Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Unlock unbeatable offers today. Shop here: https://amzn.to/4cEkqYs 🎁
Over analytical. Do you not understand that sometimes it is better to use the more common vernacular to lure readers into reading the OP? By the way did you vote on the poll? I have explained to you in many different ways what I deem a "crisis" to be. If you choose to remain as thick headed as you are, that's something you will have to reconcile on your own.
So you deny what I bolded above, but you had just confirmed exactly what I said in this exchange below:
Raising the debt limit is so the government can borrow more money instead of paying off the debt it has incurred
-Geaux
Your reply:
Hence the crisis.
Yes, a crisis of irresponsibility and self restraint. Your arrogance has become your argument.
That is not the debate. I was simply replying to misinformation that the Government is legally bound to pay Social Security.
According the the Democrat Congressman from Tennessee, they are not
-Geaux
If my eligibility to receive Social Security is supported by federal law, how can it not be a legal requirement of the federal government to pay my SS?
You would have to take that up with the Democrat lawmaker who was interviewed
-Geaux
Over analytical. Do you not understand that sometimes it is better to use the more common vernacular to lure readers into reading the OP? By the way did you vote on the poll? I have explained to you in many different ways what I deem a "crisis" to be. If you choose to remain as thick headed as you are, that's something you will have to reconcile on your own.
Maybe for clarity's sake, not to mention sanity's sake, you should tell us,
in plain English,
Are you fer it, or agin it?
Setting your snideness aside, an easy circumvention of the debt ceiling would be to abolish it. Have a balanced budget amendment added to the constitution. That if our debt reaches a certain level, automatic and severe cuts would be triggered across the board unless or until proper action is taken by Congress and The President. This Amendment would remain as is, and would require a Constitutional Convention to be changed.
So you deny what I bolded above, but you had just confirmed exactly what I said in this exchange below:
Raising the debt limit is so the government can borrow more money instead of paying off the debt it has incurred
-Geaux
Your reply:
Hence the crisis.
Yes, a crisis of irresponsibility and self restraint. Your arrogance has become your argument.
Ok, so based on your earlier claim that you cannot support anything that creates a crisis,
your position should be that any raising of the debt ceiling is unacceptable, and yet the only two choices in your poll both involve raising the debt ceiling.
If my eligibility to receive Social Security is supported by federal law, how can it not be a legal requirement of the federal government to pay my SS?
You would have to take that up with the Democrat lawmaker who was interviewed
-Geaux
So it's not your position.
Maybe for clarity's sake, not to mention sanity's sake, you should tell us,
in plain English,
Are you fer it, or agin it?
Setting your snideness aside, an easy circumvention of the debt ceiling would be to abolish it. Have a balanced budget amendment added to the constitution. That if our debt reaches a certain level, automatic and severe cuts would be triggered across the board unless or until proper action is taken by Congress and The President. This Amendment would remain as is, and would require a Constitutional Convention to be changed.
The big problem with what you just said is the word 'easy'. A balanced budget amendment would be anything but 'easy'.
Over analytical. Do you not understand that sometimes it is better to use the more common vernacular to lure readers into reading the OP? By the way did you vote on the poll? I have explained to you in many different ways what I deem a "crisis" to be. If you choose to remain as thick headed as you are, that's something you will have to reconcile on your own.
Maybe for clarity's sake, not to mention sanity's sake, you should tell us,
in plain English,
Are you fer it, or agin it?
Setting your snideness aside, .
Setting your snideness aside, an easy circumvention of the debt ceiling would be to abolish it. Have a balanced budget amendment added to the constitution. That if our debt reaches a certain level, automatic and severe cuts would be triggered across the board unless or until proper action is taken by Congress and The President. This Amendment would remain as is, and would require a Constitutional Convention to be changed.
The big problem with what you just said is the word 'easy'. A balanced budget amendment would be anything but 'easy'.
Uhh yeah it would. Stop spending. Keep the budget balanced. Ensure compliance through dire consequence. Or did simple mathematics suddenly become Quantum Physics for people like you?
Maybe for clarity's sake, not to mention sanity's sake, you should tell us,
in plain English,
Are you fer it, or agin it?
Setting your snideness aside, .
If you hold the exclusive rights to snideness on this board you should at least do the rest of us the courtesy of giving us permission to use them.
The big problem with what you just said is the word 'easy'. A balanced budget amendment would be anything but 'easy'.
Uhh yeah it would. Stop spending. Keep the budget balanced. Ensure compliance through dire consequence. Or did simple mathematics suddenly become Quantum Physics for people like you?
I should have said passing a balanced budget amendment would not be easy.
Rofl, I blew you away. Unlike you, I don't rely on left wing interpretations of history, or what is dubbed as "revisionist history." Have a seat, knucklehead. You have been denied.
