actually generate any wealth for the nation. They spend it.

Now, overall, that's not a terrible thing. They exist to insure the safety of the citizens, the smooth flow of commerce, and that basic military infrastructure exists. The problem is, infrastructure has been allowed to slide, safety programs are going underfunded (where the fuck is the wall?), and the overwhelming majority of what's spent is going into social programs that rely on stealing from one person to give to another for no reason whatsoever.

The more reasonable way to deal with taxes, and the way to insure that taxation isn't a massive burden to the economy is to pick a tax type and stick with it. Tax property, or tax income, or tax whatever. However, think of it this way:
1. I purchase a house, using money that was already taxed.
2. I now have to pay property tax on that house every year as long as I own it, using money that was already taxed.
3. In order to furnish and make the house livable, I need to pay sales tax on all items in and for the house, using money that was already taxed.
4. In order to power my appliances and warm/cool my house, I need to pay for power that is extremely heavily taxed using a dishonest hidden tax, using money that was already taxed.
5. If I decide that all this taxation is too much, and decide to sell the house, especially if I've only been there a couple years, I'm not only going to be taxed on the sale, but if there's any profit to the sale, I may well get hit with a massive capital gains tax that insures I take a huge loss over the entire endeavor.

Nope, taxes don't hurt the economy, or the individuals that make up that economy. Not at all dude. Keep on keeping on, socialism forever. :D


why is it every time a conservative is confronted with some undeniable basic truths about their simplistic talking points, they turn out to be history and fact deniers, inevitably resorting to the moronic 'everything i don't like is socialism, and socialism inevitably results in millions of dead people' narrative?

sure, enjoy your deficits, poverty rate, unaffordable healthcare and college education, unrivaled income inequality, and bailouts (socialising the losses is for some reason ok) of 'too big to fail' institutions...

meanwhile the most prosperous, healthy, happy, secure, and free countries in the world 'suffer' under what you propaganda victims falsely call 'socialism'...
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Mar 18 2019 05:58pm
Quote (fender @ 18 Mar 2019 19:46)
why is it every time a conservative is confronted with some undeniable basic truths about their simplistic talking points, they turn out to be history and fact deniers, inevitably resorting to the moronic 'everything i don't like is socialism, and socialism inevitably results in millions of dead people' narrative?

sure, enjoy your deficits, poverty rate, unaffordable healthcare and college education, unrivaled income inequality, and bailouts (socialising the losses is for some reason ok) of 'too big to fail' institutions...

meanwhile the most prosperous, healthy, happy, secure, and free countries in the world 'suffer' under what you propaganda victims falsely call 'socialism'...

fender aka heinrich von goebbels gets intellectually bamboozled by a bevy of facts and responds with an expected, long-winded rage reply that means “no u” instead of just typing “no u”
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Mar 18 2019 05:58pm
Quote (fender @ Mar 18 2019 04:46pm)
why is it every time a conservative is confronted with some undeniable basic truths about their simplistic talking points, they turn out to be history and fact deniers, inevitably resorting to the moronic 'everything i don't like is socialism, and socialism inevitably results in millions of dead people' narrative?

sure, enjoy your deficits, poverty rate, unaffordable healthcare and college education, unrivaled income inequality, and bailouts (socialising the losses is for some reason ok) of 'too big to fail' institutions...

meanwhile the most prosperous, healthy, happy, secure, and free countries in the world 'suffer' under what you propaganda victims falsely call 'socialism'...


You haven't presented any facts. You merely encourage the US to turn to Socialism to fix what socialist policies caused to fail.

Listening to you is about as smart as listening to a 2 year old in the toy aisle in Walmart. Few families and indeed, few nations can survive your brand of selfish nonsense.
Member
Posts: 30,165
Joined: Sep 10 2004
Gold: 0.00
Warn: 30%
Mar 18 2019 06:07pm
Quote (InsaneBobb @ 19 Mar 2019 00:58)
You haven't presented any facts. You merely encourage the US to turn to Socialism to fix what socialist policies caused to fail.

Listening to you is about as smart as listening to a 2 year old in the toy aisle in Walmart. Few families and indeed, few nations can survive your brand of selfish nonsense.


i'm sure the irony of that claim is lost on you, considering you probably regard regurgitating demonstrably false talking points as 'argument', but i got a good chuckle out of it.

your deficit, poverty rate, healthcare and college costs, income inequality, and socialised losses are FACTS - no matter how desperately you're trying to ignore them in favour of your corporate propaganda...
Member
Posts: 22,442
Joined: Mar 3 2007
Gold: 76.11
Mar 18 2019 06:19pm
Quote (Testiclese @ Mar 9 2019 09:44am)
Hold strong. The pissing match will burn out and we can move back to the original topic.


I wanted to believe.
Member
Posts: 21,486
Joined: Jul 21 2005
Gold: 438.40
Mar 18 2019 06:21pm
Quote (fender @ Mar 18 2019 05:07pm)
i'm sure the irony of that claim is lost on you, considering you probably regard regurgitating demonstrably false talking points as 'argument', but i got a good chuckle out of it.

your deficit, poverty rate, healthcare and college costs, income inequality, and socialised losses are FACTS - no matter how desperately you're trying to ignore them in favour of your corporate propaganda...


You cannot point to any fact I've listed that is "false" because unlike you, I have not needed to lie to appear relevant.

Even after I clearly explained to you that the bailouts were NOT a socialist policy, they were a LOAN and repayments FAR EXCEEDED the loan amounts, and the loans counted against the Bush deficit, and repayments were pure income that helped keep the Obama deficit low, you persist in bringing up your FALSE talking point, over and over.

Our healthcare costs are due to another socialist policy, that removes our citizens' ability to purchase our medicine from competing nations, and prevents qualified medical program applicants from going through the programs, due to hard limits on the programs themselves.

Income inequality? A person provides more value to society, they receive more money. There's no inequality there. Everyone has the same opportunity, aka laws do not favor any one person over another. A person can write a book, sell it in eformat on Amazon vs $0.99, sell 10 million copies and be a millionaire. There's nothing stopping anyone, from the lowest to the highest, of making as much income as they're capable of. Talk about a useless talking point.

College costs? They are government institutions. If costs in colleges are high, look to the government. That has nothing whatsoever to do with the private market. In fact, a lot of the demonized private colleges have much lower tuition fees, use standardized books that you can buy off amazon for a fraction of the cost, and host as many courses as is practical online soas to remove overhead costs and reduce student transportation costs.

Socialized costs? As in, costs from Social Programs? Um... Are you trying to make my point for me?

We do agree on our deficit though. The US deficit is unforgivably high. And based on what we currently spend, we could cut nearly 100% of our discretionary budget, which among other things would include our entire military and veterans spending, as well as education, transportation, etc. and STILL be running a deficit. How can you not know that it is MANDATORY SPENDING, which is all SOCIAL PROGRAMS plus the interest on the debt that makes up the majority of our spending? And every single one of those social programs that cause the overspending were introduced by socialist democrats? Jesus, you honestly don't know shit, do you?
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev11213141516205Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll