America's Per Capita Debt Worse Than Greeces

[Racey]

http://www.mygovcost.org/2012/02/23/americas-per-capita-government-debt-worse-than-greece/

 

[The Doctor]

It's OK racy, the spender-in-chief is already asking for another stiff increase in the debt limit and it wasn't that long ago he got one. Seems we're headed in the wrong direction IMHO. Here's what he had to say about these debt limit increases before he was president:


"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies...

Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here." Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

- Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), March 20, 2006

 

[Racey]

It's OK racy, the spender-in-chief is already asking for another stiff increase in the debt limit and it wasn't that long ago he got one. Seems we're headed in the wrong direction IMHO. Here's what he had to say about these debt limit increases before he was president:


"The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies...

Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here." Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better."

- Sen. Barack Obama (D-IL), March 20, 2006

That's what so disheartening about the so called "conservatives" that are seeking the nomination, all but one have no plans to shrink federal spending lower than it is today, they just talk about cuts to the future projected increases. They'd rather argue about birth control, moon bases, or other mindless nonsense.

 

[The Doctor]

That's what so disheartening about the so called "conservatives" that are seeking the nomination, all but one have no plans to shrink federal spending lower than it is today, they just talk about cuts to the future projected increases. They'd rather argue about birth control, moon bases, or other mindless nonsense.

So, which of the remaining four candidates do you find to be less competent than our current president? Honest question.

 

[Racey]

So, which of the remaining four candidates do you find to be less competent than our current president? Honest question.

I wouldn't say less competent, i'd say equally incompetent in actually doing anything meaningful in regards to the financial bind that decades of previous politicians have put us in. The biggest threat facing this country is the debt, continued deficit spending, and subsequent destruction of the dollar. The only one that has a plan to cut spending is RP, but they all laugh at him, or call him a crazy isolationist. None of them seem to remember that the soviet union didn't crumble from lack of military and domestic spending, it crumbled as a result of it, not from outside attackers, but from the spending within.

If Romney, Santorum, Gingrich, or Obama get the white house for the next 4 years I will personally guarantee you the national debt will continue to soar. It's more of the status quo

 

[Classic Daycruiser]

As long as americans can make more money than Greece, and we can pay our bills, I'm ok owing $40k. Its not like, I'm not good for it. And for the most part, interest on this national loan is very inexpensive, and affordable.

I'm making money, saving money, and having a great time doing it. If you ask me, the problem lately is all these lazy ass people, complaining about how much their government is reaming them.

If your smart, you'll find a way to make more money, to cover the tax bill we create, and at the same time find a way to increase your well being.

It all boils down to risk management. The best person for president will have the skills to manage capital risk, in a world arena. Romeny has failed risk management too often for me to feel comfortable with him as our president. I'm still voting RP in the primaries, and undecided is fall.

There has never been a point in the united states history, where it's citizens were all happy with taxes.

 

[Racey]

As long as americans can make more money than Greece, and we can pay our bills, I'm ok owing $40k. Its not like, I'm not good for it. And for the most part, interest on this national loan is very inexpensive, and affordable.

I'm making money, saving money, and having a great time doing it. If you ask me, the problem lately is all these lazy ass people, complaining about how much their government is reaming them.

If your smart, you'll find a way to make more money, to cover the tax bill we create, and at the same time find a way to increase your well being.

It all boils down to risk management. The best person for president will have the skills to manage capital risk, in a world arena. Romeny has failed risk management too often for me to feel comfortable with him as our president. I'm still voting RP in the primaries, and undecided is fall.

There has never been a point in the united states history, where it's citizens were all happy with taxes.

That's all well and fine, but while you are making more money, all that sovereign debt and the service to sustain it, is leading to inflation, meaning rising prices, and falling value of the dollar to buy products abroad, or travel etc.

