When Did Trump Make You A Keynesian?

[DustyInfinity]

What is wrong about what you say, though, is that you're looking at this from the government perspective only. You have an unstated premise which is that government spending is good and indicates a healthy economy. This is a non sequitur.

Wrong! Wrong wrong wrong wrong. I'm a fiscal conservative, dipshit.

You wasted an hour typing a wall of words and completely missed my point entirely.

Amazing.

Now go back and read all of my posts in this topic again. I will wait for your apology.

Nothing to apologize about. Maybe you should clarify your position rather than vaguely claim that I'm wrong. I said you were wrong, but I explained why.

No, you made up a lie. You made an ASSUMPTION without having read my posts, and then in your pointy head you decided your fantasy must be true.

"You have an unstated premise". Wow. You may have well have said, "I'm going to make up a story about you."

You are as wrong as an idiot can be.

I have a very long record on this forum, since I have arrived here, of being against big government and big spending. I have made very specific suggestions over the years how to shrink the government and balance the government. Unlike most of the dolts on this forum whose intellectual capacity is limited to "Freedom!" when it comes to the details of solving our nation's problems.


You, sir, are an idiot. Back to the drawing board for you.

No one is going to argue with that the debt is horrible or that republicans push up the debt. The problem I am having is you are wanting to draw more and more revenue out of people without addressing the real problem, which is spending. That amounts to supporting unlimited taxation. We are in debt, therefore people have no right to income. I can't subscribe to that. I appreciate your view on the debt and calling out both parties, and I also admire your search for a solution, but at some point the government is not entitled to take from its people to cover its ineptitude.

 

[P@triot]

I have a very long record on this forum, since I have arrived here, of being against big government and big spending.

 

[g5000]

What is wrong about what you say, though, is that you're looking at this from the government perspective only. You have an unstated premise which is that government spending is good and indicates a healthy economy. This is a non sequitur.

Wrong! Wrong wrong wrong wrong. I'm a fiscal conservative, dipshit.

You wasted an hour typing a wall of words and completely missed my point entirely.

Amazing.

Now go back and read all of my posts in this topic again. I will wait for your apology.

Nothing to apologize about. Maybe you should clarify your position rather than vaguely claim that I'm wrong. I said you were wrong, but I explained why.

No, you made up a lie. You made an ASSUMPTION without having read my posts, and then in your pointy head you decided your fantasy must be true.

"You have an unstated premise". Wow. You may have well have said, "I'm going to make up a story about you."

You are as wrong as an idiot can be.

I have a very long record on this forum, since I have arrived here, of being against big government and big spending. I have made very specific suggestions over the years how to shrink the government and balance the government. Unlike most of the dolts on this forum whose intellectual capacity is limited to "Freedom!" when it comes to the details of solving our nation's problems.


You, sir, are an idiot. Back to the drawing board for you.

No one is going to argue with that the debt is horrible or that republicans push up the debt. The problem I am having is you are wanting to draw more and more revenue out of people without addressing the real problem, which is spending. That amounts to supporting unlimited taxation. We are in debt, therefore people have no right to income. I can't subscribe to that. I appreciate your view on the debt and calling out both parties, and I also admire your search for a solution, but at some point the government is not entitled to take from its people to cover its ineptitude.

Nope. I do not want to "draw more and more revenue out of people".

Why don't you fools read this topic before making shit up about me?

Jesus H. Christ.

 

[P@triot]

I have a very long record on this forum, since I have arrived here, of being against big government and big spending.

You have a very long record of being an argumentative asshole and a big government progressive.

 

[g5000]

I am curious to know how a retard reads all my posts about wanting to eliminate tax expenditures so we can LOWER TAX RATES FOR EVERYONE AND PAY DOWN THE DEBT AND ACHIEVE A BALANCED BUDGET, and what they hear is, "I'm really into government spending a lot of money and drawing more and more money from the people."

How the FUCK does one get a fucking brain filter that fucking broken?

 

[P@triot]

Nope. I do not want to "draw more and more revenue out of people". Why don't you fools read this topic before making shit up about me? Jesus H. Christ.

There’s an old saying, G-string. If everyone in the room is an asshole, it’s probably you. Everyone read what you wrote. And then we destroyed you because you were completely wrong (as usual),

 

[P@triot]

I am curious to know how a retard reads all my posts about wanting to eliminate tax expenditures so we can LOWER TAX RATES FOR EVERYONE AND PAY DOWN THE DEBT AND ACHIEVE A BALANCED BUDGET, and what they hear is, "I'm really into government spending a lot of money and drawing more and more money from the people."

How the FUCK does one get a fucking brain filter that fucking broken?

Because your initial post says no such thing, you dill-hole. You can’t even follow your own conversations. No wonder you get so confused with other conversationsa.

 

[g5000]

Nope. I do not want to "draw more and more revenue out of people". Why don't you fools read this topic before making shit up about me? Jesus H. Christ.

There’s an old saying, G-string. If everyone in the room is an asshole, it’s probably you. Everyone read what you wrote. And then we destroyed you because you were completely wrong (as usual),

No, they clearly didn't read what I wrote, dipshit.

And not everyone has failed to grasp what I am about. Just you tards.

 

[g5000]

I am curious to know how a retard reads all my posts about wanting to eliminate tax expenditures so we can LOWER TAX RATES FOR EVERYONE AND PAY DOWN THE DEBT AND ACHIEVE A BALANCED BUDGET, and what they hear is, "I'm really into government spending a lot of money and drawing more and more money from the people."

How the FUCK does one get a fucking brain filter that fucking broken?

Because your initial post says no such thing, you dill-hole. You can’t even follow your own conversations. No wonder you get so confused with other conversationsa.

See, there you go. There's the problem. How many times have I said you tards don't read posts longer than a tweet? Because you just don't have the intellectual capacity or the necessary attention span.

This is from my OP: "Because while your pseudocon propagandists are crowing about revenues, they are counting on you not noticing that despite increased revenues, your party and your President are EXPLODING our deficits!"

Dumbass. Now explain how a tard like Jericho can read that and think I like big government spending.

And what part of "all my posts" do you not understand? How many times do I have to prove the tards here have not done that.

 

[g5000]

My fourth post in this topic:

Actually, every time we take advantage of a tax deduction, credit, or exemption we are helping run up the debt and tax rates. We are stealing from the pockets of other taxpayers and future taxpayers.

I've explained this at least a hundred times on this forum.

My fifth post:

I have made more posts about how to reduce the debt than any other subject on this forum.

That's a fact.

I've probably made THOUSANDS of posts about it.

So speak for yourself.

My sixth post:

Our national debt will be transferred down to future taxpayers.

You clearly know nothing about this subject and have never engaged a single moment's thought to it.

My seventh post:

Without changing spending by even a dime, we could balance the budget just by eliminating tax expenditures.

Not only balance the budget, we would have a surplus.

We could use that surplus to lower the debt and tax rates. Once the debt was paid down we could lower tax rates even more. For everyone.

Will one of you tards please explain how you read all that and decided I like big government and big spending.

This should be a real hoot.

 

[g5000]

If you look at my history on this forum, I have made more posts about reducing spending, the size of government, and reducing our debt more than all other posts combined.

If any of you tards wants to challenge me about being a big government, big spending kind of person, I will bury you. Easily. I have a metric ton of posts to prove you wrong.

You have nothing but your stupidity. It will be the most unbalanced match in forum history.

 

[P@triot]

I am curious to know how a retard reads all my posts about wanting to eliminate tax expenditures so we can LOWER TAX RATES FOR EVERYONE AND PAY DOWN THE DEBT AND ACHIEVE A BALANCED BUDGET, and what they hear is, "I'm really into government spending a lot of money and drawing more and more money from the people."

How the FUCK does one get a fucking brain filter that fucking broken?

Because your initial post says no such thing, you dill-hole. You can’t even follow your own conversations. No wonder you get so confused with other conversationsa.

See, there you go. There's the problem. How many times have I said you tards don't read posts longer than a tweet? Because you just don't have the intellectual capacity or the necessary attention span.

This is from my OP: "Because while your pseudocon propagandists are crowing about revenues, they are counting on you not noticing that despite increased revenues, your party and your President are EXPLODING our deficits!"

Uh... “exploding our deficits” doesn’t even remotely resemble the phrases “eliminate tax expenditures”, “lower tax rates for everyone”, “pay down the debt”, or “achieve balanced budget”. You just got caught lying and now you’re attempting to lie to cover up your lies.

 

[P@triot]

If any of you tards wants to challenge me about being a big government, big spending kind of person, I will bury you. Easily. I have a metric ton of posts to prove you wrong.

The problem is, you have a “metric ton” of illiteracy.

You actually say:

your party and your President are EXPLODING our deficits!

but you think that reads:

wanting to eliminate tax expenditures

You’re a walking “metric ton” of ignorance. No grasp of the English language.

 

[P@triot]

Without changing spending by even a dime, we could balance the budget just by eliminating tax expenditures.

Will one of you tards please explain how you read all that and decided I like big government and big spending. This should be a real hoot.

My pleasure, half-wit. Only a big government asshole advocates to eliminate tax deductions without first advocating for a low rate flat-tax. You want to keep taxes at the current brutal rates, yet eliminate the deductions that exist because the rates are so brutal.

And why? Because you’re a typical big government asshole leftist.

If you were a conservative, you would advocate for a 10% flat-tax across the board with 0 “expenditures”.

 

[danielpalos]

Our federal form of government is left wing, not right wing.

Uh...the U.S. Constitution is “right-wing”, sparky. Which is why you progressives hate it so much. Sure, you fascists have violated it and grown the federal government far beyond what it is legally permitted to be. But we still have a healthy portion of “right-wing” federal government (which is what has permitted the U.S. to survive - and even thrive at times - despite your failed left-wing policies).

It is left wing, not right wing.

The right wing has no respect for natural rights. Our federal Constitution, empowers the Person in regard to the State.

Your right wing, alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror, are examples of a complete lack of respect for natural rights.

The left is advocating for a fifteen dollar an hour minimum wage and unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed; to empower the individual market participant, in our market economy.

Capitalism is merely used to Punish, by the right wing.

 

[danielpalos]

I smoke two joints, and then I smoke to two more;

That explains everything. It’s a fact that marijuana kills brain cells. And most stoners are illiterate (which explains your inability to understand the U.S. Constitution).

in what way? it is the right wing that "seems to be suffering from it".

 

[danielpalos]

The right is considering spending cuts to social services,

As they should. Federal “social services” are 100% unconstitutional. And despite your deepest desires otherwise, you don’t have a constitutional right to mooch off of the rest of us.

no respect for natural rights, we get it; right wingers.

 

[danielpalos]

I would agree with you on tax cut economics, if it resulted in lowering spending. The right wing had a majority to pass tax cuts and spending cuts; which One happened, right wingers.

Once again we see stoner lying. Both happened. Congress (constitutionally) passed tax cuts, President Trump (constitutionally) cut spending.

House Republicans serve up Trump’s spending cuts

By the Numbers: President Trump’s 10 Biggest Proposed Cuts to U.S. Education, Ranked

Only the Rich are Worth it, right wingers?

Nearly every House Republican voted to support the roughly $15 billion in spending cuts, which target spare cash at a slew of domestic programs, ranging from children’s health insurance to public housing.

 

[P@triot]

Your right wing, alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror, are examples of a complete lack of respect for natural rights.

Wait...you think you have a “natural right” to commit crime?

 

[P@triot]

Your right wing, alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror, are examples of a complete lack of respect for natural rights.

Wait...you think you have a “natural right” to commit terror attacks?