Trumpsters, please don't read this

[DOTR]

[There is no danger to blaming Trump for what a Democrat House passed. Whos going to question it?

I wonder why you guys don't have the balls to refute the piece written by the conservative in the article.
.

It is anti-Trump agit-prop.

We will grow out of the debt as a percentage of the national production, of which the deficit is not even 5% of the total.

That is not out of proportion and as the Wrodl REserve currency we don't have to pay it off as other countries keep up demand for the petrodollar.

Yes it is. These people are devious. To pretend like we should oppose Trump and vote for Democrats...because Trump didnt stop Democrat spending.
These people arent Americans.

 

[anotherlife]

This is still a lot better than what the stupid Europeans do to their children's future.

 

[DustyInfinity]

I'm not a financial expert, but it is common sense that the tax rate is irrelevant to the debt. Raising it would not cause a dent in the percentage of debt paid off. Without controlling spending, the only difference the tax rate makes is weather people are allowed to prosper, or forced into government programs. Cutting red tape, and letting people keep their wages is the best bet for people of all backgrounds. Whether or not you hate the military or farmers, it still does not make sense to make people dependent on government programs.

The tax rate is not relative to debt? So, in your household, income is not relative to debt?

That explains a lot.

Be honest. The mess is nothing like anyone's household. No matter how high you raise the tax rate, you will never gain ground on percentage of debt. The spending is so out of control that taxation is nothing more than punishment to working people. It would be great if it was as simple as more revenue fixing the problem, but it is not true. No matter how much the politicians claim will ever pay for what they promise. Telling people they need to give a higher percentage to an out of control government doesn't make sense. They will just waste our money faster. That is what they do.

 

[Indeependent]

The Conservative Review isn't playing along. Good for them. Anyone who brings up Trump's exploding debt and flagging economy are immediately mocked by his obedient Trumpsters, but fortunately there are still some Conservatives who are not willing to lie and spin for him.

But I know, I know. The Trumpsters don't care.

Trump can’t be both the president of growth and the president of debt

Earlier today, the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced that the economy had grown just 2.1 percent during the second quarter of this year (ending June 30). It also revised Q4 of 2018 down to just 1.1 percent, which now means that growth during the 12 months ending Q4 of 2018 was only 2.5 percent, not 3 percent as previously thought. This means that the U.S. economy has now gone 14 years without a year-over-year growth of 3 percent. It’s been 19 years since we’ve hit 4 percent, which was during 1997-2000.

While the numbers don’t portend a coming recession, it is highly unusual for us to go for 16 consecutive months with unemployment below 4 percent and 43 months below 5 percent, yet never attain 3 or 4 percent annual GDP growth. In fact, that has never happened before. During the late 1990s, the unemployment rate ranged from 5.3 percent to 3.9 percent – not even as good as today’s 3.7 percent – yet GDP growth was over 4 percent. Ditto for the late 1960s, when we saw years of 6 percent growth. During the mid 1980s, we saw this growth even with higher unemployment rates.

The debt is not just a problem for future generations in terms of a fiscal cost that will be borne by taxpayers. The exclusive focus on the future is what has fostered the Louis XV mentality of “after me, the deluge.” Let’s face it, we are a nation that doesn’t care about the future of our children. What is missing from the discussion is that the debt is permanently weighing down economic growth now.

Let’s peek into the numbers behind today’s topline GDP report. GDP comprises personal consumption expenditures, gross private domestic investment, government spending, and net exports. Seventy percent of the equation is consumption, and the robust 4.3 percent growth in consumption this quarter is a big part of what is keeping us even at 2.1 percent growth. This is not artificial and is good news. Consumption is a sign of a healthy job market, with more people earning money, as well as the tax cuts putting more cash in people’s pockets to spend. No matter whether our economy is fully free market or quasi-socialist, whenever there is more money in people’s pockets, these numbers will go up. We are now in a boom period, and the numbers are good.

But what else is propping up the number? Government spending! Gross government spending, which accounts for about 17.5 percent of the GDP pie, spiked 5 percent. Non-defense spending rose by 15.9 percent!
,

Conservatives?
You mean the neo-Cons like GW who opened our borders like Kamala Harris’s legs?