So while you are making more money in terms of numbers, it's value is continually falling, that is the inherent problem, that means that savings is actually losings, it forces you to take riskier investments as a hedge against inflation, or guarantee that you lose wealth if you simply hold on to your money.

Also that $44,215 is if you divide it up amongst every single American, all 330 million of them, from the youngest newborn, to the oldest senior citizen, if you divide it amongst people of the working age range it is closer to $100,000 per producing age citizen

 

[Old Texan]

Our government is currently in the stage folks with multiple credit cards get themselves into when they start borrowing from one to pay the other. They never dent the principle on the maxed out card while increasing the prinicple at higher rates on the second card until they got to a third and a fourth.

Soon enough we'll reach the point where the house of cards tumbles. It's inevitable.....China's gonna get nervous if they aren't already.

 

[JBS]

Does anyone remember back in 2012 when the P&G section still made sense?

You guys have been blinded by The Greatest Showman

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Does anyone remember back in 2012 when the P&G section still made sense?

You guys have been blinded by The Greatest Showman

There was no such thing as TDS back then.

 

[RCDave]

Does anyone remember back in 2012 when the P&G section still made sense?

You guys have been blinded by The Greatest Showman

LOL. Irony defined

 

[530RL]

There was no such thing as TDS back then.

Trump Dick Sucking (TDS) took a while to fully germinate in many members of the P&G..........But now it is endemic and deficits are good......

 

[brgrcru]

I get it. there is one thing nobody likes about trump. spending , like a drunken sailor. like a few presidents before him.
can you tell me one candidate, on both sides, that will curtail this spending?
the current clown show on the dem side, wants to spend upwards of 10 trillion and more, for there great plans . of freedom> lol
Not saying the current losers on the ( R ) side wouldn't be spending as much on there own great plans.

please tell us? which candidate will stop. the insane spending.
please tell us which prez candidate. would of not buckled and given up. with the constant attacks on him and his family?

 

[JBS]

I get it. there is one thing nobody likes about trump. spending , like a drunken sailor. like a few presidents before him.
can you tell me one candidate, on both sides, that will curtail this spending?
the current clown show on the dem side, wants to spend upwards of 10 trillion and more, for there great plans . of freedom> lol
Not saying the current losers on the ( R ) side wouldn't be spending as much on there own great plans.

please tell us? which candidate will stop. the insane spending.
please tell us which prez candidate. would of not buckled and given up. with the constant attacks on him and his family?

I voted for Trump as the outsider who was going to reduce the debt. He has not even slowed the rise in Annual spending. I believe Rand Paul would not of allowed as much spending as Trump.

As for his Family if you give the family positions in the government they are fair game. His children not involved should be off limits. The First Lady should only answer for things she is currently doing.

So the fact that people pick on his family means we accept out of control spending. The earth really has shifted.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

I voted for Trump as the outsider who was going to reduce the debt. He has not even slowed the rise in Annual spending. I believe Rand Paul would not of allowed as much spending as Trump.

As for his Family if you give the family positions in the government they are fair game. His children not involved should be off limits. The First Lady should only answer for things she is currently doing.

So the fact that people pick on his family means we accept out of control spending. The earth really has shifted.

So by the logic here you accept it and are therefore a Trumpkin/Trump supporter.

 

[JBS]

So by the logic here you accept it and are therefore a Trumpkin/Trump supporter.

Easy to label people. I do not see Trump as a Conservative. Never did. I saw him as the alternative to HRC

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Easy to label people. I do not see Trump as a Conservative. Never did. I saw him as the alternative to HRC

I agree. It is easy to see from his past dealings he is far from financially conservative. In that regard I still think we are better off than the alternative.

 

[RVR SWPR]

Trump Dick Sucking (TDS) took a while to fully germinate in many members of the P&G..........But now it is endemic and deficits are good......

View attachment 799112 [/QUOTE

You really are a totally fucked up individual & embarrassment to this forum. No doubt this post gives you closure and accomplishment in your fucked up lack of positive existence.

