Theme for 2020: MAKE THE WHITE HOUSE GREAT AGAIN

[8notes]

I think just about anyone could do a better job than the fat guy with the weird comb-over.

[dirtbanker]

I think just about anyone could do a better job than the fat guy with the weird comb-over.There you go thinking again...
Fat ugly Crooked Hillary Lost...
Trump WON!


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Taltarzac725]

I think just about anyone could do a better job than the fat guy with the weird comb-over.

Me too.

[maureenod]

I think just about anyone could do a better job than the fat guy with the weird comb-over.

How about that "tribute to trump" yesterday. Thought I was watching NK and Kim Jong Un. What a laughing stock that bunch was, especially Pence.

Trump just sucked it up, any normal person would be embarrassed.

[Rockyrd]

How about that "tribute to trump" yesterday. Thought I was watching NK and Kim Jong Un. What a laughing stock that bunch was, especially Pence.

Trump just sucked it up, any normal person would be embarrassed.

It is embarrasing...the entire thing.

Watching my own country being attacked by its own leader and using Fox as State News to keep it going (mostly totally inaccurate by the way......whack jobs Ingraham and Hannity were attacking NBC for NOT reporting a story that was on .....NBC) is depressing at best.

[billethkid]

How about that "tribute to trump" yesterday. Thought I was watching NK and Kim Jong Un. What a laughing stock that bunch was, especially Pence.

Trump just sucked it up, any normal person would be embarrassed.

Wow almost 12 months in and the sore loser syndrome is alive and well.
Maybe it was all the pre-election hype (BS!) that made it so much worse. You know the Clinton polls, winning by a landslide, the odds makers predicting a sure win by HUGE margins, the media with almost annointing adoration of the first female POTUS......ALL WRONG!!!!

Well get ready because the same formula will get Trump re-elected in 2020.

The democrats need to find a real down to earth candidate, that is not in the ranks of the establishment, just waiting their turn....because it is their turn....or another female....just because of being a democratic female...an outsider...a non-Washington trained, non lawyer educated person who can tell the likes of the Pelosi's and the Schummers to take a hike.....

You know......Trump-like.

[dirtbanker]

It is embarrasing...the entire thing.

Watching my own country being attacked by its own leader and using Fox as State News to keep it going (mostly totally inaccurate by the way......whack jobs Ingraham and Hannity were attacking NBC for NOT reporting a story that was on .....NBC) is depressing at best.It's not your own country...you didn't even vote.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Wiotte]

How about that "tribute to trump" yesterday. Thought I was watching NK and Kim Jong Un. What a laughing stock that bunch was, especially Pence.

Trump just sucked it up, any normal person would be embarrassed.



No one in that room was normal. If they were, they wouldn’t be there. Trump sat there, arms folded as if to repel the accolades being thrown at him because he knew he didn’t need them. He’s his own man, he needs for NOTHING. The peons in the room are there for his amusement only. He did it all himself.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Don Baldwin]

Wow almost 12 months in and the sore loser syndrome is alive and well.
Maybe it was all the pre-election hype (BS!) that made it so much worse. You know the Clinton polls, winning by a landslide, the odds makers predicting a sure win by HUGE margins, the media with almost annointing adoration of the first female POTUS......ALL WRONG!!!!

Well get ready because the same formula will get Trump re-elected in 2020.

The democrats need to find a real down to earth candidate, that is not in the ranks of the establishment, just waiting their turn....because it is their turn....or another female....just because of being a democratic female...an outsider...a non-Washington trained, non lawyer educated person who can tell the likes of the Pelosi's and the Schummers to take a hike.....

You know......Trump-like.

By design? make the Ds so sure of a win...that they get lazy...as is their nature...and many didn't bother to vote? Or...it didn't matter how many Ds voted for Hillary as they're mostly all located in the major cities of a few states that were going D anyway?

If you go county by county...Trump won handily.

Again...I'm stating facts and asking questions only...I hate BOTH the D and the R party. They're all corrupt.

No one in that room was normal. If they were, they wouldn’t be there. Trump sat there, arms folded as if to repel the accolades being thrown at him because he knew he didn’t need them. He’s his own man, he needs for NOTHING. The peons in the room are there for his amusement only. He did it all himself.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now maybe you understand the difference between an alpha male...and you?

[8notes]

Don Baldwin, why don't you just crawl back into your little hole. It must be difficult, being the kid on the block that everyone hated.

[Kenswing]

Don Baldwin, why don't you just crawl back into your little hole. It must be difficult, being the kid on the block that everyone hated.

Don’t like the message don’t shoot the messenger.

[Don Baldwin]

Don Baldwin, why don't you just crawl back into your little hole. It must be difficult, being the kid on the block that everyone hated.

Why don't you crawl OUT of your hole? The one you live in unaware of what surrounds you.

I don't know anything about that 8notes...tell me what your childhood was like growing up...projecting again?

Come on...be a man...if you disagree with any of my statements...lets here your rebuttal. And I'll rip you apart like ALL the rest.

We could settle ALL these "racial equality" arguments with one trip...to MLK Blvd...where the 99% live...where the REAL blacks live...not the "whites in black skin" you see on TV. Those are ACTORS. We could visit a black school and see for ourselves what a waste of time and money it is educating them.

Only a few % of blacks EVER amount to anything. Most just consume resources and make live miserable for others. They're the 99% and they live along MLK Blvd..,in the inner cities...where we FEAR to go.

[mellincf]

It is embarrasing...the entire thing.

Watching my own country being attacked by its own leader and using Fox as State News to keep it going (mostly totally inaccurate by the way......whack jobs Ingraham and Hannity were attacking NBC for NOT reporting a story that was on .....NBC) is depressing at best.

I am so happy to come on this forum and see like minded people!

[Don Baldwin]

Don’t like the message don’t shoot the messenger.

Thank you Ken...

When they have no defense...they shoot the messenger before he can deliver the message.

If it wasn't so serious...if we weren't at the cusp...the threshold...I wouldn't be so vocal. But we ARE at a precipice...America's population is 50:50 right now...50% white. We ARE sliding into an 80% ratio in 30 years IF we don't stop it.

Ethnic cleansing IS the ONLY solution or "America" dies...replaced by a Mexico II.

The media will CALL it a "bad thing" but it's the ONLY solution to save "white", safe, prosperous, productive, #1, America.

When we become 80% "them" we will no longer be "us". And that's a BAD thing.

[Taltarzac725]

I am so happy to come on this forum and see like minded people!

Me too. We need more people on here who Google political topics. Rather than just mouthing whatever alt-right loud mouths put up there.

Or not just repeating the Five's comments from Fox. Hosts | The Five | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-five/hosts)

[rubicon]

Wow a lot more of Joy Behar political analysis about the Trump Administration. Real deep and substantive subject matter here.
Nancy Pelosi would be proud:D

Like attorneys like to say if the facts are on your side argue the facts. if the law is on your side argue the law.

In progressive circles this tenet translates into " we got nothing so throw them a lot of bupkus" :D

Personal Best Regards:

[Allegiance]

Me too. We need more people on here who Google political topics. Rather than just mouthing whatever alt-right loud mouths put up there.

Or not just repeating the Five's comments from Fox. Hosts | The Five | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/the-five/hosts)There is a place for all wackjobs to be together.

Good Bless the internet.

The internet is also good place to find a job.

[8notes]

I am so happy to come on this forum and see like minded people!

Me too. There are more of us than you realize, and more every day coming in to the Villages, as the baby boomers retire.

[Rockyrd]

Wow a lot more of Joy Behar political analysis about the Trump Administration. Real deep and substantive subject matter here.
Nancy Pelosi would be proud:D

Like attorneys like to say if the facts are on your side argue the facts. if the law is on your side argue the law.

In progressive circles this tenet translates into " we got nothing so throw them a lot of bupkus" :D

Personal Best Regards:

You have a serious obsession with The View

[8notes]

Why don't you crawl OUT of your hole? The one you live in unaware of what surrounds you.

I don't know anything about that 8notes...tell me what your childhood was like growing up...projecting again?

Come on...be a man...if you disagree with any of my statements...lets here your rebuttal. And I'll rip you apart like ALL the rest.

We could settle ALL these "racial equality" arguments with one trip...to MLK Blvd...where the 99% live...where the REAL blacks live...not the "whites in black skin" you see on TV. Those are ACTORS. We could visit a black school and see for ourselves what a waste of time and money it is educating them.

Only a few % of blacks EVER amount to anything. Most just consume resources and make live miserable for others. They're the 99% and they live along MLK Blvd..,in the inner cities...where we FEAR to go.

:a20: Got under your skin?

[Wiotte]

By design? make the Ds so sure of a win...that they get lazy...as is their nature...and many didn't bother to vote? Or...it didn't matter how many Ds voted for Hillary as they're mostly all located in the major cities of a few states that were going D anyway?



If you go county by county...Trump won handily.



Again...I'm stating facts and asking questions only...I hate BOTH the D and the R party. They're all corrupt.







Now maybe you understand the difference between an alpha male...and you?



Don, you’re confused between an alpha male and an assh0le male. There is a difference. Trump is the latter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wiotte]

Don, you’re confused between an alpha male and an assh0le male. There is a difference. Trump is the latter.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



Just one example of how people feel about Trumps assh0leishness.

[url=http://www.newsweek.com/trump-*******-hes-our-*******-says-gop-congressman-656240

[8notes]

Trump's latest poll numbers are down even lower. The majority of the country hates him.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

I think just about anyone could do a better job than the fat guy with the weird comb-over.

Really? Economy booming. Unemployment rate the lowest in 50 years. 1.7 million jobs added. ISIS pretty much defeated.Supreme Court gets a good judge. Comcast making a commitment to spend $50 billion in new projects in the U.S. Several other companies raising the wages that they pay employees and bringing new operation to the U.S. 17 year high in consumer confidence. Reduce federal regulations by a substantial amount. Increased our oil supply. Reduced the number of illegal immigrants coming across our southern border by about 70%. Added 100 new immigration judges. Declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.

The list goes on and on, yet people don't think that he's doing a good job.

I honestly don't understand it. I guess some people prefer a thin, good-looking guy that speaks eloquently rather than a guy that actually accomplishes something.

[billethkid]

Really? Economy booming. Unemployment rate the lowest in 50 years. 1.7 million jobs added. ISIS pretty much defeated.Supreme Court gets a good judge. Comcast making a commitment to spend $50 billion in new projects in the U.S. Several other companies raising the wages that they pay employees and bringing new operation to the U.S. 17 year high in consumer confidence. Reduce federal regulations by a substantial amount. Increased our oil supply. Reduced the number of illegal immigrants coming across our southern border by about 70%. Added 100 new immigration judges. Declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.

The list goes on and on, yet people don't think that he's doing a good job.

I honestly don't understand it. I guess some people prefer a thin, good-looking guy that speaks eloquently rather than a guy that actually accomplishes something.

Anti-Trumpers are not allowed to acknowledge anything other than criticism, negative spin, when in doubt make it up venom.
Somehow someone in the party leadership has figured the more crap they spread makes the November election loss feel better. Some even think enough crap will get them back in the WH.
Just ask them the polls and odds makers and the media....they are already making predictions. One would think the November election results certainly might make
them a little suspicious of the accuracy....one would think!!

[Taltarzac725]

Poll: Most Americans believe sexual allegations against Trump - Axios (https://www.axios.com/poll-most-americans-believe-sexual-allegations-against-trump-2519407172.html)

This seems like Trump's character or lack of it. Wish they would actually really dig into this with objectivity.

[doughete]

Let's be more objective. Steel is booming, coal companies are on top again, we have new trade agreements, no company has moved operations to Mexico, wages are soaring, North Korea knows not to do anything to upset us, gas will be .99 soon, our international friends want to help us with world problems, no cabinet member has been convicted of a crime, the stature of peodeophiles has been lifted, taxes have been cut for the top 1%, cutting real estate and inheritance and the top tax rate did not benefit the president or the super wealthy who control the republican party.

[Rockyrd]

Let's be more objective. Steel is booming, coal companies are on top again, we have new trade agreements, no company has moved operations to Mexico, wages are soaring, North Korea knows not to do anything to upset us, gas will be .99 soon, our international friends want to help us with world problems, no cabinet member has been convicted of a crime, the stature of peodeophiles has been lifted, taxes have been cut for the top 1%, cutting real estate and inheritance and the top tax rate did not benefit the president or the super wealthy who control the republican party.

Not exactly sure where you get your news....BUT....YOU BETTER change your reading material to get truth.

Trump Promised to Protect Steel. Layoffs Are Coming Instead. - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/business/economy/trump-steel-industry-layoffs.html)

EU and Mexico fail to conclude political agreement on trade deal – EURACTIV.com (https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/eu-and-mexico-fail-to-conclude-political-agreement-on-trade-deal/)

Ford is moving a production plant to Mexico - Salon.com (https://www.salon.com/2017/12/08/ford-is-moving-a-production-plant-to-mexico/)

[dirtbanker]

Let's be more objective. Steel is booming, coal companies are on top again, we have new trade agreements, no company has moved operations to Mexico, wages are soaring, North Korea knows not to do anything to upset us, gas will be .99 soon, our international friends want to help us with world problems, no cabinet member has been convicted of a crime, the stature of peodeophiles has been lifted, taxes have been cut for the top 1%, cutting real estate and inheritance and the top tax rate did not benefit the president or the super wealthy who control the republican party.And you don't have your menstrual cycle anymore!!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[dirtbanker]

Not exactly sure where you get your news....BUT....YOU BETTER change your reading material to get truth.

Trump Promised to Protect Steel. Layoffs Are Coming Instead. - The New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/22/business/economy/trump-steel-industry-layoffs.html)

EU and Mexico fail to conclude political agreement on trade deal – EURACTIV.com (https://www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/news/eu-and-mexico-fail-to-conclude-political-agreement-on-trade-deal/)

Ford is moving a production plant to Mexico - Salon.com (https://www.salon.com/2017/12/08/ford-is-moving-a-production-plant-to-mexico/)

Come on Rockface...tell us who you voted for and what did they promise to do for this country to earn your vote?

That way we can "pine" over what GREAT things would have taken place so far...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[doughete]

Sorry, I know it's hard to tell truth from lies these days. My post was a sarcastic comment. I know I forgot other accomplishments in case anybody wants to add to the list. I'm sure his response when 500 Americans were shot in Las Vegas will prevent future mass shootings.

[dirtbanker]

Sorry, I know it's hard to tell truth from lies these days. My post was a sarcastic comment. I know I forgot other accomplishments in case anybody wants to add to the list. I'm sure his response when 500 Americans were shot in Las Vegas will prevent future mass shootings.They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Chi-Town]

Let's be more objective. Steel is booming, coal companies are on top again, we have new trade agreements, no company has moved operations to Mexico, wages are soaring, North Korea knows not to do anything to upset us, gas will be .99 soon, our international friends want to help us with world problems, no cabinet member has been convicted of a crime, the stature of peodeophiles has been lifted, taxes have been cut for the top 1%, cutting real estate and inheritance and the top tax rate did not benefit the president or the super wealthy who control the republican party.A sharp wit.......bigly appreciated.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[dirtbanker]

Sorry, I know it's hard to tell truth from lies these days.
You have probably felt that way ever since they claimed Crooked Hillary could not lose...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[dirtbanker]

I'm sure his response when 500 Americans were shot in Las Vegas will prevent future mass shootings.

Were they all American citizens?

Please give us an example of a response that will prevent a mass shooting...


Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[dirtbanker]

A sharp wit.......bigly appreciated.

Sent from my VS995 using TapatalkOh the "Good" Chi...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[doughete]

Good point, I don't know they were all Americans. Should we not count as victims non citizens. The answer to the second question is too easy. BAN MACHINE GUNS.

[dirtbanker]

Good point, I don't know they were all Americans. Should we not count as victims non citizens. The answer to the second question is too easy. BAN MACHINE GUNS.Your trying to put words in my mouth? I never said victims only count of they were American...I am just pointing out how you are inaccurate in your statement.

Did the shooter use a machine gun?
Might be a trick question....maybe you should investigate before answering.

Is there any way a guy could kill 500 people without a machine gun?

Maybe Chi can help you, after the props.1

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Kenswing]

Good point, I don't know they were all Americans. Should we not count as victims non citizens. The answer to the second question is too easy. BAN MACHINE GUNS.

Machine guns are banned, genius. If you don’t have a federal permit you have it illegally.

That being said, the gunman in Vegas didn’t have a machine gun.

[8notes]

Really? Economy booming. Unemployment rate the lowest in 50 years. 1.7 million jobs added. ISIS pretty much defeated.Supreme Court gets a good judge. Comcast making a commitment to spend $50 billion in new projects in the U.S. Several other companies raising the wages that they pay employees and bringing new operation to the U.S. 17 year high in consumer confidence. Reduce federal regulations by a substantial amount. Increased our oil supply. Reduced the number of illegal immigrants coming across our southern border by about 70%. Added 100 new immigration judges. Declared a Nationwide Public Health Emergency on opioids.

The list goes on and on, yet people don't think that he's doing a good job.

I honestly don't understand it. I guess some people prefer a thin, good-looking guy that speaks eloquently rather than a guy that actually accomplishes something.

The unemployment rate was reduced under Obama. The Trump administration has only maintained the figures. And I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are on. Increasing our oil supply by drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is just plain stupid. Spills and chronic oil leaks will ruin a pristine ecosystem. We should be focusing our priorities on alternative energy sources like electric and solar. As far as ISIS, you have been watching too much FOX news. The bulk of ISIS fighters, according to senior US military officials, were killed under the Obama administration, and Trump has only continued the Obama military operations. It is true all the tax breaks he is giving to industry are helping them. Of course these companies have been making enormous profits for years. Now they are making more profits, at the expense of our national debt. Wonderful. Yeah, Trump has really accomplished something. And half of what he brags about, are things that Obama accomplished, and he tries to take credit for. Shame on you if you don't do your homework and see him for the liar he really is. :(

[doughete]

Technically I think it's called a bump stock. To me if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a duck. The other obvious answer is to limit magazines to a reasonable number, let's say around 10. If he hd to pull the trigger for every shot and change clips after 10 shots I feel sure even gun enthusiasts would agree the death and wound toll would have been dramatically less because people would have time to run. Your question on non citizens got me thinking. I'm certain everything I written contains some errors. I also am certain if you apply that standard to Fox news your spend the rest of your life trying to count their misstatements.

[Bog99]

I think just about anyone could do a better job than the fat guy with the weird comb-over.

Fine President!

Best since Reagan and on the way to being better.

[doughete]

Regan buried this country in debt and was into dementia at the end of his term. That's a pretty low bar.

[8notes]

Regan buried this country in debt and was into dementia at the end of his term. That's a pretty low bar.

:BigApplause:

[Rockyrd]

Regan buried this country in debt and was into dementia at the end of his term. That's a pretty low bar.

If you are correct, this current President in one year is well under the bar, and continues to bury the bar by his attacking any American hero who disagrees with him.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Regan buried this country in debt and was into dementia at the end of his term. That's a pretty low bar.

Reagan did not bury the country in debt. The only way to get into debt is to spend more than you take in. The President cannot spend money. Only Congress can spend money and only Congress can create debt.

Revenues to the government increased after the Reagan tax cuts and the Congress as they are wont to do, spent more than the increases.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Technically I think it's called a bump stock. To me if walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's a duck. The other obvious answer is to limit magazines to a reasonable number, let's say around 10. If he hd to pull the trigger for every shot and change clips after 10 shots I feel sure even gun enthusiasts would agree the death and wound toll would have been dramatically less because people would have time to run. Your question on non citizens got me thinking. I'm certain everything I written contains some errors. I also am certain if you apply that standard to Fox news your spend the rest of your life trying to count their misstatements.

Regulating bump stocks to me is a no-brainer. Fully automatic weapons are highly regulated. They are very difficult and expensive to obtain. A bump stock makes a semi-automatic firearm perform as if it is fully automatic.

But I don't think that limiting the capacity of a magazine will slow down anyone very much. I can change magazines in about two seconds, maybe less.

I would be Ok with limiting the capacity of magazines as long as I can be guaranteed that no bad guys will have more rounds than I have.

[mellincf]

"they're the 99% and they live along MLK Blvd..,in the inner cities...where we FEAR to go."

Conservatives fear a lot of things. Blacks, Muslims, Mexicans, gays, transgenders, taking away their guns, immigrants, Jade Helm, the United Nations, a "War on Christmas" even Starbucks coffee cups.

Should we give all those scaredy cats a teddy bear for Christmas?

[AJ32162]

Regan buried this country in debt and was into dementia at the end of his term. That's a pretty low bar.

I think you mean President Reagan. Tip O'Neill and the Democrats buried the country in debt with their uncontrolled spending. O'Neill promised President Reagan spending cuts and never followed through. What a surprise...he was just another lying Democrat.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Good point, I don't know they were all Americans. Should we not count as victims non citizens. The answer to the second question is too easy. BAN MACHINE GUNS.

While they are not banned, machine guns, or more correctly, fully automatic firearms, are very highly regulated and as such are extremely difficult and expensive to obtain.

A fully automatic weapon was not used in Las Vegas. A device that makes a semi-automatic gun perform like and fully auto, called a bump stock, was used. I agree with either banning or applying the same regulations to bump stocks as fully automatic guns.

[AJ32162]

Machine guns are banned, genius. If you don’t have a federal permit you have it illegally.

That being said, the gunman in Vegas didn’t have a machine gun.

Liberals consider ANY firearm to be a 'machine gun'...a truly ignorant lot.

[mellincf]

I think you mean President Reagan. Tip O'Neill and the Democrats buried the country in debt with their uncontrolled spending. O'Neill promised President Reagan spending cuts and never followed through. What a surprise...he was just another lying Democrat.

Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, a 186 percent increase from the $998 billion debt.

US Debt by President: By Dollar and Percent (https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296)

[mellincf]

Liberals consider ANY firearm to be a 'machine gun'...a truly ignorant lot.

If the government ever "came after you"...your guns will be worthless, because they will use viruses.

And a person is 43 times more likely to be shot by a family member than an intruder when there is a gun in the house.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

The unemployment rate was reduced under Obama. The Trump administration has only maintained the figures. And I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are on. Increasing our oil supply by drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is just plain stupid. Spills and chronic oil leaks will ruin a pristine ecosystem. We should be focusing our priorities on alternative energy sources like electric and solar. As far as ISIS, you have been watching too much FOX news. The bulk of ISIS fighters, according to senior US military officials, were killed under the Obama administration, and Trump has only continued the Obama military operations. It is true all the tax breaks he is giving to industry are helping them. Of course these companies have been making enormous profits for years. Now they are making more profits, at the expense of our national debt. Wonderful. Yeah, Trump has really accomplished something. And half of what he brags about, are things that Obama accomplished, and he tries to take credit for. Shame on you if you don't do your homework and see him for the liar he really is. :(

The unemployment rate was 4.8 in January of 2017 and 4.1 in November of 2017. That's the lowest it's been in ten years.

How do companies make huge profits at the expense of our national debt? Do you understand that companies are taxed on their profits? If a company makes more money, the government gets more money.

The problem is not our companies being too successful. If anything the fact that they have been held back by high corporate taxes and excessive regulations have made them less profitable than they might have been. That means that the government received less money from them that they might have if they made more profits.