Are you out of your mind? You just cited Wikipedia...and paraphrased it in your post. You have not blown me away.
In fact, I am pretty sure you did not read the link I cited for you. How could you know if it left wing interpretation.
"Or what is dubbed as "revisionist history"?" Man are you a word clown!
What do you know about Friedman? What country, besides this one, did he help fuck over? Do you have a clue? You have 10 seconds to answer.
Go!
Your link is left wing revisionist history. I will not dare pollute my mind with that nonsense. Milton Friedman is a Misesian economist. He is responsible for singlehandedly changing governmental views on economics across the world. His protege was none other than Thomas Sowell, who himself singlehandedly countered and destroyed the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Please.
Are you out of your mind? You just cited Wikipedia...and paraphrased it in your post. You have not blown me away.
In fact, I am pretty sure you did not read the link I cited for you. How could you know if it left wing interpretation.
"Or what is dubbed as "revisionist history"?" Man are you a word clown!
What do you know about Friedman? What country, besides this one, did he help fuck over? Do you have a clue? You have 10 seconds to answer.
Go!
Your link is left wing revisionist history. I will not dare pollute my mind with that nonsense. Milton Friedman is a Misesian economist. He is responsible for singlehandedly changing governmental views on economics across the world. His protege was none other than Thomas Sowell, who himself singlehandedly countered and destroyed the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Please.
Keynes has a good track record, does Milton Friedman? Chile? This country embargoed that country to economic death when it had an elected president. Later, the chilean miracle under a murderous dictator. Any other Friedman miracles or is it still theory? A couple good reads on the subject are "Shock Doctrine" and "Confessions of an economic hitman". .
Setting your snideness aside, .
If you hold the exclusive rights to snideness on this board you should at least do the rest of us the courtesy of giving us permission to use them.
Cry me a freaking river. I tried being reasonable with you. But you chose to critique the wording of my thread, throw strawmen, false dilemmas, genetic fallacies, red herrings and whatnot at me without even discussing the thread itself or voting on the poll. You are intellectually dishonest.
Are you out of your mind? You just cited Wikipedia...and paraphrased it in your post. You have not blown me away.
In fact, I am pretty sure you did not read the link I cited for you. How could you know if it left wing interpretation.
"Or what is dubbed as "revisionist history"?" Man are you a word clown!
What do you know about Friedman? What country, besides this one, did he help fuck over? Do you have a clue? You have 10 seconds to answer.
Go!
Your link is left wing revisionist history. I will not dare pollute my mind with that nonsense. Milton Friedman is a Misesian economist. He is responsible for singlehandedly changing governmental views on economics across the world. His protege was none other than Thomas Sowell, who himself singlehandedly countered and destroyed the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Please.
Keynes has a good track record, does Milton Friedman? Chile? This country embargoed that country to economic death when it had an elected president. Later, the chilean miracle under a murderous dictator. Any other Friedman miracles or is it still theory? A couple good reads on the subject are "Shock Doctrine" and "Confessions of an economic hitman". .
We have a huge spending problem - so cuts first
The right is so quick to toss this out but they never say that what they want to cut is NOT subsidies to big oil or our already hugely bloated military or any of the other things we really don't need.
Nope. What the right says is, take it from those have the least so we can build more tanks even though we will never even use the ones we have.
Nor do they admit how much Obama has already cut while the Rs are still voting to spend more AND fighting against paying for what they spend.
We have a huge spending problem - so cuts first
The right is so quick to toss this out but they never say that what they want to cut is NOT subsidies to big oil or our already hugely bloated military or any of the other things we really don't need.
Nope. What the right says is, take it from those have the least so we can build more tanks even though we will never even use the ones we have.
Nor do they admit how much Obama has already cut while the Rs are still voting to spend more AND fighting against paying for what they spend.
More lies from you. I want to cut EVERYTHING! Fire up the chainsaws and start slashing!
Your link is left wing revisionist history. I will not dare pollute my mind with that nonsense. Milton Friedman is a Misesian economist. He is responsible for singlehandedly changing governmental views on economics across the world. His protege was none other than Thomas Sowell, who himself singlehandedly countered and destroyed the Cloward-Piven strategy.
Please.
Keynes has a good track record, does Milton Friedman? Chile? This country embargoed that country to economic death when it had an elected president. Later, the chilean miracle under a murderous dictator. Any other Friedman miracles or is it still theory? A couple good reads on the subject are "Shock Doctrine" and "Confessions of an economic hitman". .
If Milton Friedman can successfully influence geo-economic philosophy, I'd say he does have a good track record. The Misesian economic model is superior to all.
You would have to take that up with the Democrat lawmaker who was interviewed
-Geaux
So it's not your position.
Clarify your question
-Geaux