 

[Racey]

Does anyone remember back in 2012 when the P&G section still made sense?

You guys have been blinded by The Greatest Showman

No, we have what we have.

The past 30 years of primarys have shown that nobody will get a nomination running on the addressing of debt. Period. Never gonna happen. They are marginalized by the media, laughed at by the parties, and shit on.

Now the seeds have bared the fruit of Trump the wrecking ball,

My house is in order and i'm loving every second of the show.

The great news about Trump we are getting a rapid influx of CONSERVATIVE judges in the federal court system, even if Trump isn't a 'conservative'.

I can totally live with that, and also love watching morons who claim to be conservative try to twist and squirm around the fact that Obama used the federal government to try and entrap, illegally spy on, and eventually attempt to politically coup an elected president, and pretend like it was totally above board and fine, just because they don't like Trump

Trump's existence has pulled the curtains on just how fucked up the Bureacracy establishments, and the corrupt media in this country are.

I would vote for him again given every chance, he was by far the best person on the Ballot in November 2016, and i have ZERO regrets about it.

 

[brgrcru]

I voted for Trump as the outsider who was going to reduce the debt. He has not even slowed the rise in Annual spending. I believe Rand Paul would not of allowed as much spending as Trump.

As for his Family if you give the family positions in the government they are fair game. His children not involved should be off limits. The First Lady should only answer for things she is currently doing.

So the fact that people pick on his family means we accept out of control spending. The earth really has shifted.

just like I thought . you have nothing.
you are not saying anything new to us.
we all know government spending is out of control?
who's your guy/girl to stop it ?
the anti trumpersters bash all day long . but yet , don't have any candidates . to stop the spending.

 

[530RL]

just like I thought . you have nothing.
you are not saying anything new to us.
we all know government spending is out of control?
who's your guy/girl to stop it ?
the anti trumpersters bash all day long . but yet , don't have any candidates . to stop the spending.

Had HRC picked up 70,000 votes in three states she would have been president and the R's would have controlled both the house and the senate.

No way would an R congress give a D president the spending increases they gave Trump or eliminate the spending sequester. The R congress would have held the line on spending to deny the D president any political wins.

No way would a D President sign the R tax cut.

So debt and deficits would have been lower. Period.

Historically D administrative branches coupled with R congress yields the best fiscal results for the logic above. For example Clinton in the executive branch and R's controlling the legislative branch leading to actual surpluses in the 90's.

Once the Trump supporters deliver both branches of government to the D's, America is really fucked. Much worse than now. And the R party will not allow any new R candidates in a primary. They have it rigged for 2020 like the D's did for HRC against Bernie in 2016. So we are stuck with the same horrible results no matter who wins the election.

The R's get exactly what they bargained for when they pushed Trump through the primary in 2016. Bigger spending, bigger government, higher taxes via tariffs, and greater debt. The exact opposite of anything that resembles a grain of conservatism.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Had HRC picked up 70,000 votes in three states she would have been president and the R's would have controlled both the house and the senate.

No way would an R congress give a D president the spending increases they gave Trump or eliminate the spending sequester. The R congress would have held the line on spending to deny the D president any political wins.

No way would a D President sign the R tax cut.

So debt and deficits would have been lower. Period.

Historically D administrative branches coupled with R congress yields the best fiscal results for the logic above. For example Clinton in the executive branch and R's controlling the legislative branch leading to actual surpluses in the 90's.

Once the Trump supporters deliver both branches of government to the D's, America is really fucked. Much worse than now. And the R party will not allow any new R candidates in a primary. They have it rigged for 2020 like the D's did for HRC against Bernie in 2016. So we are stuck with the same horrible results no matter who wins the election.

The R's get exactly what they bargained for when they pushed Trump through the primary in 2016. Bigger spending, bigger government, higher taxes via tariffs, and greater debt. The exact opposite of anything that resembles a grain of conservatism.

That is a one dimensional look at it.

We'd also have open borders, and a liberal monopoly in the supreme courts and every lower court, government would be just as big, taxes would be similar yet without tariffs and we'd still have a large amount of spending.

 

[530RL]

That is a one dimensional look at it.

We'd also have open borders, and a liberal monopoly in the supreme courts and every lower court, government would be just as big, taxes would be similar yet without tariffs and we'd still have a large amount of spending.

To have spending, you have to have an appropriations bill passed by the house and 60 votes in the Senate.

Your argument of equivalent "large spending" assumes that the R party in control of congress would approve the same increase in spending for a D president that it did for the R president.

Secondly, Obama deported way more people than Trump and reduced the number of crossings. Crossings increased under this executive branch after being reduced under the former. The argument of open borders flies in the face of the objective facts.

To have a liberal court, Republicans in the Senate would have had to pass across the aisle to approve those judges as they would have a majority in the Senate.

If you truly believe your post above, which flies in the face of the math of who had the votes, it is over period and all the other things you mention just don't matter.

 

[Racey]

That is a one dimensional look at it.

We'd also have open borders, and a liberal monopoly in the supreme courts and every lower court, government would be just as big, taxes would be similar yet without tariffs and we'd still have a large amount of spending.

And if you listen to Liberals Trump's 'small government policy' is literally dismantling the world with all of the regulatory and red tape roll backs he has done on business and infrastructure. Big Government, Small Government, the system is rotten to the core. Watching Trump make these people's heads spin off is amazing.

They said he would crash the stock market if he was elected,

They said he lied about Obama tapping his phones,

They said he would start a nuclear war with N Korea over Twitter,

They said, they said, they said, they were wrong every time, because instead of actually focusing on solutions, they were too busy focusing on anti-Trump gotchas.

No different than the anti-Obama people in many ways.

 

[regor]

Had HRC picked up 70,000 votes in three states she would have been president and the R's would have controlled both the house and the senate.

No way would an R congress give a D president the spending increases they gave Trump or eliminate the spending sequester. The R congress would have held the line on spending to deny the D president any political wins.

No way would a D President sign the R tax cut.

So debt and deficits would have been lower. Period.

Historically D administrative branches coupled with R congress yields the best fiscal results for the logic above. For example Clinton in the executive branch and R's controlling the legislative branch leading to actual surpluses in the 90's.

Once the Trump supporters deliver both branches of government to the D's, America is really fucked. Much worse than now. And the R party will not allow any new R candidates in a primary. They have it rigged for 2020 like the D's did for HRC against Bernie in 2016. So we are stuck with the same horrible results no matter who wins the election.

The R's get exactly what they bargained for when they pushed Trump through the primary in 2016. Bigger spending, bigger government, higher taxes via tariffs, and greater debt. The exact opposite of anything that resembles a grain of conservatism.

You gave us Trump, your beloved ball less loser admitted it!!!!!!

 

[530RL]

You gave us Trump, your beloved ball less loser admitted it!!!!!!

Your shipment arrived.......

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

To have spending, you have to have an appropriations bill passed by the house and 60 votes in the Senate.

Your argument of equivalent "large spending" assumes that the R party in control of congress would approve the same increase in spending for a D president that it did for the R president.

Secondly, Obama deported way more people than Trump and reduced the number of crossings. Crossings increased under this executive branch after being reduced under the former. The argument of open borders flies in the face of the objective facts.

To have a liberal court, Republicans in the Senate would have had to pass across the aisle to approve those judges as they would have a majority in the Senate.

If you truly believe your post above, which flies in the face of the math of who had the votes, it is over period and all the other things you mention just don't matter.

So your premise is that if HRC was elected, we would have just been in a govt spending freeze and no money would have been spent? If spending is $100B more under Trump, does that really matter? A vast amount of money woudl have been spent regardless. It is a lot of taxing and spending either way. I have the same position on the debt I did under Obama. At some point it will be "renegotiated". If we are the strongest economy and we fall, we take the rest of the world down with us. As long as this country is the safest place to put and invest money, the rest is semantics.

So your premise is that Obama is the real heartless racist? Trump has no control over individual border crossings. He has not been able to do much to prevent them, has been fought at every turn to do so, and has not received support from states that encourage illegal border crossings. A wall will address a vast number of crossings.. but walls are racist. Your premise is that HRC would have eliminated sanctuary cities, sought to eliminate DACA and removed other incentives for illegal immigration?

As far as the supreme court, they would have been down 2 judges by now. The Senate would have had to put in some moderate-left appointment after HRC was elected if they liked it or not, otherwise every decision would be to the left. The makeup of federal courts has been pulled back towards center.

It already is over.. It has been over for decades. Trump is just the disruption that exposed how rotten it has become.

As @Racey pointed out, everything we were told was going to happen under a Trump presidency didn't happen. We are not in a nuclear war, The economy did well, etc.

I'm not saying I'm fine with the spending, But at least the spending brought with it things I at least identify with in principle. The converse with HRC would not have been the case.

 

[JBS]

just like I thought . you have nothing.
you are not saying anything new to us.
we all know government spending is out of control?
who's your guy/girl to stop it ?
the anti trumpersters bash all day long . but yet , don't have any candidates . to stop the spending.

"Not saying anything new?" OK If this is the new standard might as well shut down the P&G section.

Are you saying we should accept the government spending is out of control and not talk about it?

When Obama was in office I complained about the spending. Like most in the P&G section.

I am even ok with Trump not paying off the debt as he promised. I never thought he would. I did however think he would not spend like he is.

So if i criticize the President at all I am a never Trumper.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

"Not saying anything new?" OK If this is the new standard might as well shut down the P&G section.

Are you saying we should accept the government spending is out of control and not talk about it?

When Obama was in office I complained about the spending. Like most in the P&G section.

I am even ok with Trump not paying off the debt as he promised. I never thought he would. I did however think he would not spend like he is.

So if i criticize the President at all I am a never Trumper.

You are really screwed. You are a never Trumper Trumpkin.

 

[530RL]

So your premise is that if HRC was elected, we would have just been in a govt spending freeze and no money would have been spent? If spending is $100B more under Trump, does that really matter? A vast amount of money woudl have been spent regardless. It is a lot of taxing and spending either way. I have the same position on the debt I did under Obama. At some point it will be "renegotiated". If we are the strongest economy and we fall, we take the rest of the world down with us. As long as this country is the safest place to put and invest money, the rest is semantics.

snip.........

Following your "logic" for a short stroll, we as a country would be better off electing a far left socialist progressive which would retire every American's student loans, provide free healthcare, provide billions for infrastructure and give everyone a couple G's a month in spending money for as you profess, "at some point it will be "renegotiated. If we are the strongest economy and we fall, we take the rest of the world down with us."

If the debt doesn't matter as you profess, we might as well load up as quick and as robustly as possible.

At least I am starting to understand the Trumpkins vote for Trump.

 

[brgrcru]

and yet both jbs and 530 have no answers.
so who

"Not saying anything new?" OK If this is the new standard might as well shut down the P&G section.

Are you saying we should accept the government spending is out of control and not talk about it?

When Obama was in office I complained about the spending. Like most in the P&G section.

I am even ok with Trump not paying off the debt as he promised. I never thought he would. I did however think he would not spend like he is.

So if i criticize the President at all I am a never Trumper.

what is your answer?

Who is is your guy?

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Following your "logic" for a short stroll, we as a country would be better off electing a far left socialist progressive which would retire every American's student loans, provide free healthcare, provide billions for infrastructure and give everyone a couple G's a month in spending money for as you profess, "at some point it will be "renegotiated. If we are the strongest economy and we fall, we take the rest of the world down with us."

If the debt doesn't matter as you profess, we might as well load up as quick and as robustly as possible.

At least I am starting to understand the Trumpkins vote for Trump.

There is no logic in any of that. All that you mentioned creates more burden on society, and a society that is not driven to excel or innovate, nor are their consequences or rewards based on action or inaction.

You keep wanting to distill your disdain for Trump down to a series of single issues that only have a black and white answer. Maybe that makes you feel better about your position.

In a presidential election we are given a handful of choices, 2 are actually legitimate. I don't think the entire country is going to 100% agree with anything any candidate says or does.

The debt is never getting paid back. The only hope we have is that we somehow manage the servicing of the debt. But if interest rates are 0, or even negative.. that begins solving itself.

 

[regor]

Your shipment arrived.......



View attachment 799129

hahahaha you're in the condom sweat shop business now also..............Made in China hahahahaha

 

[brgrcru]

Had HRC picked up 70,000 votes in three states she would have been president and the R's would have controlled both the house and the senate.

No way would an R congress give a D president the spending increases they gave Trump or eliminate the spending sequester. The R congress would have held the line on spending to deny the D president any political wins.

No way would a D President sign the R tax cut.

So debt and deficits would have been lower. Period.

Historically D administrative branches coupled with R congress yields the best fiscal results for the logic above. For example Clinton in the executive branch and R's controlling the legislative branch leading to actual surpluses in the 90's.

Once the Trump supporters deliver both branches of government to the D's, America is really fucked. Much worse than now. And the R party will not allow any new R candidates in a primary. They have it rigged for 2020 like the D's did for HRC against Bernie in 2016. So we are stuck with the same horrible results no matter who wins the election.

The R's get exactly what they bargained for when they pushed Trump through the primary in 2016. Bigger spending, bigger government, higher taxes via tariffs, and greater debt. The exact opposite of anything that resembles a grain of conservatism.

this is what I get out of all of this.

@#%^R@!# Trumpkins *&^%^$$^&*((^$# Trump@#%#bad
(&*^$#$%&*& all trumps fault.

sorry Dan its all the same BS from you.
lots of guns, but no ammo. No solutions , no candidates, no answers.
its all Trumps fault and his voters fault.
same old song and dance. useless.

 

[RCDave]

"Not saying anything new?" OK If this is the new standard might as well shut down the P&G section.

Are you saying we should accept the government spending is out of control and not talk about it?

When Obama was in office I complained about the spending. Like most in the P&G section.

I am even ok with Trump not paying off the debt as he promised. I never thought he would. I did however think he would not spend like he is.

So if i criticize the President at all I am a never Trumper.

Exactly. Criticism where its merited isn't allowed if you hang on everything trump does like he is god. Sorry its OK to criticize where its merited and on the budget its totally merited.

 

[530RL]

hahahaha you're in the condom sweat shop business now also..............Made in China hahahahaha

It takes very tiny hands to make your size. They can only be made in China by the smallest of children........

I called to get you a pair of these to go along and they said you already ordered a dozen as you use them daily.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

Exactly. Criticism where its merited isn't allowed if you hang on everything trump does like he is god. Sorry its OK to criticize where its merited and on the budget its totally merited.

You forgot the part where if you agree with Trump on ANY issue you are a 100% Trump supporter

 

[500bbc]

and yet both jbs and 530 have no answers.
so who



what is your answer?

Who is is your guy?

 

[regor]

It takes very tiny hands to make your size. They can only be made in China by the smallest of children........

I called to get you a pair of these to go along and they said you already ordered a dozen as you use them daily.


View attachment 799156

hahaha you have to resort to my lines hahahaha coat tail whore!!!!!

 

[jet496]

As long as americans can make more money than Greece, and we can pay our bills, I'm ok owing $40k. Its not like, I'm not good for it. And for the most part, interest on this national loan is very inexpensive, and affordable.

I'm making money, saving money, and having a great time doing it. If you ask me, the problem lately is all these lazy ass people, complaining about how much their government is reaming them.

If your smart, you'll find a way to make more money, to cover the tax bill we create, and at the same time find a way to increase your well being.

It all boils down to risk management. The best person for president will have the skills to manage capital risk, in a world arena. Romeny has failed risk management too often for me to feel comfortable with him as our president. I'm still voting RP in the primaries, and undecided is fall.

There has never been a point in the united states history, where it's citizens were all happy with taxes.

I only know one thing for sure & that is there is not one Democratic candidate qualified to manage any more than a small business. They are only about getting votes & trying to appeal to the weak or misfits of society. We need people like Trump who's willing to say it like it is.

 

[500bbc]

It takes very tiny hands to make your size. They can only be made in China by the smallest of enslaved children........

I called to get you a pair of these to go along and they said you already ordered a dozen as you use them daily.


View attachment 799156

Fixed it fer ya Boofmeister!

REPORT!

REPORT!!!

 

[530RL]

There is no logic in any of that. All that you mentioned creates more burden on society, and a society that is not driven to excel or innovate, nor are their consequences or rewards based on action or inaction.

You keep wanting to distill your disdain for Trump down to a series of single issues that only have a black and white answer. Maybe that makes you feel better about your position.

In a presidential election we are given a handful of choices, 2 are actually legitimate. I don't think the entire country is going to 100% agree with anything any candidate says or does.

The debt is never getting paid back. The only hope we have is that we somehow manage the servicing of the debt. But if interest rates are 0, or even negative.. that begins solving itself.

But you said debt does not matter. So if debt does not matter, why not get a bunch of stuff to "make america great again" and not have to pay for it.

Your logic was that we don't have to pay it back, so why not just run it up at exponentially faster rates like the current administration?

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

But you said debt does not matter. So if debt does not matter, why not get a bunch of stuff to "make america great again" and not have to pay for it.

Your logic was that we don't have to pay it back, so why not just run it up at exponentially faster rates like the current administration?

Once again, you are focusing on a single sentence on a single issue. The caveat was - as long as we are the most prosperous country in the world it does not really matter as long as servicing the debt can be managed. If things change, we will have a serious problem.

The debt does not matter, but culture does. Raising a generation of people with no accountability and no responsibility serves no purpose, and will not leave us as the strongest economy on earth and thus much more vulnerable to the perils of debt.

 

[530RL]

Once again, you are focusing on a single sentence on a single issue. The caveat was - as long as we are the most prosperous country in the world it does not really matter as long as servicing the debt can be managed. If things change, we will have a serious problem.

The debt does not matter, but culture does. Raising a generation of people with no accountability and no responsibility serves no purpose, and will not leave us as the strongest economy on earth and thus much more vulnerable to the perils of debt.

I believe in High School we called your circular argument above a Halting Problem.

 

[LargeOrangeFont]

I believe in High School we called your circular argument above a Halting Problem.

Forrest Gump called it stupid is as stupid does.

 

[BONER]

Jesus Christ. This JBS Character brings shit back from the dead and you all bite like an 18yr old Hooker with Braces....

 

[brgrcru]

Exactly. Criticism where its merited isn't allowed if you hang on everything trump does like he is god. Sorry its OK to criticize where its merited and on the budget its totally merited.

Not God, but a lot better then our alternative from the dems side

I don't know one person in here that supports his spending or his morals . But what's the difference , if it's trump or any other of those fools he ran against , in 2016 or now in 2020. They all would be giving away the farm .
Prove me wrong , not one of you anti trumpers have named one candidate.

Yes criticizing , one president 90% of the time , is ridiculous with out the MSM ever saying ,
Any good things .

Never , even our local news , they have anything good to say about his job performance .
In all reality , it's sad .

This guy has put up with so much shit .
The good thing he can Handel it . Throws there shit right back in there faces.