 

[Vandalshandle]

I'm not a financial expert, but it is common sense that the tax rate is irrelevant to the debt. Raising it would not cause a dent in the percentage of debt paid off. Without controlling spending, the only difference the tax rate makes is weather people are allowed to prosper, or forced into government programs. Cutting red tape, and letting people keep their wages is the best bet for people of all backgrounds. Whether or not you hate the military or farmers, it still does not make sense to make people dependent on government programs.

The tax rate is not relative to debt? So, in your household, income is not relative to debt?

That explains a lot.

Be honest. The mess is nothing like anyone's household. No matter how high you raise the tax rate, you will never gain ground on percentage of debt. The spending is so out of control that taxation is nothing more than punishment to working people. It would be great if it was as simple as more revenue fixing the problem, but it is not true. No matter how much the politicians claim will ever pay for what they promise. Telling people they need to give a higher percentage to an out of control government doesn't make sense. They will just waste our money faster. That is what they do.

Ok, so in spite of Trump's tax cut, spending has not been cut, and the deficit is higher than it was when he took office. I have to assume, based on your post, that that works for you.

Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

 

[DustyInfinity]

I'm fine with the tax cut, pissed off at the spending. The key word is SPENDING. A household can choose to live within its means. Voters just get screwed.

 

[toobfreak]

You're such an idiot.

The words of a person who has nothing intelligent to say, otherwise they would have said it. No further point reading you.

By the time Frank became chairman of that committee, the economy train had already come off the rails, it just hadn't crashed yet.

Pretty neat trick considering it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it. Bye.

Name one

Already did, bonehead. Learn to read. People shouldn't have to post everything twice just because you can't read it once.

 

[WheelieAddict]

The Conservative Review isn't playing along. Good for them. Anyone who brings up Trump's exploding debt and flagging economy are immediately mocked by his obedient Trumpsters, but fortunately there are still some Conservatives who are not willing to lie and spin for him.

But I know, I know. The Trumpsters don't care.

Trump can’t be both the president of growth and the president of debt

Earlier today, the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced that the economy had grown just 2.1 percent during the second quarter of this year (ending June 30). It also revised Q4 of 2018 down to just 1.1 percent, which now means that growth during the 12 months ending Q4 of 2018 was only 2.5 percent, not 3 percent as previously thought. This means that the U.S. economy has now gone 14 years without a year-over-year growth of 3 percent. It’s been 19 years since we’ve hit 4 percent, which was during 1997-2000.

While the numbers don’t portend a coming recession, it is highly unusual for us to go for 16 consecutive months with unemployment below 4 percent and 43 months below 5 percent, yet never attain 3 or 4 percent annual GDP growth. In fact, that has never happened before. During the late 1990s, the unemployment rate ranged from 5.3 percent to 3.9 percent – not even as good as today’s 3.7 percent – yet GDP growth was over 4 percent. Ditto for the late 1960s, when we saw years of 6 percent growth. During the mid 1980s, we saw this growth even with higher unemployment rates.

The debt is not just a problem for future generations in terms of a fiscal cost that will be borne by taxpayers. The exclusive focus on the future is what has fostered the Louis XV mentality of “after me, the deluge.” Let’s face it, we are a nation that doesn’t care about the future of our children. What is missing from the discussion is that the debt is permanently weighing down economic growth now.

Let’s peek into the numbers behind today’s topline GDP report. GDP comprises personal consumption expenditures, gross private domestic investment, government spending, and net exports. Seventy percent of the equation is consumption, and the robust 4.3 percent growth in consumption this quarter is a big part of what is keeping us even at 2.1 percent growth. This is not artificial and is good news. Consumption is a sign of a healthy job market, with more people earning money, as well as the tax cuts putting more cash in people’s pockets to spend. No matter whether our economy is fully free market or quasi-socialist, whenever there is more money in people’s pockets, these numbers will go up. We are now in a boom period, and the numbers are good.

But what else is propping up the number? Government spending! Gross government spending, which accounts for about 17.5 percent of the GDP pie, spiked 5 percent. Non-defense spending rose by 15.9 percent!
,

Thank you for this. Tax cut and increased spending. I've been told it will pay for itself, somehow.

 

[Mac1958]

You claim to be in the middle, but for the last two-three years you have slid further and further left.

Let's start by addressing this lie for what must be the three thousandth time: Line 2 of my sig - 2. >>> For the liars who pretend I claim to be a centrist/moderate/impartial/unbiased/fence-sitter: Come on Jake, man up, just this once.

