U.S. Politics

[Fenwyr]

Why won't 15% cut it?

There was close to $16 trillion in earned income in the U.S last year. 15% of all earned income is about $2.4 trillion dollars. And that's just taxes on personal income, not corporate taxes or others, which would more than cover the ones making less than $40k and what's in our current budget.

Fair argument.  But I want 0 deficit.  I know you are a Reagan guy, but I want a balanced budget.  The flat tax could change every year for all I care.  It would give our vote real power.  You could vote for tax and spend republicans, or member when we had a surplus democrats.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Tommy]

Fair argument.  But I want 0 deficit.  I know you are a Reagan guy, but I want a balanced budget.  The flat tax could change every year for all I care.  It would give our vote real power.  You could vote for tax and spend republicans, or member when we had a surplus democrats.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I'd say both sides are pretty even when it comes to being a little spend-happy with the budget:
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

Why do you want a balanced budget anyway? Just curious. When a country has a deficit, they issue debt, which is the most liquid and safe debt in the world, and everyone buys the bonds. How exactly would your life change for the better if the next 4 years were completely balanced?

[Fenwyr]

And for the under 40 crowd, I grew up under MAD.  I was too young to see what Reagan was actually doing.

In retrospect, he used the cold war as a veil to transfer massive amounts of wealth to the already wealthy.  He did it by introducing deficit spending because 'the cold war'. 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Fenwyr]

I'd say both sides are pretty even when it comes to being a little spend-happy with the budget:
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

Why do you want a balanced budget anyway? Just curious. When a country has a deficit, they issue debt, which is the most liquid and safe debt in the world, and everyone buys the bonds. How exactly would your life change for the better if the next 4 years were completely balanced?

The middle class was a great place to be before the country decided freak it.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Fenwyr]

My life wouldn't change at all, and I don't have kids, but for some stupid reason I care about the future of this country.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Tommy]

And for the under 40 crowd, I grew up under MAD.  I was too young to see what Reagan was actually doing.

In retrospect, he used the cold war as a veil to transfer massive amounts of wealth to the already wealthy.  He did it by introducing deficit spending because 'the cold war'. 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

...but reduced poverty?



Yeah, rich people made money in the 80s and 90s. So what?

[Tommy]

My life wouldn't change at all, and I don't have kids, but for some stupid reason I care about the future of this country.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

But can you give me examples of how our future would be fucked unless we balance our budget every year?

[bojanglesman]

But can you give me examples of how our future would be fucked unless we balance our budget every year?

-You have to pay interest on the debt, which is more debt with no benefit.  If I bought some shoes on a credit card, I got shoes out of the debt.  When I start paying interest on the credit card, I start accruing debt with no benefit.

-At some point, our debt will be so high that our creditors will become leery that we will repay them.  Then interest rates go up.  More debt.  This isn't an issue now, but when will it be?

-This isn't a problem right now, and it's political suicide to try to tighten the belt of the country.  However, it will be a problem in the not-so-distant future if we don't at least reign it in some.  I'm not saying the US needs to reduce the debt to zero, but having the deficit getting worse every year will be a problem.

[Fenwyr]

...but reduced poverty?



Yeah, rich people made money in the 80s and 90s. So what?

I'm a numbers guy.  I can make a graph to show anything you want.  Hell, your side made graphs to show Obama hates poor people.

Let's rise above that.

It is absolutely clear and undeniable that Reagan introduced deficit spending, bloated our military to an unsustainable level, and was responsible for the largest wealth redistribution in the history of the world.

It is not working.  It never trickled down.  It has gone beyond politics.  Citizens United made that clear.  Our country is now owned by a handful of billionaires.

If you are OK with that, cool.  I hope you scavenge what you can and have a nice life.  I really do.

Some of us would prefer to not see this country continue as an oligarchy.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Tommy]

I'm a numbers guy.  I can make a graph to show anything you want.  Hell, your side made graphs to show Obama hates poor people.

Let's rise above that.

It is absolutely clear and undeniable that Reagan introduced deficit spending, bloated our military to an unsustainable level, and was responsible for the largest wealth redistribution in the history of the world.

It is not working.  It never trickled down.  It has gone beyond politics.  Citizens United made that clear.  Our country is now owned by a handful of billionaires.

If you are OK with that, cool.  I hope you scavenge what you can and have a nice life.  I really do.

Some of us would prefer to not see this country continue as an oligarchy.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Please stop using the term "trickle down", it belittles both of us and doesn't add anything of substance. It's just a talking point used by the other side who were against Reagan's policies.

You have to understand why Reagan did what he did. The 1970s were an absolute mess. The country was not doing well, and we were suffering from stagnant growth and inflation (not a good combo). After the oil crisis, unemployment shot up, but eventually moved down towards full employment by the late-80s. Progress. Investments poured into this country (remember that whole "The Japanese are taking over" thing?) and faith in the markets picked up. Progress. The rise in defense spending forced the USSR to basically bankrupt itself and implode, leaving us the lone world's Super Power. Progress. Innovation flourished, and so did startups because of increases in investments. Computers, all of that. Progress. By the end of Reagan's term we were on our way to becoming the lone economic and military super power, and we haven't looked back since.

Did the wealth distribute to levels that people like you would be happy with? It didn't, but the opportunity to take what you can get is there, and everything we've seen since the 80s are great examples. All the innovation, startups, wealth, everything.

[Fenwyr]

Please stop using the term "trickle down", it belittles both of us and doesn't add anything of substance. It's just a talking point used by the other side who were against Reagan's policies.

You have to understand why Reagan did what he did. The 1970s were an absolute mess. The country was not doing well, and we were suffering from stagnant growth and inflation (not a good combo). After the oil crisis, unemployment shot up, but eventually moved down towards full employment by the late-80s. Progress. Investments poured into this country (remember that whole "The Japanese are taking over" thing?) and faith in the markets picked up. Progress. The rise in defense spending forced the USSR to basically bankrupt itself and implode, leaving us the lone world's Super Power. Progress. Innovation flourished, and so did startups because of increases in investments. Computers, all of that. Progress. By the end of Reagan's term we were on our way to becoming the lone economic and military super power, and we haven't looked back since.

Did the wealth distribute to levels that people like you would be happy with? It didn't, but the opportunity to take what you can get is there, and everything we've seen since the 80s are great examples. All the innovation, startups, wealth, everything.

You started that by calling trickle down a talking point, then ended with take what you can?  Wow.  OK.

They are going to make a shitty sequal to your life starring Mila Kunis.

The world, not just the US, was coming out of a pretty fucked up time in the 70's.  You know, war and stuff.  We had a decent man as president, but he wasn't a war guy.  He got bounced and we got a guy that loved war, and apparently loved Saudi Arabian oil even more.  Not to mention he was slowly losing his mind.

He then abolished the concept of fiscal conservatism and created the national debt that tea party folks, who love him, want to get rid of.  I do too, but wtf?

He then set out to take as much money as he could from the middle class to create a ruling class, and told us all the while the money would trickle down.

His words, not mine.  It didn't happen, and here we are trying to clean up the mess.

Reagan republicans under 40 are the worst.  The revisionist history knows no bounds.  He was a fraud.  He was a B movie actor slowly succumbing to Alzheimer's.  He set the economy, and our country back a century.

It sucks when less than 30 years later, it's happening again.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

[Tommy]

You started that by calling trickle down a talking point, then ended with take what you can?  Wow.  OK.

They are going to make a shitty sequal to your life starring Mila Kunis.

The world, not just the US, was coming out of a pretty fucked up time in the 70's.  You know, war and stuff.  We had a decent man as president, but he wasn't a war guy.  He got bounced and we got a guy that loved war, and apparently loved Saudi Arabian oil even more.  Not to mention he was slowly losing his mind.

He then abolished the concept of fiscal conservatism and created the national debt that tea party folks, who love him, want to get rid of.  I do too, but wtf?