The problem is Congress always spends more money than it takes in. We have no law that limits the amount that they spend. the budget that is set forth at the beginning of the year is a joke. There is no law that says they must adhere to it. That is why we desperately need a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

[Allegiance]

Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, a 186 percent increase from the $998 billion debt.

US Debt by President: By Dollar and Percent (https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296)Yes spin the numbers, all you got is spin.

Obama's debt bought nothing except political gift giving.

Infrastructure deteriorated and Military diminished

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, a 186 percent increase from the $998 billion debt.

US Debt by President: By Dollar and Percent (https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296)

Interesting but the fact is that only Congress can create a deficit or debt. We tend to blame or give credit to whoever happens to be president at the time, but Congress is who has the pocketbook. The president can only spend the White House Budget.

During President Obama's two terms, more money was added to the debt than during the terms of all the other presidents combined. Take a look at who controlled Congress during those years.

[doughete]

I think Presidents have veto power over budgets. I don't know the answer as to whether or not the budget was passed over a veto but I'm guessing it wasn't. If it was he is blameless. He doubled the national debt. Giving a tax cur without cutting spending is heading in the same direction.

[AJ32162]

I think Presidents have veto power over budgets. I don't know the answer as to whether or not the budget was passed over a veto but I'm guessing it wasn't. If it was he is blameless. He doubled the national debt. Giving a tax cur without cutting spending is heading in the same direction.

"As there was a deal in 1983, there was a deal in 1982 — a budget deal. Democrats will tell you that Reagan teamed with O’Neill to raise taxes and save the day. For instance, President Obama has said, “If Ronald Reagan could compromise, why wouldn’t folks who idolize Ronald Reagan be willing to engage in those same kinds of compromises?” I’ll tell you what “folks” know, some of us: that O’Neill and the Democrats promised three dollars in spending cuts for every dollar in taxes raised. The taxes were raised, of course; the spending cuts never came. Reagan kicked himself, hard, for that deal."

Read more at: National Review (https://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/articles/336185/good-ol-tip)

[AJ32162]

If the government ever "came after you"...your guns will be worthless, because they will use viruses.

And a person is 43 times more likely to be shot by a family member than an intruder when there is a gun in the house.

Sounds like a paranoid delusion to me.:shrug:

[Don Baldwin]

Regan buried this country in debt and was into dementia at the end of his term. That's a pretty low bar.

Obama buried us...he added $10 trillion.

"they're the 99% and they live along MLK Blvd..,in the inner cities...where we FEAR to go."

Conservatives fear a lot of things. Blacks, Muslims, Mexicans, gays, transgenders, taking away their guns, immigrants, Jade Helm, the United Nations, a "War on Christmas" even Starbucks coffee cups.

Should we give all those scaredy cats a teddy bear for Christmas?

You combined fear and loathing...

"We" fear blacks...as do you. You won't wander down MLK Blvd at 1am either. We fear what some Muslims do: List of Islamic Terror Attacks (https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks/attacks.aspx?Yr=Last30) The Mexicans ARE breeding us out. They WILL be the majority in 30 years.

The others...are loathed...not feared.

The rest...whatever...you're the one obsessed with those.

Ronald Reagan: Added $1.86 trillion, a 186 percent increase from the $998 billion debt.

US Debt by President: By Dollar and Percent (https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296)

But nowhere NEAR the $10 trillion Obama added.

If the government ever "came after you"...your guns will be worthless, because they will use viruses.

And a person is 43 times more likely to be shot by a family member than an intruder when there is a gun in the house.

Yes they will...and you've been "primed" to be susceptible...the flu shots...sensitized you to the "killer strain" they've got developed. At least that's what some people say.

[8notes]

The unemployment rate was 4.8 in January of 2017 and 4.1 in November of 2017. That's the lowest it's been in ten years.

How do companies make huge profits at the expense of our national debt? Do you understand that companies are taxed on their profits? If a company makes more money, the government gets more money.

The problem is not our companies being too successful. If anything the fact that they have been held back by high corporate taxes and excessive regulations have made them less profitable than they might have been. That means that the government received less money from them that they might have if they made more profits.

The problem is Congress always spends more money than it takes in. We have no law that limits the amount that they spend. the budget that is set forth at the beginning of the year is a joke. There is no law that says they must adhere to it. That is why we desperately need a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

And apparently you don't grasp that all the economists that have reviewed this tax package say the huge tax cuts to the corporations and to the wealthy are adding to the debt. In simple terms, if a corporation makes a profit of $100 and pays 30% tax, the government will receive $30. If the corporation makes $125 in profit, and pays 20% tax, the government will receive $25.

Howard Schultz, executive chairman of Starbucks said: “If you talk about tax reform, which is in the news every minute of every day, this is not tax reform. This is fool’s gold.”

[8notes]

As usual, the Fox News watchers have it wrong. Obama's policies contributed 983 billion to the debt between 2009 and 2017. This was a result of increased military spending, The Affordable care act, tax cuts and the American Recovery and Reinvestment act which was created to stimulate the economy after the 2008 financial crisis. During Obama's terms, there was less federal income than usual. The recession and the Bush tax cuts reduced tax receipts. At the same time, the cost of Social Security, Medicare, and other mandatory programs continued to increase. The War on Terror, although technically over, was still being fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, hence increase in national debt. Trump's new set of tax cuts is expected to add over $1.46 trillion to the national debt. There is no justification for this cut. Thanks to Obama, there is almost full employment. The financial crisis was dealt with. This is a simple case of giving money to the wealthy, and increasing the national debt even more.

[Byte1]

As usual, the Fox News watchers have it wrong. Obama's policies contributed 983 billion to the debt between 2009 and 2017. This was a result of increased military spending, The Affordable care act, tax cuts and the American Recovery and Reinvestment act which was created to stimulate the economy after the 2008 financial crisis. During Obama's terms, there was less federal income than usual. The recession and the Bush tax cuts reduced tax receipts. At the same time, the cost of Social Security, Medicare, and other mandatory programs continued to increase. The War on Terror, although technically over, was still being fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, hence increase in national debt. Trump's new set of tax cuts is expected to add over $1.46 trillion to the national debt. There is no justification for this cut. Thanks to Obama, there is almost full employment. The financial crisis was dealt with. This is a simple case of giving money to the wealthy, and increasing the national debt even more.

So "Obama's policies" added ONLY ......... So, he did not mean it when he said the buck stops in the oval office? It was ALL congresses fault? OK, so Obama was just as inept and impotent as I have stated for the past 8 years.

Addressing the tax cuts and the estimate of adding 1.5 trillion to the national debt, you do know that is calculating a never increasing average GDP growth of about 1.5%, right? The CBO can only calculate based on known figures. The truth is that if the GDP growth averages 3%, there will be a surplus. So far, there has been a three month GDP growth of 3%.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

And apparently you don't grasp that all the economists that have reviewed this tax package say the huge tax cuts to the corporations and to the wealthy are adding to the debt. In simple terms, if a corporation makes a profit of $100 and pays 30% tax, the government will receive $30. If the corporation makes $125 in profit, and pays 20% tax, the government will receive $25.

Howard Schultz, executive chairman of Starbucks said: “If you talk about tax reform, which is in the news every minute of every day, this is not tax reform. This is fool’s gold.”

The problem is that you're looking at everything as a zero-sum game. If, because of reduction in corporate taxes, more corporations decide to do business in the United States, there will be a much larger base that will feed the government.

And not all economists are saying that the plan is bad.

Here's an interesting little piece from CBS news.

Senate GOP - Breaking news: CBS This Morning asked three... (https://www.facebook.com/SenateGOP/videos/10155877787919360/)

[Don Baldwin]

So "Obama's policies" added ONLY ......... So, he did not mean it when he said the buck stops in the oval office? It was ALL congresses fault? OK, so Obama was just as inept and impotent as I have stated for the past 8 years.