Maybe I'll need to address that lie ANOTHER three thousand times, huh? Whaddaya think?

Out of context arguments, straw man arguments (like this one), and so much other nonsense.

I'm sure I'm wasting my time with the OP but in case anyone sensible wants to read this:

We Trump supporters know and care about the debt. We Trump supporters know and care about our children and grand children. Knowing and caring is WHY we vote for Trump. Is he perfect? No. Is he even a Conservative? No. Do we wish he was? Well, maybe, at least on fiscal issues. But at this point in time, fiscal issues are second to the crisis facing us RIGHT NOW.

Illegal immigration
Horrible treaties
Excessive idiotic regulation
Liberal Activist Judges
Destruction of our culture
Invasion from within
Loss of rights
Globalism

Things have gotten SO bad that fiscal issues need to be on the back burner. If the above aren't checked or eliminated, it won't matter what fiscal problems we leave for our descendants.

Trump is not perfect, no one says he is, but he's the best we have had and he's the man we need right now.

Precisely how is my posting a piece from Conservative Review an "out of context, straw man argument"? How is the first freakin' post in a thread "out of context"?

This piece is specifically about his handling of the economy and spending. Why are you trying to change the subject?

I know you agree with him on those other issues, and that's fine. This thread is pretty specific, and it's not about them.

But it sure has inspired a ton of anger and deflection, and I didn't write the piece. You guys should spend less time worrying about me and more time exposing yourselves to information outside the Trumpiverse and being intellectually honest.
.

It was a list of the things you are in the habit of doing. Two things: taking things out of context AND (but not necessarily together) strawman arguments. I have to explain that?

Let me also remind you that your OP states that Trump voters don’t care. Maybe that will clear up some of your confusion about my post. Read it again and all your questions quill be answered.

You didn't wrote the post BUT YOU POSTED IT, so you take the heat. That’s how it works. Grow up.

I can take the "heat" from Trumpsters, not to worry.

All I have to do is listen to talk radio, so I know what to expect.
.

 

[Mac1958]

The Conservative Review isn't playing along. Good for them. Anyone who brings up Trump's exploding debt and flagging economy are immediately mocked by his obedient Trumpsters, but fortunately there are still some Conservatives who are not willing to lie and spin for him.

But I know, I know. The Trumpsters don't care.

Trump can’t be both the president of growth and the president of debt

Earlier today, the Bureau of Economic Analysis announced that the economy had grown just 2.1 percent during the second quarter of this year (ending June 30). It also revised Q4 of 2018 down to just 1.1 percent, which now means that growth during the 12 months ending Q4 of 2018 was only 2.5 percent, not 3 percent as previously thought. This means that the U.S. economy has now gone 14 years without a year-over-year growth of 3 percent. It’s been 19 years since we’ve hit 4 percent, which was during 1997-2000.

While the numbers don’t portend a coming recession, it is highly unusual for us to go for 16 consecutive months with unemployment below 4 percent and 43 months below 5 percent, yet never attain 3 or 4 percent annual GDP growth. In fact, that has never happened before. During the late 1990s, the unemployment rate ranged from 5.3 percent to 3.9 percent – not even as good as today’s 3.7 percent – yet GDP growth was over 4 percent. Ditto for the late 1960s, when we saw years of 6 percent growth. During the mid 1980s, we saw this growth even with higher unemployment rates.

The debt is not just a problem for future generations in terms of a fiscal cost that will be borne by taxpayers. The exclusive focus on the future is what has fostered the Louis XV mentality of “after me, the deluge.” Let’s face it, we are a nation that doesn’t care about the future of our children. What is missing from the discussion is that the debt is permanently weighing down economic growth now.

Let’s peek into the numbers behind today’s topline GDP report. GDP comprises personal consumption expenditures, gross private domestic investment, government spending, and net exports. Seventy percent of the equation is consumption, and the robust 4.3 percent growth in consumption this quarter is a big part of what is keeping us even at 2.1 percent growth. This is not artificial and is good news. Consumption is a sign of a healthy job market, with more people earning money, as well as the tax cuts putting more cash in people’s pockets to spend. No matter whether our economy is fully free market or quasi-socialist, whenever there is more money in people’s pockets, these numbers will go up. We are now in a boom period, and the numbers are good.

But what else is propping up the number? Government spending! Gross government spending, which accounts for about 17.5 percent of the GDP pie, spiked 5 percent. Non-defense spending rose by 15.9 percent!
,

Your thread would have more credibility had you correctly pointed out the debt started to ramp up under W, but then went into hyperdrive under Obama. It is true that debt has continued to rise under Trump, but debt is like a supertanker. You don't just turn on a dime after many years of runaway spending and borrowing.

Credibility? All I did was post a factual piece from a conservative publication.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Glad you agree that gross government spending and massive debt is a problem for this country. I don't see where the economy is flagging, perhaps you could elaborate on that.

2.1% GDP growth is down. Higher GDP numbers have been revised down. 10 Year Treasury yields have dropped by about 30%. The market is expecting the Fed to drop rates to deal with weakness. I'd say that "a flagging economy" is a fair characterization.

Could we turn back up? Yes, here's hoping. Fed stimulus might help. But Trump is lying about this being the best US economy ever, and the Conservative Review has laid out a very good and detailed case. Trumpsters can call this fake news, they can go after me for posting it, but that's what they do when they don't like reality.
.

So, the prediction was 2.0%. It may be slight, but the number came in higher. Digging into the GDP you see strong consumer data. This is nothing but a bump in the road.

What we do NOT need is Federal Stimulus. We had 8 years of that and the inflation bill is still due on that mismanagement.

I noted you avoided the real question. What, besides defense, will you cut to reduce the obscene amount of spending that is driving deficits and continuing to pile on debt?

All you can do is decrease the amount of increases at this point.

I'm not the one screaming CUT SPENDING. Ask them, as they cheer and defend Trump as his INCREASES SPENDING.
.

 

[Mac1958]

The only one we mock are you cockroaches and fake news.

And more about me, thanks.

So you're saying that the Conservative Review is "fake news"?

Dang, you guys are tough!


.

I see you identify with the cockroaches, sanctimonious fence-sitter faggot Mac1958.

Mac has a goal...get the people who broke free of his system and voted for Trump back in line. It doesnt have to make sense because his party doesnt rely on voters with sense. There is no danger to blaming Trump for what a Democrat House passed. Whos going to question it?

I wonder why you guys don't have the balls to refute the piece written by the conservative in the article.

Okay, I'm just kidding.

I know why.
.

You don't know shit. All you do is post media bullshit. And you are a liar.

You're more than welcome to point out my lies.

I notice you haven't refuted the piece, coward.

Let me know about those lies, please.
.

 

[Mac1958]

Fake news from a liar.

I called it! "Fake news"!

This place is TOO EASY.


.

 

[Mac1958]

Cockroach sez wut, bitch?

That's one fine Trump-level response there.

What are you, twelve?
.

 

[Mac1958]

Well Mac & Cheese, I've heard you tell us 100 times now how wrong we all are, now I'm waiting for you to splain to us what is RIGHT. Splain the meltdown to us. Splain to us why Trump is to blame for the federal debt! I'm all ears!

"Why Trump is to blame for the federal debt"? Huh? $22 trillion? Who, anywhere, any time, has said that? Did you hear that one on talk radio? Holy crap.

Anyway, back to freakin' planet Earth -- I've explained the Meltdown many times. But I'll try to help. Go to post 125 in this thread (Hickenlooper blows it in CA, gets booed), read my 10 questions, do some research on each one, learn something, then report back to us on what you've learned. That will be a good start for you. Then we can also discuss how Clinton signed the bill to repeal Glass Steagall (which was a key factor) and how Democrats ignored some key signs and pretended they were shocked when the shit hit the fan. All true, as well. The Meltdown was a group effort.

Once we're done, you'll have a much better understanding of what happened. I'll then recommend a few things you can watch, including a couple of things I've found on YouTube that are helpful.

Or don't do any of that. I don't expect you to, and I don't care.
.

 

[gipper]

I'm not a financial expert, but it is common sense that the tax rate is irrelevant to the debt. Raising it would not cause a dent in the percentage of debt paid off. Without controlling spending, the only difference the tax rate makes is weather people are allowed to prosper, or forced into government programs. Cutting red tape, and letting people keep their wages is the best bet for people of all backgrounds. Whether or not you hate the military or farmers, it still does not make sense to make people dependent on government programs.

The tax rate is not relative to debt? So, in your household, income is not relative to debt?

That explains a lot.

Be honest. The mess is nothing like anyone's household. No matter how high you raise the tax rate, you will never gain ground on percentage of debt. The spending is so out of control that taxation is nothing more than punishment to working people. It would be great if it was as simple as more revenue fixing the problem, but it is not true. No matter how much the politicians claim will ever pay for what they promise. Telling people they need to give a higher percentage to an out of control government doesn't make sense. They will just waste our money faster. That is what they do.

Ok, so in spite of Trump's tax cut, spending has not been cut, and the deficit is higher than it was when he took office. I have to assume, based on your post, that that works for you.

Under Trump's watch, national debt tops $21 trillion for first time ever

If massive government spending grows an economy, then ours should have grown big time. Trump like his two asshole predecessors, is spending like a drunken sailor. The worthless criminals in Congress apparently love it too. What better way to garner big campaign donations, than to enrich their rich donors with taxpayer funds?

Of course, very little of that money benefits the poor and MC.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You mean the neo-Cons like GW who opened our borders like Kamala Harris’s legs?

Cant really open sumpin that is never really closed.

 

[Faun]

You're such an idiot.

The words of a person who has nothing intelligent to say, otherwise they would have said it. No further point reading you.

By the time Frank became chairman of that committee, the economy train had already come off the rails, it just hadn't crashed yet.

Pretty neat trick considering it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it. Bye.

Name one

Already did, bonehead. Learn to read. People shouldn't have to post everything twice just because you can't read it once.

View attachment 271505

No you didn't, ya poor loser. All you said was...

"it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it."​

... you didn't actually cite any bill. Which of course you can't since there was no such bill.

Don't you ever feel stupid for posting such nonsense?

 

[toobfreak]

You're such an idiot.

The words of a person who has nothing intelligent to say, otherwise they would have said it. No further point reading you.

By the time Frank became chairman of that committee, the economy train had already come off the rails, it just hadn't crashed yet.

Pretty neat trick considering it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it. Bye.

Name one

Already did, bonehead. Learn to read. People shouldn't have to post everything twice just because you can't read it once.

View attachment 271505

No you didn't, ya poor loser. All you said was...

"it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it."​

... you didn't actually cite any bill. Which of course you can't since there was no such bill.

Don't you ever feel stupid for posting such nonsense?

Look! My own personal Private Ass Licker and troll shows up one more time to show how deep inside his head I really am! He follows me around hoping I misspell a word or something so he can call me out on it and hopefully win at SOMETHING. BET ME, my little kumquat. BET ME that I didn't cite any bills!
Bet me under the terms that if I prove you wrong, that USMB bans you for 6 months. Show us you stand by your word. You said I didn't actually cite any bills. Let's see who is full of nonsense and ends up feeling stupid!

And no technicalities, no parsing words, no "it depends on what the meaning of is is." You said I didn't cite any bills, I say I did. I'll get a moderator on here and live by his decision! C'mon, little dewdrop, I'm waiting. Don't keep me waiting too long or I'll think of something better.

 

[toobfreak]

You're such an idiot.

The words of a person who has nothing intelligent to say, otherwise they would have said it. No further point reading you.

By the time Frank became chairman of that committee, the economy train had already come off the rails, it just hadn't crashed yet.

Pretty neat trick considering it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it. Bye.

Name one

Already did, bonehead. Learn to read. People shouldn't have to post everything twice just because you can't read it once.

View attachment 271505

No you didn't, ya poor loser. All you said was...

"it was Bawney's bills that derailed and crashed it."​

... you didn't actually cite any bill. Which of course you can't since there was no such bill.

Don't you ever feel stupid for posting such nonsense?

Look! My own personal Private Ass Licker and troll shows up one more time to show how deep inside his head I really am! He follows me around hoping I misspell a word or something so he can call me out on it and hopefully win at SOMETHING. BET ME, my little kumquat. BET ME that I didn't cite any bills!
Bet me under the terms that if I prove you wrong, that USMB bans you for 6 months. Show us you stand by your word. You said I didn't actually cite any bills. Let's see who is full of nonsense and ends up feeling stupid!

And no technicalities, no parsing words, no "it depends on what the meaning of is is." You said I didn't cite any bills, I say I did. I'll get a moderator on here and live by his decision! C'mon, little dewdrop, I'm waiting. Don't keep me waiting too long or I'll think of something better.

Looks like shitstain is going to stand me up.