He then set out to take as much money as he could from the middle class to create a ruling class, and told us all the while the money would trickle down.

His words, not mine.  It didn't happen, and here we are trying to clean up the mess.

Reagan republicans under 40 are the worst.  The revisionist history knows no bounds.  He was a fraud.  He was a B movie actor slowly succumbing to Alzheimer's.  He set the economy, and our country back a century.

It sucks when less than 30 years later, it's happening again.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

K

[dcm1602]

You started that by calling trickle down a talking point, then ended with take what you can?  Wow.  OK.

They are going to make a shitty sequal to your life starring Mila Kunis.

The world, not just the US, was coming out of a pretty fucked up time in the 70's.  You know, war and stuff.  We had a decent man as president, but he wasn't a war guy.  He got bounced and we got a guy that loved war, and apparently loved Saudi Arabian oil even more.  Not to mention he was slowly losing his mind.

He then abolished the concept of fiscal conservatism and created the national debt that tea party folks, who love him, want to get rid of.  I do too, but wtf?

He then set out to take as much money as he could from the middle class to create a ruling class, and told us all the while the money would trickle down.

His words, not mine.  It didn't happen, and here we are trying to clean up the mess.

Reagan republicans under 40 are the worst.  The revisionist history knows no bounds.  He was a fraud.  He was a B movie actor slowly succumbing to Alzheimer's.  He set the economy, and our country back a century.

It sucks when less than 30 years later, it's happening again.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Im no historian and wont pretend to be even close to good at having a thorough understanding of the overwhelming majority of presidents and their accomplishments. But a quick google search and on many polls/rankings by both regular people and historians Reagan is frequently listed as one of the best presidents in the history of this country.

Now I realize that the American people are ignorant uneducated freaking morons who don't know anything and will gladly voice strong opinions on these matters (this applies equally to both sides of the political spectrum), but I have to imagine that presidential historians know at least a little bit about this stuff.

[Miamipuck]

Im no historian and wont pretend to be even close to good at having a thorough understanding of the overwhelming majority of presidents and their accomplishments. But a quick google search and on many polls/rankings by both regular people and historians Reagan is frequently listed as one of the best presidents in the history of this country.

Now I realize that the American people are ignorant uneducated freaking morons who don't know anything and will gladly voice strong opinions on these matters (this applies equally to both sides of the political spectrum), but I have to imagine that presidential historians know at least a little bit about this stuff.

Recency, although he's better than the last 5 douche bags we have had. He got lucky, he had Volker and the beginning of Greenspan. Interest rates went from the very high teens to mid single digits. That's a huge move in 8 years. That alone could cement his legacy.

[Fenwyr]

Im no historian and wont pretend to be even close to good at having a thorough understanding of the overwhelming majority of presidents and their accomplishments. But a quick google search and on many polls/rankings by both regular people and historians Reagan is frequently listed as one of the best presidents in the history of this country.

Now I realize that the American people are ignorant uneducated freaking morons who don't know anything and will gladly voice strong opinions on these matters (this applies equally to both sides of the political spectrum), but I have to imagine that presidential historians know at least a little bit about this stuff.

Reagan was not the worst president by any means, but even your simple google searches should give you something to understand why I do not care for him.

He gets a ton of credit for toppling the Soviet Union.  He was in the right place at the right time when Gorbachev came along.  He didn't screw it up.  Kuddos.

Meanwhile, he waged proxy wars in the middle east.  He trained and armed Bin Laden.  He went all in on Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Let's not even get started on Iran/Contra.  The man should have been impeached.

He created he who dies with the most toys wins.  Not the actual saying, but the mentality.

His wife started the war on drugs, which targeted black men smoking pot, while white business men were doing enough coke to fund the entire Escobar regime.  While he supported for profit prisons to keep the pot smokers in.

He changed regulations and tax policies to make the rich become ultra rich, and maybe he truly thought the extra revenue would go to the middle class.  History tells us how that worked out.  Unions crushed, right to work states, our middle class decimated.

The more I dig, the more I might have to alter the first line of this post.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk