Trump and Evangelical religion pro's and con's. Should Religion even be involved in the election?

[Luckyone]

Pack a lunch.

Already eating it while enjoying laughing at your posts.

 

[TruthNotBS]

So, is our debt backed up by what they print or what they collect from working Americans?

If it's backed up by what they print why not print enough for all to stay home and relax?

Because you need production. If the US Federal Government were to deposit five million dollars in every American's checking account, no one would go to work the next day and prices would go through the roof. In other words, the economy would collapse. There would be no production. Let me explain to you how it works.

GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, is the total monetary value of all goods and services produced within a country's borders over a specific period, typically a year or a quarter. It serves as a broad measure of a nation's overall economic activity and production capacity. The US Federal Government's yearly budget shouldn't exceed our nation's GDP. The budget constraints of the US Federal Government is the nation's GDP - Production Capacity.

2024 GDP: 27 Trillion Dollars.

So if the US Federal Government has a budget of several trillion dollars yearly, it can cover the expense of those social programs that you are concerned about because you believe they rely on taxation. No they don't. When the US Federal Government allocates money for social services or infrastructural development, that contributes to the nation's production capacity or GDP. If more people are put to work, and are educated, housed, have access to healthcare, public transit..etc. it contributes to the nation's production capacity, expanding the US economy. Social services actually save money in the long-term, because without those services, a segment of society becomes seriously unstable, incurring a higher cost to the nation.

 

[Luckyone]

Because you need production. If the US Federal Government were to deposit five million dollars in every American's checking account, no one would go to work the next day and prices would go through the roof. In other words, the economy would collapse. There would be no production. Let me explain to you how it works.

GDP, or Gross Domestic Product, is the total monetary value of all goods and services produced within a country's borders over a specific period, typically a year or a quarter. It serves as a broad measure of a nation's overall economic activity and production capacity. The US Federal Government's yearly budget shouldn't exceed our nation's GDP. The budget constraints of the US Federal Government is the nation's GDP - Production Capacity.

2024 GDP: 27 Trillion Dollars.

So if the US Federal Government has a budget of several trillion dollars yearly, it can cover the expense of those social programs that you are concerned about because you believe they rely on taxation. No they don't. When the US Federal Government allocates money for social services or infrastructural development, that contributes to the nation's production capacity or GDP. If more people are put to work, and are educated, housed, have access to healthcare, public transit..etc. it contributes to the nation's production capacity, expanding the US economy. Social services actually save money in the lomg-term, because without those services, a segment of society becomes seriously unstable, incurring a higher cost to the nation.

It does seem that your intelligent and clear explanation of how it all works is falling on deaf ears and blind-by-choice eyes, or worse being the possibility of it falling on a mind that does not have the ability of understanding of how things work (meaning that person lives in a fantasy world).

I applaud you for continuing to try, but I think you are probably wasting your time explaining it to him.

 

[dblack]

The Democrats have the "desire" to help the poor and they use the government to do it.

Democrats have the desire to force someone else to help the poor.

 

[Luckyone]

Democrats have the desire to force someone else to help the poor.

Yes, they want the rich to pay their "fair" share. No one likes to be taken advantage of. Do you?

As Americans, we all need to contribute OUR fair share to the welfare of the nation. You think the rich should not have to?

If you feel otherwise, perhaps it is time for you to move out of the U.S. and go live here

 

[dblack]

You think the rich should not have to?

Nope. Didn't say that. Try again.

 

[Luckyone]

Nope. Didn't say that. Try again.

Well then explain this:

Buffett says he's still paying lower tax rate than his secretary

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Not a single Justice's decision was based on religion. They were all based on law.

No. That is absolutely not true.

The religious right consisting of militant Abrahamic Catholics and white evangelical Christian Abrahamic nationalists put Republican senators and presidents in power to appoint and seat supreme court justices. They have managed to get six militant Abrahamic Catholic justices on the Supreme Court to find such religion related decisions as the Dobbs decision that overturned Roe versus Wade.

There is no secular group in existence pushing the Supreme Court to interpret the constitution favorable to Catholic doctrine. That doctrine is that the sanctity of life begins at conception. The Supreme Court did not insist upon that determination, but they do allow states to deprive women of their rights to decide whether or not they recognize a life inside their body as made in the image of God at the moment of conception or not.

Without religion in politics through the Republican party, there would never have been an abortion ban in this country.