When Did Trump Make You A Keynesian?

[P@triot]

Only the Rich are Worth it, right wingers?

Is that your standard response every time you get caught lying? You just said the Republicans didn’t cut spending. I proved they did. President Trump also made huge cuts to the Department of Education.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

lol. But, officer, I have a second amendment right to keep and bear Arms. I merely need some money.

 

[danielpalos]

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?

a made up term. why are we in the Middle East?

The right wing prefers to use our exorbitantly expensive superpower, for "gunboat diplomacy", not the advancement of natural rights.

 

[danielpalos]

Only the Rich are Worth it, right wingers?

Is that your standard response every time you get caught lying? You just said the Republicans didn’t cut spending. I proved they did. President Trump also made huge cuts to the Department of Education.

if it were up to me; it would be held up in Court due to being an unConstitutional cut in Spending, when we have alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror that the right wing refuses to Pay for, with Wartime Tax Rates.

 

[P@triot]

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?

The most perfect (irrational, incoherent) response to my comment.

 

[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?

The most perfect (irrational, incoherent) response to my comment.

thank you; i am working on concentrates, now.

 

[g5000]

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”.

All right retard, you asked for it. Time to bury your dumb ass.

From this topic:

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.

My posts from weeks, months, and years past:

With the $1.4 trillion in spending cuts I have proposed, I have always said it could allow us to LOWER tax rates for EVERYONE and be used to pay down the debt. And when our debt is paid off, we can LOWER tax rates for EVERYONE even more.

I have posted that god knows how many times.

Actually I have been talking about tax cuts.

The opposite of "tax expenditures = higher tax rates, is "eliminating tax expenditures = lower tax rates for EVERYONE".

I've said that many hundreds of times on this forum.

If we stopped giving out tax breaks and subsidies, we could easily balance the budget and lower tax rates for everyone.

As for tax rates, we could significantly lower tax rates for EVERYONE if we banned tax expenditures.

But just try to get someone to give up their mortgage interest deduction or child tax credit which is paid for by someone else. They scream like the welfare queen they are.

See, with lower tax rates for everyone, they get to keep more of their own money, and no one is stealing from them through tax expenditures.

So simple even a retard can understand.

Oh, wait...

1. Lower the tax rates, broaden the tax base. We do this simply by eliminating tax expenditures. Tax expenditures are gifts to special interests that are paid for by higher tax rates on everyone and heavy borrowing. We are mortgaging our future so special interests can steal more money from us.

In that same post, I provide an example of how to reduce government spending, as well:

2. Increase the retirement age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward. We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors who established SS, we should be working longer. Common fricking sense.

These two things alone would give us such a ridiculous surplus, we could balance the budget, lower tax rates for EVERYONE, and pay down the debt. All at the same time.

And it would give us instant campaign finance reform. If we banned Congress from putting tax expenditures in the tax code, the special interests would lose the incentive to bribe Congressmen to do so. Again, common fricking sense.

We simply need to eliminate all tax expenditures. Then we can lower tax rates and still have a surplus to pay down the debt. Then, once the debt is paid back, we can lower tax rates on everyone even more.

Exemptions, deductions and credits have to be paid for by raising tax rates on everyone.

If you lower tax rates on everyone without removing the exemptions, deductions, and credits which required tax rates to be so high to begin with, then you are being evil and irresponsible. You are INCREASING THE DEBT.

I said I would use it to pay off the DEBT (not the deficit) AND TO LOWER EVERYONE's TAX RATES.

Then, when the debt is paid off, we can LOWER EVERYONE'S TAX RATES EVEN MORE.

There, can you see that now, willfully blind monkey?

Need more, retard? Because I can literally do this all day. It all depends on the size of the mountain you wish to be buried under.

If there is one thing about me, I have been totally consistent through the years about lowering tax rates, reducing spending, and eliminating the debt.


For anyone else reading this: Ladies and gentlemen, it has never failed that when one of these retards is confronted with their own stupidity and errors of their ways, they invariable come down with an extreme case of willful blindness. Watch and see.

 

[P@triot]

a made up term.

All terms are “made up”. Language is invented - not provided by nature.

why are we in the Middle East?

Simple answer: it is in our best interest to do so

Long answer: because Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda killed over 3,000 U.S. citizens on September 11, 2001. Because Saddam Hussein was a maniac who murdered and tortured people. Because Iran is a threat to global security (and a state sponsor of terrorism). There is more, but you won’t understand any of it anyway.

 

[P@triot]

All right retard, you asked for it. Time to bury your dumb ass.