Addressing the tax cuts and the estimate of adding 1.5 trillion to the national debt, you do know that is calculating a never increasing average GDP growth of about 1.5%, right? The CBO can only calculate based on known figures. The truth is that if the GDP growth averages 3%, there will be a surplus. So far, there has been a three month GDP growth of 3%.

Obama added $10 TRILLION to the debt.

The CBO numbers are garbage. We'll borrow closer to $2 trillion a year with Trump.

We have NO choice but to borrow...there's no way to EVER pay it back...and we CAN'T/WON'T cut expenses.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

So "Obama's policies" added ONLY ......... So, he did not mean it when he said the buck stops in the oval office? It was ALL congresses fault? OK, so Obama was just as inept and impotent as I have stated for the past 8 years.

Addressing the tax cuts and the estimate of adding 1.5 trillion to the national debt, you do know that is calculating a never increasing average GDP growth of about 1.5%, right? The CBO can only calculate based on known figures. The truth is that if the GDP growth averages 3%, there will be a surplus. So far, there has been a three month GDP growth of 3%.

Exactly right. The CBO is a joke. Their numbers are usually wrong. I don't know why we even have them. They must view everything as a zero-sum game. No one looks at budgetary numbers like that.

But there will never be a surplus as long as Congress is free to spend whatever they want. Most spending these days has to do with bringing home the bacon in an effort to get re-elected. Members will agree to sign off on each other's pork, sometimes even across party lines.

There are only two things that will stop this lunacy. Number one, term limits for Congress and number two, a balanced budget amendment.

[8notes]

Obviously all the numbers are a joke unless you read it on Fox News or hear it from the fat guy with the bad combover . You people are hopelessly close-minded.

[Don Baldwin]

Obviously all the numbers are a joke unless you read it on Fox News or hear it from the fat guy with the bad combover . You people are hopelessly close-minded.

Obviously all the numbers are a joke unless you read it on CNN/NYT or hear it from the fat lady with the bad temper (Hillary for the slower among us) . You people are hopelessly close-minded.

There...fixed it for you. YOU are as closed minded as they are.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

As usual, the Fox News watchers have it wrong. Obama's policies contributed 983 billion to the debt between 2009 and 2017. This was a result of increased military spending, The Affordable care act, tax cuts and the American Recovery and Reinvestment act which was created to stimulate the economy after the 2008 financial crisis. During Obama's terms, there was less federal income than usual. The recession and the Bush tax cuts reduced tax receipts. At the same time, the cost of Social Security, Medicare, and other mandatory programs continued to increase. The War on Terror, although technically over, was still being fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, hence increase in national debt. Trump's new set of tax cuts is expected to add over $1.46 trillion to the national debt. There is no justification for this cut. Thanks to Obama, there is almost full employment. The financial crisis was dealt with. This is a simple case of giving money to the wealthy, and increasing the national debt even more.

There are three different ways to look at the debt increase during an administration and depending who's side you're on you'll either look at the most favorable or the most unfavorable. Like I said, even though we give the president blame or credit, debt comes from Congress spending more than they take in.

On January 20, 2009, when President Obama was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion. That's almost double.

That is very simply how much the debt rose during the Obama administration. How much of that he was responsible for is a matter of discussion. Even though Congress is responsible for all of the spending the president still to sign the bills. Now a lot of different factors come into play here. Does the same party hold the Congress and the White House? Were bills passed with a clear veto-proof majority?

You can make numbers look like whatever you want, but the fact is that the debt grew almost as much in the eight years of the Obama presidency than it did for the previous two hundred and forty years of the nation.

[mellincf]

Exactly right. The CBO is a joke. Their numbers are usually wrong. I don't know why we even have them. They must view everything as a zero-sum game. No one looks at budgetary numbers like that.

But there will never be a surplus as long as Congress is free to spend whatever they want. Most spending these days has to do with bringing home the bacon in an effort to get re-elected. Members will agree to sign off on each other's pork, sometimes even across party lines.

There are only two things that will stop this lunacy. Number one, term limits for Congress and number two, a balanced budget amendment

We have term limits. it's called "voting'.

And the only thing that will stop this lunacy is to relitigate the Supreme Court decision of Citizen's United, which gave corporations the power to shovel unlimited dark money into the pockets of politicians. And that decision, fyi, was from the conservative "hero" Scalia, and why Republicans were so desperate to keep the Court conservative that they held Scalia's position unfilled for over a year (in defiance of their Constitutionally mandated duty). Ginsberg said we now have "the best democracy money can buy."

Five years after Citizens United ruling, big money reigns - LA Times (http://beta.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-20150125-column.html)

[Don Baldwin]

We have term limits. it's called "voting'.

And the only thing that will stop this lunacy is to relitigate the Supreme Court decision of Citizen's United, which gave corporations the power to shovel unlimited dark money into the pockets of politicians. And that decision, fyi, was from the conservative "hero" Scalia, and why Republicans were so desperate to keep the Court conservative that they held Scalia's position unfilled for over a year (in defiance of their Constitutionally mandated duty).

Five years after Citizens United ruling, big money reigns - LA Times (http://beta.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-20150125-column.html)

Mellin...Citizens United was rulead as it was for ONE reason.

Presidential election now cost over a $ billion to run. You DON'T get that kind of money through $10 donations from the public. They NEED BIG MONEY donations and that's the way they get it.

They RIG the system for themselves,,,and then LIE to us about WHY.

Even welfare benefits them more than the poor. Sure...the poor eat...but Kraft and Tyson end up with the money as the poor spend it right away...using a JP Morgan EBT card. So, JP Morgan, Kraft and Tyson lobby for more welfare benefits.

That's how it works...government comes up with a "problem" and contracts out to "fix" it. The corporations CREATE the problem and then using the government get paid to fix the "problem" they created.

[doughete]

Question for those who support repealing the Obama Care Mandate. I understand it's limiting your freedoms to have to pay for insurance. But if you have income and don't want to pay for insurance don't you agree you should have to sign an agreement that if you get hit by a bus the ambulance will take you home put on your sofa and give you a bottle of aspirin and say good luck. Why, because if you go to the hospital and need a million dollars of care who pays for it? Everybody else who uses the hospital pays that bill. Seniors pay for medicare every month so why do they support a system that lets working people get subsidized care? When Fox News says heh seniors pay for the working people who want to party instead of paying for insurance why is this a good thing?

[dirtbanker]

Question for those who support repealing the Obama Care Mandate. I understand it's limiting your freedoms to have to pay for insurance. But if you have income and don't want to pay for insurance don't you agree you should have to sign an agreement that if you get hit by a bus the ambulance will take you home put on your sofa and give you a bottle of aspirin and say good luck. Why, because if you go to the hospital and need a million dollars of care who pays for it? Everybody else who uses the hospital pays that bill. Seniors pay for medicare every month so why do they support a system that lets working people get subsidized care? When Fox News says heh seniors pay for the working people who want to party instead of paying for insurance why is this a good thing?

You are a fvcking idiot...

If a person has income and they go to the hospital, THEY are on the hook for the hospitals bill. If they refuse to pay, the hospital will send it to collection and could pursue a court judgement to lien their assets to satisfy the bill. Just because a person does not want to pay for something, does not mean the government steps in and pays the bill - that would be ideal in a liberals world.

"Everybody else who uses the hospital" does not pay anyone else's bill. Most people have insurance, all insurance companies (including Obammacare, Medicaid, and medicare) have a pre negotiated rate per code (every illness or service required has a code assigned to it for billing purposes). People that have insurance would only be required to pay the deductible, if they have one. People that do not have insurance and have income or resources to pay the bill, are charged at full rate (not the cheaper pre negotiated rate the insurance companies have)...

FYI - The person that has income most likely pays property tax and a portion of that is going to fire / paramedic services. If they ride in the ambulance to the hospital they will in most cases receive a bill for that transport...even though the equipment and personnel were funded by their property tax money.

What working people get subsidized care funded by seniors?

You should stick to something your qualified at, like cleaning the house!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Don Baldwin]

Question for those who support repealing the Obama Care Mandate. I understand it's limiting your freedoms to have to pay for insurance. But if you have income and don't want to pay for insurance don't you agree you should have to sign an agreement that if you get hit by a bus the ambulance will take you home put on your sofa and give you a bottle of aspirin and say good luck. Why, because if you go to the hospital and need a million dollars of care who pays for it? Everybody else who uses the hospital pays that bill. Seniors pay for medicare every month so why do they support a system that lets working people get subsidized care? When Fox News says heh seniors pay for the working people who want to party instead of paying for insurance why is this a good thing?

Dougie...I'll give your ass some time to heal after dirt gave you a good f@cking...

I agree...if you're poor and have no insurance...they SHOULD just bring you home to die. WHY should everyone else pay for you to "get better" so you can leech some more?

[doughete]

Absolutely both parties deserve blame for spending money they don't have. It's the fundamental problem of any democracy. But if we are talking about accepting responsibility the buck stops with the president. It diminishes Reagan's accomplishments.

[doughete]

If you are talking about a 10K I will agree with you. If you are talking about 1 million it's called bankruptcy court.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

We have term limits. it's called "voting'.

And the only thing that will stop this lunacy is to relitigate the Supreme Court decision of Citizen's United, which gave corporations the power to shovel unlimited dark money into the pockets of politicians. And that decision, fyi, was from the conservative "hero" Scalia, and why Republicans were so desperate to keep the Court conservative that they held Scalia's position unfilled for over a year (in defiance of their Constitutionally mandated duty). Ginsberg said we now have "the best democracy money can buy."

Five years after Citizens United ruling, big money reigns - LA Times (http://beta.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-20150125-column.html)

You have to understand the games and trickery employed by members of Congress to get you to vote for them. Most people don't have the time nor inclination to follow every action taken by Congress. One of the biggest problems is that your Congressman and Senator will brag about all the money he takes hoke to your state or district. Since most people are only concerned about themselves and their neighborhood, they think that their guy is great. What most people don't see is all of the additional spending that is done so that your guy can bring home the bacon to you. What a lot of people also don't realize is that Congress tries to maximize their income by taking more and more from the states and then controlling how it is spent by mandates. Since they take out their costs, less money goes back to the states than if they just left it alone and let the states handle state issues.

Another great device is hearings and investigations which are not the job of Congress. These cost billions of dollars and rarely ever accomplish anything other than to get the member's names and faces on television.

Congress will do almost anything to avoid legislating, which it really their only job. Everytime that they vote on something, they risk alienating some of their constituency. Even when they do vote, those votes may be pre-approved by the party leadership. A prime example is this latest tax reform bill. Rep Peter King and a few others that live in states with high state taxes voted no on the bill. That was OK with the party leaders because they knew that if they voted for the bill it might hurt their re-election chances. They also knew that they had more than enough votes to pass it so those few votes weren't necessary.

The Senate had to such luxury every Republican had to be on board and if they weren't John McCain would have been wheeled in from his deathbed to vote.

Often a member will be able to vote for or against a bill in its initial stages which will save him from voting on the final bill.

It's all a game and a show. No one really can be sure about any of these people. The only thing that we really know about them is which party they belong to which gives you an idea if their basic philosophy somewhat aligns with yours.

Term limits by voting is a nice idea, but it's naive to think that it will work. The number one job of people in Congress is to get themselves re-elected. And they don't do it by doing the job they were sent to do.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

You are a fvcking idiot...

If a person has income and they go to the hospital, THEY are on the hook for the hospitals bill. If they refuse to pay, the hospital will send it to collection and could pursue a court judgement to lien their assets to satisfy the bill. Just because a person does not want to pay for something, does not mean the government steps in and pays the bill - that would be ideal in a liberals world.

"Everybody else who uses the hospital" does not pay anyone else's bill. Most people have insurance, all insurance companies (including Obammacare, Medicaid, and medicare) have a pre negotiated rate per code (every illness or service required has a code assigned to it for billing purposes). People that have insurance would only be required to pay the deductible, if they have one. People that do not have insurance and have income or resources to pay the bill, are charged at full rate (not the cheaper pre negotiated rate the insurance companies have)...

FYI - The person that has income most likely pays property tax and a portion of that is going to fire / paramedic services. If they ride in the ambulance to the hospital they will in most cases receive a bill for that transport...even though the equipment and personnel were funded by their property tax money.

What working people get subsidized care funded by seniors?

You should stick to something your qualified at, like cleaning the house!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

It's always such a good idea to start a discussion with this statement. You are a fvcking idiot...


It will help to solve so many problems.

[doughete]

Taxes don't hurt as bad as spending does. I agree congress says I give you this and people vote for them not thinking about who is going to pay. All politicians put a spin on everything. When we talk health care the dems will pull out a 5 year old with a rare genetic condition and the republicans will tell you all businesses are going under. The truth is in the middle and we need a health care system so we have to do some critical thinking. Primary rule is follow the money. In 8 years of Obama care the economy has rebounded, that's a fact. The republicans want to repeal it because of the Obama Care surcharge on upper incomes. I know because I pay it. If you want to make my insurance cheaper so yours can go up in cost vote republican and try to find the error in my logic (please don't give me a triad on what could of, would of, should of been done).

[Don Baldwin]

You have to understand the games and trickery employed by members of Congress to get you to vote for them. Most people don't have the time nor inclination to follow every action taken by Congress. One of the biggest problems is that your Congressman and Senator will brag about all the money he takes hoke to your state or district. Since most people are only concerned about themselves and their neighborhood, they think that their guy is great. What most people don't see is all of the additional spending that is done so that your guy can bring home the bacon to you. What a lot of people also don't realize is that Congress tries to maximize their income by taking more and more from the states and then controlling how it is spent by mandates. Since they take out their costs, less money goes back to the states than if they just left it alone and let the states handle state issues.

Another great device is hearings and investigations which are not the job of Congress. These cost billions of dollars and rarely ever accomplish anything other than to get the member's names and faces on television.

Congress will do almost anything to avoid legislating, which it really their only job. Everytime that they vote on something, they risk alienating some of their constituency. Even when they do vote, those votes may be pre-approved by the party leadership. A prime example is this latest tax reform bill. Rep Peter King and a few others that live in states with high state taxes voted no on the bill. That was OK with the party leaders because they knew that if they voted for the bill it might hurt their re-election chances. They also knew that they had more than enough votes to pass it so those few votes weren't necessary.

The Senate had to such luxury every Republican had to be on board and if they weren't John McCain would have been wheeled in from his deathbed to vote.

Often a member will be able to vote for or against a bill in its initial stages which will save him from voting on the final bill.

It's all a game and a show. No one really can be sure about any of these people. The only thing that we really know about them is which party they belong to which gives you an idea if their basic philosophy somewhat aligns with yours.

Term limits by voting is a nice idea, but it's naive to think that it will work. The number one job of people in Congress is to get themselves re-elected. And they don't do it by doing the job they were sent to do.

Yes...it is...it's distraction while they keep on stealing from the treasury.

Which GUARANTEES that they are corrupt crooks. EVERY one of them.

Their #1 job is "earning" for those who put them there. Taking form the treasury and giving it away...THAT is their #1 job. THAT is what will get them elected.

Many think the electronic voting machines are so crooked that "voting" doesn't even matter any more. Results are pre-programmed in and our vote means nothing...well it ALWAYS meant nothing when BOTH candidates are well vetted and corrupt. Telling you pick this one or that one...isn't really a choice.

It's always such a good idea to start a discussion with this statement.

It will help to solve so many problems.

ONLY if the f@cking idiot listens.

[dirtbanker]

It's always such a good idea to start a discussion with this statement.

It will help to solve so many problems.I call a spade a spade...
If you think you can reason with "Dumbette the top 4% earner", go for it. She is all over the place with her thoughts, reminds me of the Tithead on here.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[doughete]

Hey, I have little doubt the republicans will treat me well financially. If you want to think they are going to look after the lee well off I don't think I can change your opinions, but I would suggest you limber up and practice grabbing your ankles. It's coming.