I always find it a bit unnerving when G-string the queer talks about what he wants to do to my ass. But that being said, you just came across as an even bigger idiot because we were specifically talking about your initial post and none of that was stated in your initial post. None of it.

You just got caught lying again.

 

[g5000]

As I have explained many times, if you get rid of all these government gifts to all these special interests, you could substantially lower tax rates. And you get the extra bonus of everyone being on a level playing field. Entities which earn identical incomes would pay identical taxes.

It works if the reason you were able to cut tax rates is because you eliminated tax expenditures.

Our tax rates are as high as they are, and should be higher, because of tax expenditures.

Deductions are Other People's Money. Eliminate them, and you can lower everyone's tax rates.

Tax revenues are far more dependent on the strength of the economy than on tax rates. Especially since our tax code has $1.4 trillion of government giveaways hidden in it. The "lower tax rates = more revenue" bullshit propagandists are very careful not to ever mention this fact to their parroting rubes.

We could easily lower our tax rates for EVERYONE significantly if we eliminated all those bogus tax expenditures which are artificially transferring wealth UP the economic food chain.

We give away $1.2 TRILLION every year in tax expenditures. That's hardly a "small gain" if you eliminate all of them.

If we left tax rates the same, we would have an $800 billion surplus every year.

That's plenty of cash to lower tax rates significantly.

I can literally do this. All. Day.

 

[P@triot]

All right retard, you asked for it. Time to bury your dumb ass. From this topic:

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.

See? Pure big-government asshole. Not a single mention anywhere about cutting spending or restoring constitutional government. Just more “increase revenue by stealing more from the American people through eliminating the few tax deductions dollars they get”.

You’re a big government asshole to your core. Conservatives always talk about cutting spending, cutting taxes, and restoring constitutional government (which would rapidly achieve everything you’re claiming to want right now).

 

[g5000]

All right retard, you asked for it. Time to bury your dumb ass.

I always find it a bit unnerving when G-string the queer talks about what he wants to do to my ass. But that being said, you just came across as an even bigger idiot because we were specifically talking about your initial post and none of that was stated in your initial post. None of it.

You just got caught lying again.

You claimed I am a big government, big spending liberal.

You and your bullshit have just been buried. Do you need more punishment, bitch?

Ladies and gentlement, did I call it or what? Here comes that willful blindness. We will now see red herrings, moving of goalposts, and more just to cover up the fact his lie that I am a "big government asshole" has been obliterated.

 

[P@triot]

I can literally do this. All. Day.

God I hope that’s true! Because it will literally expose how stupid you are. All. Day.

 

[P@triot]

You claimed I am a big government, big spending liberal.

And I proved it. I also proved that you were lying about everything you stated.

You and your bullshit have just been buried. Do you need more punishment, bitch?

Yes! More “punishment”, please?

Ladies and gentlement, did I call it or what?

The answer to that question would be “or what”. Because you didn’t “call” anything. All you did was claim you made a statement in your initial post that you didn’t make. And then you got really triggered when I pointed it out and subsequently proved it.

 

[g5000]

Okay, the tard clearly craves to be buried under a bigger mountain.

I've already posted one example of how I would reduce spending. I will post it again, along with other posts I have made on this forum over the years.

1. Lower the tax rates, broaden the tax base. We do this simply by eliminating tax expenditures. Tax expenditures are gifts to special interests that are paid for by higher tax rates on everyone and heavy borrowing. We are mortgaging our future so special interests can steal more money from us.

2. Increase the retirement age to 70, and index to 9 percent of the population going forward. We are living DECADES longer than our ancestors who established SS, we should be working longer. Common fricking sense.

These two things alone would give us such a ridiculous surplus, we could balance the budget, lower tax rates for EVERYONE, and pay down the debt. All at the same time.

And it would give us instant campaign finance reform. If we banned Congress from putting tax expenditures in the tax code, the special interests would lose the incentive to bribe Congressmen to do so. Again, common fricking sense.

Well, in the case of health care, government is the problem. We need LESS government in health care. So the Right should be offering a solution to health care which involves less government. Instead, they offer NOTHING.

So to throw up one's hands and offer NOTHING means we will end up with the Democrats' Plan A. And then the Democrats' Plan B. And so on.

The more government has become involved in the health care market, the more expensive health care has become.

Meanwhile, despite cars getting more and more expensive, and thus auto repair getting more expensive, the cost of auto insurance has decreased.

You should be buying your health insurance the same way you buy your auto insurance.

We need LESS government in health insurance, not more!

Unlike all other insurance, the government is the biggest player in the health insurance market. Even worse, the government gets to write the rules which binds the hands of its private sector competitors.

That's the X factor driving up costs.

We need LESS government in health care. Not more. Definitely not more.

Unfortunately, what I would like to see and what will actually happen are wildly different, which sows confusion among the pseudocons whenever I have entered into topics about ObamaCare and health care reform.

They haven't caught on they have been sold down the river by the Republicans.

Here's the smart way to fix health care:

1. We should be buying our health insurance the same way we buy our home, auto, and life insurance. I should be able to pick up the phone and call any insurance company in the country and buy the insurance I want. This way, I have maximum leverage since I can hang up if I am not satisfied and call any one of a constellation of competitors, just like I do now with my home, auto, and life insurance.

2. We need to eliminate employer sponsored health insurance (ESHI). ESHI is one of the biggest drivers of increasing health care costs. Also, employees are completely hostage to their employer's insurance. There is no negotiation. It is a take it or leave it proposition from a single insurer. And if you lose your job, you lose your health insurance. And you don't get new insurance until you have been in your new job for up to six months. With my home, auto, and life insurance, I get bundle discounts and long term customer discounts.

We can easily disincentivize ESHI by eliminating the tax exemption we currently have for ESHI.

3. We need LESS government in health care, not more. The government is the biggest market entity in the health insurance market, and it gets to write the rules for its private sector competitors. This is not the case in the auto, home, and life insurance markets, where prices have been DROPPING.

4. The idiot liberals have demanded more and more government takeover of health care. When you concentrate power in one place, you make it easier to capture. The liberals have NEVER learned this lesson. In every aspect of our lives, they have continually repeated this insanity over and over and over and over. And then when that centralized power gets captured by corrupt special interests, the liberals demand we solve the problem with MORE government takeover.

Unbelievable.

The GOP should have put a plan on the table along these lines:

1. Raise the Medicare eligibility age to 70, and then index it to 9 percent of the population. We are living decades longer than our ancestors, we should be working longer.

2. Get government OUT of the healthcare business as much as possible. It is completely fucked up the government is in the healthcare business AND gets to write the rules affecting its private sector competitors.

3. Eliminate the tax exemption for employer-sponsored health insurance. Employer-sponsored health insurance bends the cost of healthcare up, and it should be discouraged as much as possible.


I should be buying my health insurance the same way I buy my auto, home, and life insurance. If I lose my job, I don't automatically lose my auto, home, or life insurance.

 

[g5000]

Now, fuckwit. Any more red herrings you wish to pull out of your ass?

 

[g5000]

The Way Forward: Raise The Retirement Age

Raising the retirement age to 70 would back the load down to 9 percent of the population, which is almost on par with 1965.

To get to the 6 percent load of 1935, we would have to raise the retirement age to 75.

When Social Security was enacted, you were not intended to live a long life of retirement on Social Security. Medicare and Social Security were intended as a support, not as a way of life.

We are living longer than our ancestors who gave us Social Security and Medicare. We should be working longer than they did. This is just plain common sense.



.

A single bill to raise the eligibility age to 70 would probably very nearly balance the budget without taking a single other action.

Combined with my plan to eliminate tax expenditures in the first in this series, it would be a very simple matter to be running surpluses that could eliminate our debt.

.

The Republican tax bill will add to our federal debt. This glaring truth causes the monkeys to slap their hands over their eyes. "We no care bout debt any more!"

Because of PayGo, these deficits caused by the tax bill will have to be paid for by cutting spending on entitlement programs. You know, we have to tear those lazy, shiftless poor people away from their steak and champagne dinners and get them into the fields picking cotton.

But here's a better, saner idea to save our national treasury: Raise the Social Security and Medicare eligibility ages to 70, and index them to 9 percent of the US population.

We are living longer, we should be working longer.

Common sense.

Alllllllllll daaaaaaaayyyyyyyy!

 

[g5000]

You see, the tards never present any ideas how to actually cut spending, and lower our debt.

I actually do. I have. Many, many times.

And now one of those tards just got his ass handed to him.

 

[g5000]

Fuckwit won't be able to produce any evidence I am a big government liberal. It is a totally fake bald assertion.

It is the epitome of irony and stupidity that these fuckwits think that just because I hate the big spending Trump that I must be a big spending liberal!

 

[danielpalos]

a made up term.

All terms are “made up”. Language is invented - not provided by nature.

why are we in the Middle East?

Simple answer: it is in our best interest to do so

Long answer: because Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda killed over 3,000 U.S. citizens on September 11, 2001. Because Saddam Hussein was a maniac who murdered and tortured people. Because Iran is a threat to global security (and a state sponsor of terrorism). There is more, but you won’t understand any of it anyway.

a vacuum of special pleading? Maybe a storyteller, telling a story may start there; but, History did not start there.