[dirtbanker]

Hey, I have little doubt the republicans will treat me well financially. If you want to think they are going to look after the lee well off I don't think I can change your opinions, but I would suggest you limber up and practice grabbing your ankles. It's coming.

You seem to know a lot about getting ready to take it in the grit hole...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[Chi-Town]

You are a fvcking idiot...

If a person has income and they go to the hospital, THEY are on the hook for the hospitals bill. If they refuse to pay, the hospital will send it to collection and could pursue a court judgement to lien their assets to satisfy the bill. Just because a person does not want to pay for something, does not mean the government steps in and pays the bill - that would be ideal in a liberals world.

"Everybody else who uses the hospital" does not pay anyone else's bill. Most people have insurance, all insurance companies (including Obammacare, Medicaid, and medicare) have a pre negotiated rate per code (every illness or service required has a code assigned to it for billing purposes). People that have insurance would only be required to pay the deductible, if they have one. People that do not have insurance and have income or resources to pay the bill, are charged at full rate (not the cheaper pre negotiated rate the insurance companies have)...

FYI - The person that has income most likely pays property tax and a portion of that is going to fire / paramedic services. If they ride in the ambulance to the hospital they will in most cases receive a bill for that transport...even though the equipment and personnel were funded by their property tax money.

What working people get subsidized care funded by seniors?

You should stick to something your qualified at, like cleaning the house!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

You know Dirt, you need to work on your greetings and salutations. Obamacare is not an insurance company like a lot of people think. Medicaid never covers the full cost of a hospital stay and the hospitals have to wait months for any reimbursement. Private pay doesn't pay very well waiting for collection agencies and their fees and bankruptcy filings definitely affect accounts payable. And yes, DRGs are billing tools but collecting is a different story. And just like shrinkage raises prices in retail no pay or slow pay raises healthcare costs. They get passed along to those who pay.

Sent from my VS995 using Tapatalk

[8notes]

There are three different ways to look at the debt increase during an administration and depending who's side you're on you'll either look at the most favorable or the most unfavorable. Like I said, even though we give the president blame or credit, debt comes from Congress spending more than they take in.

On January 20, 2009, when President Obama was sworn in, the debt was $10.626 trillion. On January 20, 2017, when he left, it was $19.947 trillion. That's almost double.

That is very simply how much the debt rose during the Obama administration. How much of that he was responsible for is a matter of discussion. Even though Congress is responsible for all of the spending the president still to sign the bills. Now a lot of different factors come into play here. Does the same party hold the Congress and the White House? Were bills passed with a clear veto-proof majority?

You can make numbers look like whatever you want, but the fact is that the debt grew almost as much in the eight years of the Obama presidency than it did for the previous two hundred and forty years of the nation.

Debt is not a stand alone number. You have to look at it in relation to GDP i.e. the size of the economy, and whether there were major catastrophes, recession, war, etc. Two companies could each have debt of $100. If one country earns $1 million, the debt of $100 is nothing. If the other country earns $200, the $100 debt is a big deal. The President does not have control over all the debt. For example, Obama inherited war costs from Bush that went on for years. And an obstructionist republican congress didn't help either. Obama wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy which Congress wouldn't enact, which would have reduced the deficit. Nor did a recession help, the biggest one since the great Depression. That was huge - the recession caused a massive decline in government revenues, and that started a year before Obama took office. And of course, the recession caused extra expenditures such as unemployment insurance. And comparing debt from 240 years ago is not comparing apples with oranges, due to inflation. Lastly, had there not been a burst of spending under Bush, the budget surplus would have been available to help out during the recession. Instead, Bush used it to pay for the unpopular war. Remember "weapons of mass destruction"?

[Don Baldwin]

Debt is not a stand alone number. You have to look at it in relation to GDP i.e. the size of the economy, and whether there were major catastrophes, recession, war, etc. Two companies could each have debt of $100. If one country earns $1 million, the debt of $100 is nothing. If the other country earns $200, the $100 debt is a big deal. The President does not have control over all the debt. For example, Obama inherited war costs from Bush that went on for years. And an obstructionist republican congress didn't help either. Obama wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy which Congress wouldn't enact, which would have reduced the deficit. Nor did a recession help, the biggest one since the great Depression. That was huge - the recession caused a massive decline in government revenues, and that started a year before Obama took office. And of course, the recession caused extra expenditures such as unemployment insurance. And comparing debt from 240 years ago is not comparing apples with oranges, due to inflation. Lastly, had there not been a burst of spending under Bush, the budget surplus would have been available to help out during the recession. Instead, Bush used it to pay for the unpopular war. Remember "weapons of mass destruction"?

And if you add a third company that earns $75...that $100 debt is an even bigger deal. That 3rd company is the US.

We owe over $20 trillion...we spend over $4 trillion...but our income is less than $3 trillion. We're bankrupt.

November spending:

Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus/Deficit for November 2017

Total Outlays $347 Billion $4,164,000,000,000 ($4.2 trillion) for the year
Total Receipts $208 Billion $2,496,000,000,000 ($2.5 trillion) for the year
Deficit $139 Billion That's $1,668,000,000,000 ($1.6 trillion) for the year.

We borrowed 40% of what we spent. How long do you think that will last?

Monthly Treasury Statement (https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/current.htm)

[dirtbanker]

You know Dirt, you need to work on your greetings and salutations. Obamacare is not an insurance company....no pay or slow pay raises healthcare costs. They get passed along to those who pay.


You know Chi, I have no problem with greetings and salutations to people with sense. I do not waste the "nice" stuff on the hopeless.

I did not say Obammacare was insurance company, it is a government program that insurance companies provide coverage for the enrolled...big difference !?

Those costs do not get passed on to the government as Dumbete suggested. Those costs certainly do not get passed on to the insurance company (pre negotiated rates). Those costs get passed on to the very guy Dumbete was complaining about...the guy that decided he did not want to have healthcare.

I do wonder why you attempt to bolster these idiots, encouraging them to post their nonsense, and then they get fvcked by the rest of us on here...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

[8notes]

And if you add a third company that earns $75...that $100 debt is an even bigger deal. That 3rd company is the US.

We owe over $20 trillion...we spend over $4 trillion...but our income is less than $3 trillion. We're bankrupt.

November spending:

Receipts, Outlays, and Surplus/Deficit for November 2017

Total Outlays $347 Billion $4,164,000,000,000 ($4.2 trillion) for the year
Total Receipts $208 Billion $2,496,000,000,000 ($2.5 trillion) for the year
Deficit $139 Billion That's $1,668,000,000,000 ($1.6 trillion) for the year.

We borrowed 40% of what we spent. How long do you think that will last?

Monthly Treasury Statement (https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/current.htm)

So true.

[doughete]

The wife asked me last month how I could be so stupid. I asked if after 39 years she just now catching on who is the slow one. Yes without insurance you are on the hook but when you owe a million dollars the answer is called bankruptcy. Medical debt is the leading reason for bankruptcy. The loss does not go to the federal budget but it goes to everybody else who uses the hospital. You pay for medicare you are paying for those who would rather buy a new boat over paying for health insurance. You need insurance ro drive a car why shouldn't you have to be financially responsible regarding health care. The reason republicans tell you Obamacare is so terrible is they don't want to pay the Obama care surcharge. I know I pay it. That's what they are really trying to eliminate. I am pretty slow if there is a fault in my logic I'm listening.

[Golf View]

:pepper2:Don Baldwin, why don't you just crawl back into your little hole. It must be difficult, being the kid on the block that everyone hated.

You speak for yourself & your libtard friends, Mr Baldwin is right on target with his posts. I have yet to see anyone dispute the facts he presents, instead they resort to name calling. Typical of you people. Merry Christmas, Make America Great Again.

[dirtbanker]

The wife asked me last month how I could be so stupid. I asked if after 39 years she just now catching on who is the slow one.
You are so special, you have been calling your wife stupid for the last 39 years and just now she is questioning who is stupid. So, are you saying she is so dumb that she did not know you were dumber OR are you saying she was so dumb she started to think you are dumb?...Lets see if the liberals on here attack you for that sexist statement...don't worry they aren't bright enough to understand it...


Yes without insurance you are on the hook but when you owe a million dollars the answer is called bankruptcy. Medical debt is the leading reason for bankruptcy. The loss does not go to the federal budget but it goes to everybody else who uses the hospital.
The biggest reason for bankruptcy is poor management of finances and a risk tolerance that does not correlate with their earning ability. And NO the debt is not passed on to everyone that uses the hospital, only those that do not have coverage (the ones that do have insurance have pre negotiated rates).

You pay for medicare you are paying for those who would rather buy a new boat over paying for health insurance. You need insurance ro drive a car why shouldn't you have to be financially responsible regarding health care.
Please expand on the claim that Medicare rates are paying for someone's healthcare that does not have insurance...The difference between the requirement to have auto insurance is because when you are in an accident, other peoples property (cars, homes, etc) could be damaged, other people could end up with injuries as a result of the accident...healthcare coverage only covers the person that took it out, and if someone has gallbladder stones other people are at no risk of injury due to this illness.


The reason republicans tell you Obamacare is so terrible is they don't want to pay the Obama care surcharge. I know I pay it. That's what they are really trying to eliminate. I am pretty slow if there is a fault in my logic I'm listening.
The reason this Republican tells you Obammacare sucks is; I am 54 year old male with no health issues and my healthcare went from $750 a month to $1350 a month over the last 3 years. The reason is; I now am paying more for some other unknown person, who does not make enough money to afford healthcare themselves (like the wackadoodle that has been unemployed for the last 18 years)...

And no, you are not listening...

[Allegiance]

Debt is not a stand alone number. You have to look at it in relation to GDP i.e. the size of the economy, and whether there were major catastrophes, recession, war, etc. Two companies could each have debt of $100. If one country earns $1 million, the debt of $100 is nothing. If the other country earns $200, the $100 debt is a big deal. The President does not have control over all the debt. For example, Obama inherited war costs from Bush that went on for years. And an obstructionist republican congress didn't help either. Obama wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy which Congress wouldn't enact, which would have reduced the deficit. Nor did a recession help, the biggest one since the great Depression. That was huge - the recession caused a massive decline in government revenues, and that started a year before Obama took office. And of course, the recession caused extra expenditures such as unemployment insurance. And comparing debt from 240 years ago is not comparing apples with oranges, due to inflation. Lastly, had there not been a burst of spending under Bush, the budget surplus would have been available to help out during the recession. Instead, Bush used it to pay for the unpopular war. Remember "weapons of mass destruction"?You mean like the assets the presidents owns in relationship to the very little debt he has?

[ColdNoMore]

You mean like the assets the presidents owns in relationship to the very little debt he has?
:1rotfl:


As if you know. :oops:

And before you start showing your ignorance further, the IRS audit is simply looking to ensure that the numbers are being put in the right boxes...NOT how much debt he has or where he received the money from.

I realize that you're one of the dumbest Trump cultists on here (albeit, it's a close contest :D), but even you should know there's a reason...Trump is petrified to let anyone see his tax returns.

I personally think it's because Putin loaned him a massive amount of money to keep him out of bankruptcy and that Chump has yet to pay it back...which is why Trump acts like Putin's little bitch. :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

[doughete]

You are so special, you have been calling your wife stupid for the last 39 years and just now she is questioning who is stupid. So, are you saying she is so dumb that she did not know you were dumber OR are you saying she was so dumb she started to think you are dumb?...Lets see if the liberals on here attack you for that sexist statement...don't worry they aren't bright enough to understand it...


The biggest reason for bankruptcy is poor management of finances and a risk tolerance that does not correlate with their earning ability. And NO the debt is not passed on to everyone that uses the hospital, only those that do not have coverage (the ones that do have insurance have pre negotiated rates).

Please expand on the claim that Medicare rates are paying for someone's healthcare that does not have insurance...The difference between the requirement to have auto insurance is because when you are in an accident, other peoples property (cars, homes, etc) could be damaged, other people could end up with injuries as a result of the accident...healthcare coverage only covers the person that took it out, and if someone has gallbladder stones other people are at no risk of injury due to this illness.


The reason this Republican tells you Obammacare sucks is; I am 54 year old male with no health issues and my healthcare went from $750 a month to $1350 a month over the last 3 years. The reason is; I now am paying more for some other unknown person, who does not make enough money to afford healthcare themselves (like the wackadoodle that has been unemployed for the last 18 years)...

And no, you are not listening...

Yes you have a pre negotiated rate but that is going to include something which covers the cost of treating non paying patients. Think about it, every business has customers who do not pay, you need to set your rate so overall you still make money. Pre negotiated rates/medicare reimbursement rates include something to cover these losses. The only way to reduce rates is to not treat people without insurance or get money from somewhere to insurance companies or hospitals. When they eliminate the Obama care surcharge that will be less money going into health care. The only reason we have medicare is insurance companies realized it was too expensive to cover old people and make money so the government was forced to take over. Now tell me what idea the republicans have to make health care cheaper. Donald is going to make a deal and everything will be better?

[Don Baldwin]

:1rotfl:


As if you know. :oops:

And before you start showing your ignorance further, the IRS audit is simply looking to ensure that the numbers are being put in the right boxes...NOT how much debt he has or where he received the money from.

I realize that you're one of the dumbest Trump cultists on here (albeit, it's a close contest :D), but even you should know there's a reason...Trump is petrified to let anyone see his tax returns.

I personally think it's because Putin loaned him a massive amount of money to keep him out of bankruptcy and that Chump has yet to pay it back...which is why Trump acts like Putin's little bitch. :ho:



Deepest Sincere Wishes: :wave:

The IRS has them...so what's your problem? Post YOUR tax return if you think others should. Should EVERY elected official HAVE to post their tax returns? Why just the president?

"I personally think"...don't think...you're not very good at it...continue to let others make important decisions for you.

Yes you have a pre negotiated rate but that is going to include something which covers the cost of treating non paying patients. Think about it, every business has customers who do not pay, you need to set your rate so overall you still make money. Pre negotiated rates/medicare reimbursement rates include something to cover these losses. The only way to reduce rates is to not treat people without insurance or get money from somewhere to insurance companies or hospitals. When they eliminate the Obama care surcharge that will be less money going into health care. The only reason we have medicare is insurance companies realized it was too expensive to cover old people and make money so the government was forced to take over. Now tell me what idea the republicans have to make health care cheaper. Donald is going to make a deal and everything will be better?

OK...STOP treating those without insurance or the means to pay...it would save TONS of money...less costs for healthcare that won't get paid back...less spent on welfare...AND less minorities running around robbing, stealing, and being violent! It's a win-win for the white American taxpayer.

That's MY idea for healthcare...you get it IF you can afford it...just like everything else SHOULD be. We are RAISING poor people like we raise cattle...except we get NOTHING but trouble from them.

[dirtbanker]

Yes you have a pre negotiated rate but that is going to include something which covers the cost of treating non paying patients. Think about it, every business has customers who do not pay, you need to set your rate so overall you still make money. Pre negotiated rates/medicare reimbursement rates include something to cover these losses. The only way to reduce rates is to not treat people without insurance or get money from somewhere to insurance companies or hospitals. When they eliminate the Obama care surcharge that will be less money going into health care. The only reason we have medicare is insurance companies realized it was too expensive to cover old people and make money so the government was forced to take over. Now tell me what idea the republicans have to make health care cheaper. Donald is going to make a deal and everything will be better?

Your wife is right, you are stupid...blind and deaf as well.

You don't know what your talking about and you certainly never respond to anyone questioning your claims, you just ignore the questions and make more ill informed claims.



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk